{ "export": { "source": "https://urth.darkrealm.vip/thread/urth/4172", "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": 4172, "subject": "Wolfe physics", "messages": 7, "voices": 6, "first": "2003-08-19T03:10:47+00:00", "last": "2003-08-19T16:16:30+00:00" }, "messages": [ { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "William Ansley", "address": "wansley at warwick.net" }, "date": "2003-08-19T03:10:47+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) Wolfe physics", "in_reply_to": null, "reply_link": null, "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "At 8:05 PM -0500 8/18/03, Michael Buice wrote:\nOn Monday, August 18, 2003, at 07:38 PM, Alice K. Turner wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "No, you haven't. It'a just a consequence of GW's having tried to cobble\nseveral sf traditions together that sensibly shouldn't be cobbled. NS not\nonly has FtL effects, but the ship, through some post-Einsteinian doodah\nthat makes my head spin can get there before it started. LS has tradional\n(in sf) generational travel, and seems pretty well thought out. SS has\ninstantaneous magic flights to other planets that hark back to Burroughs.\nWhat's not to be confused about? Sometimes I think you guys spend a lot more\ntime than the author did trying to make sense of all this." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "IMHO, Wolfe \"cobbled\" rather well. One of the many things I \nappreciate about Gene Wolfe's writing is the way he deals with \nscience. Since none of the major \"authors\" in the Sun universe are \nscientists themselves, we're to expect some confusion in the \nrelation of the deeper workings of things. I've always been \nimpressed with how realistic most of it seems, having been filtered \nthrough the \"lay-brains\" of Severian, Horn, etc. Ever read a \n\"popular\" book on Quantum Mechanics? I've yet to see one get it \nright. I've NEVER seen any science fiction in which it's down right \n(that is, when people try to dig deeper than Severian ever does)." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Michael Buice,\n\nI'm with alga on this one. IMO the seams really show where Wolfe \ntried to sew the New and Long/Short Suns together. And I'm not really \nsure what the fact that Gene Wolfe is very good at presenting science \nfrom the point of view of a non-scientist has to do with his trying \nto combine too many disparate elements together, which I think he \ndid, especially in Short Sun.\n\n(BTW, did you really mean to put the H in your IMHO? I'm sure you \ndidn't mean to imply that you and only you have the absolute grasp of \nphysics necessary to judge if it is used properly in popular science \nwriting and SF, but you came across that way in your last two posts. \nrather.)" }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "William Ansley\n\n-- " } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Michael Buice", "address": "mabuice at uchicago.edu" }, "date": "2003-08-19T03:57:13+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) Wolfe physics", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Monday, August 18, 2003, at 10:10 PM, William Ansley wrote:\n(BTW, did you really mean to put the H in your IMHO? I'm sure you \ndidn't mean to imply that you and only you have the absolute grasp of \nphysics necessary to judge if it is used properly in popular science \nwriting and SF, but you came across that way in your last two posts. \nrather.)" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "\tSorry about that; to me the 'H' has always seems more or less \nself-mocking, displaying an awareness that the speaker is as much of a \nbuffoon as the next person. I do have strong opinions about how \nscience is both delivered to and perceived by the public but I did not \nintend to present an insistence that all must without question accept \nmy opinion as truth.\n\tI Humbly apologize for any offense." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I'm with alga on this one. IMO the seams really show where Wolfe tried \nto sew the New and Long/Short Suns together. And I'm not really sure \nwhat the fact that Gene Wolfe is very good at presenting science from \nthe point of view of a non-scientist has to do with his trying to \ncombine too many disparate elements together, which I think he did, \nespecially in Short Sun." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "\tI may have lost the thread of the conversation, but I thought the \ndiscussion of inconsistencies stemmed from the 'One Ship' discussion \nwhich had been (to me) well-argued out of existence. The trouble under \ndiscussion seemed to be the whole generation starship/FTL idea and \nwhich type the Whorl could have been based on the available \ntechnologies, etc. Perhaps I'm the one whose sloppily sewing together \ndisparate threads. :)\n\n\tPerhaps we could continue in manner more useful to all thusly:\n\n\tWhat specific instances in the Sun books do people see as being \ninconsistent as far as science and technology are concerned, in \nparticular with respect to differences between the major works?\n\nMichael" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "James Wynn", "address": "crushtv at hotpop.com" }, "date": "2003-08-19T04:41:32+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) Wolfe physics", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "William Ansley said:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I'm with alga on this one. IMO the seams really show where Wolfe\ntried to sew the New and Long/Short Suns together. And I'm not really\nsure what the fact that Gene Wolfe is very good at presenting science\nfrom the point of view of a non-scientist has to do with his trying\nto combine too many disparate elements together, which I think he\ndid, especially in Short Sun." