contra Summa contra Marcus

Jerry Friedman · 26 Mar 2002, 17:00 · from urth-v0203.mbox · original

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: Jerry Friedman <jerry_friedman at yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: (urth) contra Summa contra Marcus
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2002 09:00:19 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <urth-v0203-455 at digest.urth.net>
X-Urthmirror-Source: http://www.urth.net/urth/archives/v0203/455.txt.shtml
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


--- matthew.malthouse at guardian.co.uk wrote:
...
=20
> A question.
>=20
> The Whorl of the Long Sun produces a facsimilie of gravity through spin.
> Otherwise when we see it there is no other acceleration.  Is there (and
> I
> ask because I can't remember) any mention of how the Whorl behaved when
> traveling?  I'm thinking here of AC Clarke's Rama and it's circular sea
> with one shore higher than the other to prevent the water flooding over
> the land when Rama is under acceleration.
>=20
> A linear path is simple enough but a circular one would require
> accelerations in directions other than parallel with the access of the
> Whorl - either constant or periodic.  The first suggests some motive
> force
> applied at an angle to the direction of travel, the latter might be
> effected by an attitudinal adjustment.
>=20
> In either case how large a force could be applied without it being
> perceptible to the inhabitants?  And is there a mid-trajectory
> roll-over?

The acceleration, either for a straight-line path (speeding up and
slowing down) or for a curved path, would have to be negligible
compared to g (or g on the _Whorl_ if that's different).

> >> IV. The objection from gravitation
> >>
> >> This has been discussed to death ... but ... it's very hard
> >> to produce a plausible argument for Green as a satellite of
> >> Blue (even an escaped satellite) without producing tidal
> >> effects of a scale that dwarf those described by Horn.
> >
> >It is not possible that the Blue/Green system could be gravitationally
> >stable.   Ergo, it is recent.
>=20
> Yet the Neighbours have a long history of interaction with the Inhumi.
> Ergo the orbital arrangement of Blue and Green must have been stable for
> minimally several thousands of years of that history and potentially for
> periods sufficient to have impact on the evolutionary development of the
> species.
>=20
> So we have a contradiction between celestial mechanics and narrative.
> It's
> fiction, not history, so narrative is our only evidence and it would
> appear that celestial mechanics can go hang.  ;-)

I totally agree.  The celestial mechanics doesn't work at all,
independent of whether Blue is Ushas or not, and it works only slightly
better if Gagliardo's numbers are wrong.

--=20
Jerry Friedman

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Movies - coverage of the 74th Academy Awards=C2=AE
http://movies.yahoo.com/

--=20

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