FIND in
<--prev V309 next-->
From: "James Wynn" 
Subject: Re: (urth) Typhon's folly?
Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2003 10:45:48 -0500

Matthew says:
> Roy suggests that Typhon's tampering might have done the damage - the
> means emplyoyed to draw off energy rather than the amount of energay
> actually utilised.
> Scientifically it's nonsense yet plausible with a vigorous enough wand.
> As a narrative I like the concept.  Within Wolfe's Urth I'd find it akward
> because it implies a technological sophistication that I don't believe
> Typhon had.

Well, the concept fits thematically with Typhon's name and identification
with Set and all the other serpents that devoured the Sun during an eclipse.
So naturally the concept is attractive to me.

Once one presumes the technology to implant a black hole into a star, all
bets are off for plausibility. It doesn't have to mean sending a beam of
"energy" to where you want it ~ it could be some other method as
inconceivable to us as power lines would be to someone in the 17th century.

Propulsion/Mirror technology and Energy technology are not necessarily the
same thing. There is no need to believe that because Typhon did not have
access to one, that he did not have access to the other. Typhon himself
didn't seem to understand how this technology worked precisely himself.

The ancient Sumerians invented algebra, but never figured out papyrus or
advanced metallurgy. The Greeks made startling advances in astronomy
(discovering heliocentricy, the Earth's spherical shape, and methods for
measuring the distance to the moon and the circumference of the Earth) but
never developed a scientific method.

It's possibly due to my naiveté in practical science, but it never struck me
as awkward.



<--prev V309 next-->