From: "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes"
Subject: RE: (urth) Green's diameter, angular and otherwise Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 14:27:38 -0800 Jerry F., responding to me... > > ... for which I am frankly grateful, because it seems to me to drive the > > final nail into the "Blue = Urth" theory's coffin, based on past > > discussions herein. > Okay, how? I too would be relieved, but I don't see the connection. Well, maybe I was wrong from that perspective. I think the gravity issue does it, though... > > A twin planet, or even the moon, seen at the distance of 105K > > miles, would be rather too large for an "eye" to be, at any > > rate, the most obvious metaphor. > Au contraire, mon frere. Sundogs (mock suns, parhelia) have a good > deal more than twice the angular diameter of the moon, and one person > who talked to me about seeing one compared it repeatedly to God's eye > looking at her, perhaps accusingly. I can weasel this a bit, by observing that the ring makes the sundog _look_ much more like an eye than a bright glowing round thing in the sky does, but I accept your basic point. > I think Marc just presented, not for the first time, cogent reasons > to think that Green's gravity is less than the Earth's. I disagree. I suggest that the "climbing with one arm while fighting with the other" bit is possible due to one or both of two things: 1) This happens when the Narr is astrally travelling, not physical present on Green; and 2) Dramatic/narrative convention; how many times have you seen this in the movies? > I argued a couple of days ago that nonetheless Green's gravity should be > much greater than the moon's, more or less for the reason you mention. I > agree with you and him that there's no trace of any difference between > Earth's gravity, Urth's, Blue's, and the _Whorl's_ "gravity". Nor do I see any real evidence that Green's is any different. > > (BTW, the whole issue of the Fliers in a separate thread seems to miss > > the point that they rarely - never voluntarily? - come near "ground" > > level.) > But they're capable of flying near ground level, at least for a little > while. See Sciathan's discussion of his capture, if I remember it > correctly. Maybe I'm wrong, but I seem to recall his saying it's much more difficult near the ground. > > > Anyway, the higher the true distance, the harder the problem of how > > > the inhumi cross. > > True, but in any event the problem of how the inhumi cross between > > Bleen and Grue > (or Blee and Groon, for King Crimson fans) Well, I confess that I'm a 21st Century Schizoid Fan... > > is trivial next to the problem of how Remora (and, > > apparently, other inhumi) achieved the crossing to the Whorl. If I > > recall correctly, a Neighbor mentions to Horn that they (the Neighbors) > > sent them (the inhumi) - but does not describe how this was done. > I don't see that. It's one of the problems the Blue=Ushas theory is > supposed to solve, and for those of us who don't believe that, there > was plenty of space travel before Typhon. The problem of how inhumi > got onto the _Whorl_ is no harder than the problem of how the averns' > and the alzabo's ancestors got to Urth. That seems to be based on an assumption that they were on the _Whorl_ from the time it left Urth, and I see no basis for that claim whatever. The Neighbor's comment about sending the inhumi to the _Whorl_ seems to me to refer to a time after (probably just after) the _Whorl_'s arrival in the Glune system. > On the other hand, I think you could make a good case that it's not > much easier for the inhumi to cross 35,000 leagues of space than ten > times that distance. Shrug. Possibly. And actually, the distance to the _Whorl_ can't be _too_ much greater than the distance between the two planets, since the _Whorl_, which is certainly smaller than either of them, is plainly visible in the Bluvian night sky. --Blattid --