From: Michael Andre-Driussi <mantis@sirius.com>
Subject: (urth) science of the day before its day
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 08:30:35 

Mark Millman wrote:
>My purpose had been to point out that the theory in the text is,
>regrettably, undermined rather than bolstered by the theory of
>its day.  The idea of the white hole was already on its way out
>when Wolfe was writing SotT, to say nothing of UotNS.

Right, I understand that (cf. "Wolfe's impishness" in "BaD sCienCe" post),
so I should have written "science of its day" as "science of the day before
its day."  But the clunky phrase had not gotten past my internal censor.
(BTW, I'm not so sure about the example you gave from "Silhouette"--the
non-Einsteinian return travel route bit--since I took it as being not
necessarily "science valid within the framework of the tale" but an
indication of how wigged out and factionalized the starship crew had
become.  Old superstitions arise in troubled times, old concepts find new
political purpose.)

We should also note the same Wolfe trick in using discredited saints, too.
White Holes (197n model) from Big Science; Catherine from Big Religion
(since she was not "on her way out"--she was OUT).

=mantis=



*More Wolfe info & archive of this list at http://www.urth.net/urth/