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Crush disagrees (he thinks):\nTwo things:\nONE - I'm not sure the seams show between the NS and LS/SS or anywhere else\nbecause I'm still not certain (nor do I think anyone else is) what kind of\ngarments he is intending or who he had in mind to wear it. With Tailor\nWolfe, it can be hard to tell a seam from a cuff. To change analogies,\nWolfe's writing is so plot-oriented (the characters' behavior seem so\nprecisely blocked), yet Wolfe has so much of the narrative taking place\nbehind the scenery (whether we are talking about NS, LS, SS, Peace, Pandora,\nor The Fifth Head). I simply cannot imagine what audience Wolfe could have\nin mind when he is writing? \"Look, the architect carved a little florish\nbehind these baseboards! Wait! That no florish, that looks like a supporting\nbeam!\"\n\nTWO - I think Wolfe's ease with a having a generation ship share the\nuniverse with a \"post-Einsteinian\" monstrosity like Tzadkiel is exemplary of\nWolfe adeptness at World-building. He has criticized works that have a\nsingle culture on an entire planet (ala Star Trek); well, how realistic is\nit suppose that the existence of a FTL ship would render generation ships\nobsolete? Even a single one? That would be like saying that after the\ninvention of the jet airliner, no one on the same planet would ever think or\nregularly moving freight by train, let alone horse and cart. But neither of\nthese conveyances are on the verge of being eliminated.\n\nI'm not sure this argument really even applies since Tz. moves in and out of\nTime and Space -- sharing the universe with an Urth before Europe discovered\nAmerica, let alone Typhon's Urth.\n\n-- Crush" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Chris", "address": "rasputin_ at hotmail.com" }, "date": "2003-08-19T05:47:05+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) Wolfe physics", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I don't think that's the important point in the generation vs. FTL argument. \nI think a more accurate analogy might be that while the existence of jet \nairplanes do not preclude the existence of triplanes on the same planet, you \nare extremely unlikely to find a jet triplane.\n\nIn any event there is very little reason in my mind to equate Tzadkiel's \nship to the Whorl, or even to posit any relationship between the two. \nPutting an argument together against the possibility seems unnecessary, but \nan ample number of them have been supplied.\n\n-- Civet" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "single culture on an entire planet (ala Star Trek); well, how realistic is\nit suppose that the existence of a FTL ship would render generation ships\nobsolete? Even a single one? That would be like saying that after the\ninvention of the jet airliner, no one on the same planet would ever think \nor\nregularly moving freight by train, let alone horse and cart. But neither of\nthese conveyances are on the verge of being eliminated.\n\nI'm not sure this argument really even applies since Tz. moves in and out \nof\nTime and Space -- sharing the universe with an Urth before Europe \ndiscovered\nAmerica, let alone Typhon's Urth.\n\n-- Crush\n\n\n\n--" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "matthew.malthouse", "address": "matthew.malthouse at guardian.co.uk" }, "date": "2003-08-19T08:29:17+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) Wolfe physics", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 19/08/2003 04:57:13 Michael Buice wrote:\n What specific instances in the Sun books do people see as being\ninconsistent as far as science and technology are concerned, in\nparticular with respect to differences between the major works?" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Typhon launching a slow-boat colony seems at odds with his intention of \nregaining his empire stated when Severian-as-Conciliator meets him.\n\nGiven that I'd always had the impression that this was a stellar empire, \nnot just a solar one (which may of course be mistaken), the disparity in \nrequired technology jars. It also disrupts motive, but that wasn't your \nquestion.\n\nMatthew" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "William Ansley", "address": "wansley at warwick.net" }, "date": "2003-08-19T13:29:27+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) Wolfe physics", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "At 10:57 PM -0500 8/18/03, Michael Buice wrote:\nSorry about that; to me the 'H' has always seems more or less \nself-mocking, displaying an awareness that the speaker is as much of \na buffoon as the next person. I do have strong opinions about how \nscience is both delivered to and perceived by the public but I did \nnot intend to present an insistence that all must without question \naccept my opinion as truth.\nI Humbly apologize for any offense." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "No offence was taken, by me at any rate.\n\nYou seemed to me to be bragging enough about your knowledge of \nphysics that the \"Humble\" in \"In My Humble Opinion\" seemed a tad \nironic, so I couldn't resist twitting you on it.\n\nBut I should have resisted. It really amounted to nothing more than a \ncheap shot and I apologize, especially as I know from personal \nexperience how tough graduate programs in the sciences (or I am sure \nin any field) are.\n\nAs for the rest of your message, that will have to wait for later." }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "William Ansley\n\n-- " } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "James Jordan", "address": "jbjordan4 at cox.net" }, "date": "2003-08-19T16:16:30+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) Wolfe physics", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "If Whorl was intended to make a sleau circuit and return to a post-Flood \nUrth/Ushas, that would provide an explanation for its slow speed in a \nculture that had FTL capability, no?\n Assuming Wolfe IS consistent, then this might be another line of \nevidence for the circuit theory.\n\nNutria" } ] } ] }