Urth geochronology

Jeffrey Lefstin · 30 Jul 2006, 23:58 · from 2006-July.txt.gz

This is the message as the crawl holds it, before anything here touched it. What the conversation shows has been through ingest: transfer encodings decoded, attachments dropped, quote markers repaired, and the archiver’s ? resolved into quotation marks and dashes. Those repairs are judgements and some of them are wrong, which is what this page is for. Email addresses are obscured here as they are everywhere else on the site, so it is before our repairs rather than byte for byte.

From: jeff.lefstin at stanfordalumni.org (Jeffrey Lefstin)
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2006 16:58:36 -0700
Subject: (urth) Urth geochronology
In-Reply-To: <mailman.1.1154302497.28679.urth-urth.net at lists.urth.net>
References: <mailman.1.1154302497.28679.urth-urth.net at lists.urth.net>
Message-ID: <cc8d0a80a18e68893dd9f7d75bc70f85 at stanfordalumni.org>

> Jeff Wilson wrote:

> More ambiguous. At one point he says Urth is "perhaps a million years 
> in
> our future."
>

If we were really trying to deduce the age of Urth from the text, it 
must be older than that.  At several points Severian mentions the lack 
of volcanic activity on Urth and the solidification of the Urth's 
interior.  I'm not a geologist, but a few million years, or even a few 
tens of millions of years, isn't going to cut it if we assume that 
volcanic activity has ceased due to natural cooling and decay.

But since Wolfe is not a hard SF writer I wouldn't make too much of it.

An unofficial mirror of a public mailing list · about & removal requests · download the archive · before the list · original archive at urth.net