{ "export": { "source": "https://urth.darkrealm.vip/thread/urth/3084", "note": "Exported from an unofficial mirror of a public mailing list. Copyright in each message remains with the person who wrote it. Email addresses are obscured as `user at host`, the form the original archive published. This file was rebuilt from parsed fields rather than retained headers, so it is faithful in content but not byte-exact.", "addresses": "obscured as 'user at host'" }, "archive": "urth", "thread": { "id": 3084, "subject": "Summa contra Marcus", "messages": 4, "voices": 3, "first": "2002-03-25T20:06:53+00:00", "last": "2002-03-27T11:12:41+00:00" }, "messages": [ { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes", "address": "ddanehy at siebel.com" }, "date": "2002-03-25T20:06:53+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Summa contra Marcus", "in_reply_to": null, "reply_link": null, "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "A summary of objections to the theory that Blue = Urth.\n\nOthers may wish to add any that I've missed.\n\nI. The cosmographical objection.\n\nThe WHORL, a slower-than-light ship, set out _from_ the \nUrth system. Barring evidence to the contrary (which has\nnot, to the best of my knowledge, been presented), it begins\nin a reference frame more-or-less stationary relative to \nthe Solar system, accelerates away from the Solar system, \nand eventually brakes to come to relative rest at another\nsystem. In order for the \"other system\" to be the Solar \nsystem, then, some mechanism must be provided for the motion \naway from the Solar system to somehow bring the WHORL back\nto the Solar system. Several such mechanisms are certainly\npossible, as: the WHORL hit some kind of \"space warp\" \n(which is, I believe, your proposal); the Solar system \nhit ditto; the WHORL was gone so long that it wandered \naround the edge of curved spacetime. \n\nHowever, and this is the key here, it is not sufficient \nfor such a mechanism to be offered, or even for it to\nbe \"plausible.\" Some _textual_ evidence (direct or \nindirect) for the mechanism must also be adduced. To \nsay (as you have in effect done) that the space(-time) \nwarp must be present because it fits your theory, is \n_not_ textual evidence; it is circular logic, using \nthe \"Urth=Blue\" theory as support for the \"space warp\"\ntheory which was, in turn, created to support the \n\"Urth=Blue\" theory. If reasonably unambiguous textual \nevidence could be adduced for the \"space warp\" theory, \nthen it would indeed support the \"Urth=Blue\" theory.\nLikewise, if the \"Urth=Blue\" theory were supported by\nevidence so strong that it could stand on its own, then\nfinding evidence for a mechanism might be problematized.\nBut as things stand ... no.\n\nII. The genetic objection.\n\nThe life forms of Blue/Green are sufficiently different\nfrom those of Urth that some mechanism must be proposed,\nand evidence given, for the production of one from the\nother. You have proposed _part_ of a mechanism (polyploidy), \na mechanism which may, in some cases, produce effects \nsimilar to those seen in the life forms of Blue (but which \nproduces nothing vaguely similar to the inhumi). However,\nno mechanism whatsoever has been offered for _why_ Urthian\nanimal forms might have become uniformly polyploid, and \nwith such uniform phenotypic effects evidencing in a \nvariety of species.\n\nIII. The chronological objection.\n\nRelated to the above. Assuming that the mechanism for \nUrth's animalia becoming uniformly polyploid is discovered\nand evidence given for it, you find yourself in a bit of\na sticky wicket. Either Blue is in Urth's distant past, or\nit is in Ushas's distant future. \n\nNow, if it is in Urth's past, the genetic objection becomes \nredoubled -- a second mechanism must be provided for the \nreturn of Urthian life to diploid normality by the era of \nSeverian. But other chronological objections (beginning, \nbut not limited to, the difficulty of placing an era \nresembling the Blue of SHORT SUN anywhere in Severian's \napparent past) make this whole idea so unlikely that, \nfrankly, I dismiss it out of hand.\n\nSo suppose Blue to be the distant future of Ushas. Now, we\ncan begin by wondering: why the did Green Man not show the\n\"polyploid\" characteristics of Bluvian life? Nor, indeed,\ndid he resemble the Neighbors, or Bluvian life forms in \ngeneral, in any interesting way. And, supposing you do \nsuccessfully overcome this objection -- for example, proposing\nthat the Green Man is from even farther in the future, a time\nwhen the Colonists and the Inhumi have somehow merged into a\nsingle species (mechanism required, etc.) -- then we would\nneed to have some plausible sequence of events leading from\nSeverian's time, to the Neighbors, to the colonists', to the \nGreen Man's.\n\nIV. The objection from gravitation\n\nThis has been discussed to death ... but ... it's very hard \nto produce a plausible argument for Green as a satellite of\nBlue (even an escaped satellite) without producing tidal \neffects of a scale that dwarf those described by Horn.