FIND in
<--prev V302 next-->
Subject: RE: (urth) No Grand Gnab
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2003 12:30:58 -0700
From: "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes" 

> Well, so Wolfe is now apparently out of date!

...which was hardly my point. I was just directing attention
to a bit of current science that I figured would be of interest
to Wolfe readers, because of his cosmological concerns.

>          I think 100 years from now, all our SF will be=20
> seriously out of date.=20

I think it better to say that the science in the SF will be
out of date, which doesn't particularly make the SF out of
date. The current state of knowledge about, say, Mars, does
not detract from my pleasure in reading (to pick a relatively
few examples) "A Rose for Ecclesiastes," "A Martian Odyssey,"
does it do so for you?=20

> Conventional SF works in terms of theories about the=20
> universe that are just that: theories. Better: myths.

H'mmm. I don't know if I'd go so far as to call the theories
of modern science "myths." I think though that _some_ SF (and
particularly the resurgent, literary space opera of people=20
like Zindell and Hamilton) uses them _in part_ the way=20
classical myths used their respective cosmologies.

> Can anyone seriously believe that humanity has done more
> than just scratch the surface of the reality of the universe?

Hey, I'm not sure we've even done that ... !

Which is just as well. After all, the most merciful thing in
the world, I think, is the inability of the human mind ...
oh, did someone already say that ... ?

> That's why I like SF much more than I like PBS.

This line had me lol in my office.

> PBS always seems to think the latest word is also the last word!

True for you, Patera!



<--prev V302 next-->