We notice:
(i) Poul Anderson's several rationalizations of FTL are matched by at least two different rationalizations for temporal stasis: a level-entropy field in "Time Heals" and a superenergy state in "Welcome" - although the increased rate of existence of the latter makes no sense. It should make the protagonist move and age very quickly, not leap ahead five hundred years.
(ii) Temporal stasis is not time travel mainly because it is impossible to return. Nevertheless, the protagonists of these two stories are in exactly the same position as the futureward time travellers that we have discussed. They must cope with their sudden arrival in future periods.
(iii) Mainly because of Wells (I think), it is generally believed (wrongly, I think) that a time traveller should be invisible and intangible while in transit but this does not apply to temporal stasis. Hart, like all the others in the Crypt, is enclosed in a totally reflecting cubical field. He is not seen but only because of the reflecting shield, not because light passes through him. (Why should it?) We are not told about Barlow in "Welcome" but it seems that he does just disappear and reappear.
(iv) When Hart emerges in 2837, people live on Earth, on other Solar planets and at Centauri although little is heard from Centauri. We get the impression that interstellar travel is STL.
(v) We recognized the term "psychotechnics" (p. 190) and the categorization of Hart as "unintegrated (ibid.) from Anderson's Psychotechnic History.
10 comments:
We are time-travelling... in to the future.
I don't think that we are. If I sit in this chair from 7:00 pm until 8:00 pm, then I am equally present, stationary, at 7:00 and at 8:00 and every intermediate moment. I do not in any sense move from 7:00 to 8:00.
7:00 with me in it is not followed by 7:00 with me not in it. It is followed only by 7:00:01 with me in it.
"is enclosed in a totally reflecting cubical field"
Which reminds me of the spherical reflecting fields called 'bobbles' in some of Verner Vinge's stories starting with 'The Peace War'. At the start of that story people think the bobbles are impenetrable fields with time passing normally inside, so someone enclosed in a bobble would die from asphyxiation if the bobble did not collapse soon.
Kaor, Mr. Stirling and Jim!
Mr. Stirling: Whether we are walking, sitting, or lying down we are somehow passing thru time into the future.
Jim: Unless persons inside those "bobbles" took along tanks of air to prolong their "journeys."
Which reminds me of what the mutant time travelers Jack Havig and his followers did during the conflict with Caleb Wallis and the Eyrie. They used tanked air to travel longer thru time without needing to take frequent stops for air in THERE WILL BE TIME.
Ad astra! Sean
We are not passing through time into the future. We move around in space and that takes time. We endure through time. Motion requires two sets of units, e.g., we can accelerate from 60 miles per hour to 70 miles per hour but we cannot accelerate from 60 minutes per hour to 70 minutes per hour because 60 minutes IS one hour.
Well, yes you -do- move forward in time. The 7:00 you is gone. Only the present exists.
Sean: I don't think I expressed that well.
When 'bobbles' are first invented people *think* time passes normally inside and they last indefinitely. So people *think* anyone caught inside one will die in however long it takes for the air to run out.
A few decades later, the bobbles start 'popping' and it is found that time stops inside and they are a one way time machine.
Kaor, To All Three!
Mr. Stirling and Paul: We would need something like the Temporal language of Anderson's Time Patrol for a really satisfactory terminology describing time and time traveling.
I think the last three books of St. Augustine's CONFESSIONS was the earliest philosophical attempt at analyzing time.
Jim: Got it. And I should have remember that from reading one of Vinge's books where "bobbles" are used. Not sure I recall the title correctly.
Ad astra! Sean
Jim:
I think that we can describe time as we experience it well enough but we have to think about it first.
Paul: yes, but duration is a function of velocity. Time slows down as you approach light-speed. Your sense of duration is 'stretched'.
Post a Comment