\n\tSimilarly, the failure of Horn to describe any real\ndifference in weight, trajectory of thrown objects, walking\ngait, etc., between the surfaces of Blue, Green, and the\nRed Sun Whorl, and the \"surface\" of the WHORL (other than\nthe interesting discussion of floater mechanics in LONG SUN),\nstands as strong evidence that the surface gravities of \nBlue and Green are very similar, and very similar to that of\nUrth, i.e., one G. Nor does the \"climbing the tower one-handed\"\nbusiness really help; we know that the Narrator is not subject\nto the ordinary laws of physics when astrally travelling \n(e.g., is, he is capable of creating weapons out of thin air);\nfurther, that is, as noted in an earlier post, a classic \nadventure fiction trope.\n\n\nSummary of the summary: I admit that you have \"dealt with\" \neach of these objections at some level in the past. The problem\nis that in each case, your method of dealing with the objection \nis to pile another hypothetical on top of the hypothesis already\nin place (i.e., \"Blue = Urth\"). This might be satisfactory for a\ntheory with a really solid textual basis, but for a theory that\nbegins fairly shaky, such additional hypotheses are completely \nunacceptable, because your explanations for the objections must,\nof themselves, be solid enough to _support_ the overall theory." } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Jerry Friedman", "address": "jerry_friedman at yahoo.com" }, "date": "2002-03-26T17:10:42+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) Summa contra Marcus", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Is \"Marcus\" the right case? Just curious." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "--- Dan'l Danehy-Oakes wrote:\nA summary of objections to the theory that Blue = Urth.\n\nOthers may wish to add any that I've missed.\n\nI. The cosmographical objection.\n\nThe WHORL, a slower-than-light ship, set out _from_ the \nUrth system. Barring evidence to the contrary (which has\nnot, to the best of my knowledge, been presented), it begins\nin a reference frame more-or-less stationary relative to \nthe Solar system, accelerates away from the Solar system, \nand eventually brakes to come to relative rest at another\nsystem. In order for the \"other system\" to be the Solar \nsystem, then, some mechanism must be provided for the motion \naway from the Solar system to somehow bring the WHORL back\nto the Solar system. Several such mechanisms are certainly\npossible, as: the WHORL hit some kind of \"space warp\" \n(which is, I believe, your proposal); the Solar system \nhit ditto; the WHORL was gone so long that it wandered \naround the edge of curved spacetime. \n\nHowever, and this is the key here, it is not sufficient \nfor such a mechanism to be offered, or even for it to\nbe \"plausible.\" Some _textual_ evidence (direct or \nindirect) for the mechanism must also be adduced. To \nsay (as you have in effect done) that the space(-time) \nwarp must be present because it fits your theory, is \n_not_ textual evidence; it is circular logic, using \nthe \"Urth=Blue\" theory as support for the \"space warp\"\ntheory which was, in turn, created to support the \n\"Urth=Blue\" theory. If reasonably unambiguous textual \nevidence could be adduced for the \"space warp\" theory, \nthen it would indeed support the \"Urth=Blue\" theory.\nLikewise, if the \"Urth=Blue\" theory were supported by\nevidence so strong that it could stand on its own, then\nfinding evidence for a mechanism might be problematized.\nBut as things stand ... no.\n\nII. The genetic objection.\n\nThe life forms of Blue/Green are sufficiently different\nfrom those of Urth that some mechanism must be proposed,\nand evidence given, for the production of one from the\nother. You have proposed _part_ of a mechanism (polyploidy), \na mechanism which may, in some cases, produce effects \nsimilar to those seen in the life forms of Blue (but which \nproduces nothing vaguely similar to the inhumi). However,\nno mechanism whatsoever has been offered for _why_ Urthian\nanimal forms might have become uniformly polyploid, and \nwith such uniform phenotypic effects evidencing in a \nvariety of species." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Stop it! Polyploidy has nothing to do with extra limbs, as Marc\nhas agreed." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "III. The chronological objection.\n\nRelated to the above. Assuming that the mechanism for \nUrth's animalia becoming uniformly polyploid is discovered\nand evidence given for it, you find yourself in a bit of\na sticky wicket. Either Blue is in Urth's distant past, or\nit is in Ushas's distant future. \n\nNow, if it is in Urth's past, the genetic objection becomes \nredoubled -- a second mechanism must be provided for the \nreturn of Urthian life to diploid normality by the era of \nSeverian. But other chronological objections (beginning, \nbut not limited to, the difficulty of placing an era \nresembling the Blue of SHORT SUN anywhere in Severian's \napparent past) make this whole idea so unlikely that, \nfrankly, I dismiss it out of hand.\n\nSo suppose Blue to be the distant future of Ushas. Now, we\ncan begin by wondering: why the did Green Man not show the\n\"polyploid\" characteristics of Bluvian life? Nor, indeed,\ndid he resemble the Neighbors, or Bluvian life forms in \ngeneral, in any interesting way. And, supposing you do \nsuccessfully overcome this objection -- for example, proposing\nthat the Green Man is from even farther in the future, a time\nwhen the Colonists and the Inhumi have somehow merged into a\nsingle species (mechanism required, etc.)" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Or by assuming the Short Sun books aren't in the Green Man's future\nany more than they're in Master Ash's." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "-- then we would\nneed to have some plausible sequence of events leading from\nSeverian's time, to the Neighbors, to the colonists', to the \nGreen Man's." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "The only real problem I see is why humanity either altered itself and\nmost terrestrial fauna to have doubled limbs, or left Ushas to the\nNeighbors and their related alien fauna (depending on whether the\nNeighbors are human-descended or not). But that's a very big problem.\nThere's also the question of the inhumi would have gotten to Lune,\nbut heck, there's a question of why anybody brought the alzabos to\nUrth." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "IV. The objection from gravitation\n\nThis has been discussed to death ... but ... it's very hard \nto produce a plausible argument for Green as a satellite of\nBlue (even an escaped satellite) without producing tidal \neffects of a scale that dwarf those described by Horn." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "As I just mentioned, this all has nothing to with whether Blue is\nUshas." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "\tSimilarly, the failure of Horn to describe any real\ndifference in weight, trajectory of thrown objects, walking\ngait, etc., between the surfaces of Blue, Green, and the\nRed Sun Whorl, and the \"surface\" of the WHORL (other than\nthe interesting discussion of floater mechanics in LONG SUN),\nstands as strong evidence that the surface gravities of \nBlue and Green are very similar, and very similar to that of\nUrth, i.e., one G. Nor does the \"climbing the tower one-handed\"\nbusiness really help; we know that the Narrator is not subject\nto the ordinary laws of physics when astrally travelling \n(e.g., is, he is capable of creating weapons out of thin air);\nfurther, that is, as noted in an earlier post, a classic \nadventure fiction trope." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "It's not unreasonable to assume that the gravity of Lune was already\nraised as part of the terraforming (although that creates an even\nbigger problem in conjunction with Lune's being closer to Urth than\nthe moon is to the earth)." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Summary of the summary: I admit that you have \"dealt with\" \neach of these objections at some level in the past. The problem\nis that in each case, your method of dealing with the objection \nis to pile another hypothetical on top of the hypothesis already\nin place (i.e., \"Blue = Urth\"). This might be satisfactory for a\ntheory with a really solid textual basis, but for a theory that\nbegins fairly shaky, such additional hypotheses are completely \nunacceptable, because your explanations for the objections must,\nof themselves, be solid enough to _support_ the overall theory." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I agree with this.\n\nJerry Friedman" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes", "address": "ddanehy at siebel.com" }, "date": "2002-03-26T18:06:56+00:00", "subject": "RE: (urth) Summa contra Marcus", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Jerry Friedman wrote..." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Stop it! Polyploidy has nothing to do with extra limbs,\nas Marc has agreed." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Well, yeah. But it was (at the time) the only explanation that\nhad been offered. I have since offered a very silly retrovirus\n-- one capable of having a nearly identical effect on elephants\nand crocodilians, and possibly humans..." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Or by assuming the Short Sun books aren't in the\nGreen Man's future any more than they're in Master\nAsh's." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I'm pretty sure that Wolfe has stated that Sev's bringing \nof the New Sun means that the Green Man's future is the\none that will happen." } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "matthew.malthouse", "address": "matthew.malthouse at guardian.co.uk" }, "date": "2002-03-27T11:12:41+00:00", "subject": "RE: (urth) Summa contra Marcus", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 26/03/2002 18:06:56 Dan'l Danehy-Oakes wrote:\nJerry Friedman wrote..." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Or by assuming the Short Sun books aren't in the\nGreen Man's future any more than they're in Master\nAsh's." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I'm pretty sure that Wolfe has stated that Sev's bringing\nof the New Sun means that the Green Man's future is the\none that will happen." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Anyone have something to confirm this?\n\nIt's interesting that the 'divergent futures' idea often posits an\ninfinite number of posibilies, sometimes of varying probability: Asimov's\npsychohistory; Herbert's prescience, etc etc. Because of this perhaps a\nreader might assume an 'anything possible' future. But as far as I can\nrecall we are only shown 2 posibilities: Ashe's Ice and the Green Man's\nfecund world. The New Sun doesn't/does come. A duality: very Lupine.\n\nMatthew" } ] } ] }