Names of Ranks in the Set

[Theodore Smedry]

During my last Mistborn reread, I noticed that the terms used for the ranks in the set are all math/computer science terms: Sequence, Series, Suit, Array, and the name Set itself. I originally thought that this might say something about the nature of Trell, however I am not sure exactly what it would indicate. It is possible that these terms are used simply because they are not associated with any known structure other than math (if Scadrians use them in their system of math) and would thus be hard to guess what the internal structure of the Set actually is.

Any theories or thoughts about why Brandon uses these names?

[Halyo_Alex]

1 hour ago, Theodore Smedry said:

During my last Mistborn reread, I noticed that the terms used for the ranks in the set are all math/computer science terms: Sequence, Series, Suit, Array, and the name Set itself. I originally thought that this might say something about the nature of Trell, however I am not sure exactly what it would indicate. It is possible that these terms are used simply because they are not associated with any known structure other than math (if Scadrians use them in their system of math) and would thus be hard to guess what the internal structure of the Set actually is.

Any theories or thoughts about why Brandon uses these names?

Quick, crackpot hot take: Trell is actually an Invested Supercomputer.

[Ripheus23]

Sanderson also uses the phrase "one-to-one correspondence" periodically (in WoBs). In set theory, the word "cardinality" was originally read off the notion of suits and ranks in decks of cards (the example being 4 suits X 13 ranks giving you a "set with a cardinality of 52"). 1-to-1 correspondence ends up being crucial to defining "different sizes of infinite cardinalities."

I wonder if there's anything about the Physical-Cognitive interface that suggests you could get a lot of indirect magical power from thinking about infinite sets. My guess is that there is, that the Set are either on to the problem or know (part of) its solution, etc.

[Karger]

I always thought they were referring to probability and how much of the overall events someone was actually competent to take in.  For example an Array can only really see the present if broadly, a Suit can see several moves ahead as well as to the side, Sequence is Marasi's counterpart able to foresee a variety of events branching out in all directions, while a series can look forward but can be blindsided in the now. 

Edited June 21, 2020 by Karger

[+Oltux72]

On 18/06/2020 at 8:28 AM, Theodore Smedry said:

Any theories or thoughts about why Brandon uses these names?

Trell is the vessel of the Shard of Abstract Reasoning.

[Theodore Smedry]

On 6/22/2020 at 5:16 AM, Oltux72 said:

Trell is the vessel of the Shard of Abstract Reasoning.

Sadly, I don't think that Trell is a shard/is associated with a shard that we don't already know based on these two WoBs:

Quote

Questioner

In the past, you have said... that we've seen a metal that is from a Shard that we know, on Scadrial. You said Wax has seen the influence of a Shard other than Preservation, Ruin, or Harmony, and that the spike that Bleeder was using was a metal from a Shard we know. It seems like there's another Shard influencing Scadrial. Is Trell an extension of that?

Brandon Sanderson

Yes.

Questioner

And is that Odium?

Brandon Sanderson

That's a RAFO.

Oathbringer San Francisco signing (Nov. 15, 2017)

Quote

Questioner

Is the metal that Bleeder was associated with and had, is the Shard associated with that metal the same entity that's calling itself Trell?

Brandon Sanderson

Yes.

Oathbringer Portland signing (Nov. 16, 2017)

However, it could be possible that a splinter of a shard we already know has become more associated with or was originally more associated with abstract reasoning. For example, the cryptic spren on Roshar are (possibly) a combination of Cultivation and Honor's investiture, yet are related specifically to logic, abstract reasoning, and lies. Trell might be a formation similar to this where he is associated with a shard we know, but he is more associated with abstract reasoning.

[Theodore Smedry]

On 6/18/2020 at 0:45 AM, Halyo_Alex said:

Quick, crackpot hot take: Trell is actually an Invested Supercomputer.

That would be awesome if it were the case, but I find it more likely to have to do with the foreman on Taldain named Trell. 

Quote

Brandon Sanderson (paraphrased)

Trell the foreman is connected to the religions on Scadrial.

General Reddit 2019 (Nov. 5, 2019)

Quote

Questioner

In Vol. 2 of White Sand, there is a character named Trell. Is that intentional?

Brandon Sanderson

Yes, that is intentional, but the connections are a little more obtuse than you may be expecting.

Starsight Release Party (Nov. 26, 2019)

 

[Theodore Smedry]

On 6/21/2020 at 1:07 PM, Karger said:

I always thought they were referring to probability and how much of the overall events someone was actually competent to take in.  For example an Array can only really see the present if broadly, a Suit can see several moves ahead as well as to the side, Sequence is Marasi's counterpart able to foresee a variety of events branching out in all directions, while a series can look forward but can be blindsided in the now. 

Do you think then that the members of the set have access to Fortune or investiture-related future sight? I'm not sure how they would other than unlocked metalminds or a direct connection to a shard. 

[Theodore Smedry]

On 6/21/2020 at 0:31 PM, Ripheus23 said:

Sanderson also uses the phrase "one-to-one correspondence" periodically (in WoBs). In set theory, the word "cardinality" was originally read off the notion of suits and ranks in decks of cards (the example being 4 suits X 13 ranks giving you a "set with a cardinality of 52"). 1-to-1 correspondence ends up being crucial to defining "different sizes of infinite cardinalities."

I wonder if there's anything about the Physical-Cognitive interface that suggests you could get a lot of indirect magical power from thinking about infinite sets. My guess is that there is, that the Set are either on to the problem or know (part of) its solution, etc.

What I think of when I consider one-to-one correspondence between the Cognitive and Physical realms is the Cognitive realm on Roshar where each physical object has a cognitive sphere counterpart, each soul has a candle-like manifestation, and the land and water manifest as opposites of each other. When thinking about how a shard manifests like this (its one-to-one correspondence in the three realms), I'm not sure how it would look in the Cognitive or Spiritual but in the Physical realm each shard manifests investiture as solid (i.e. god metal, shardplate/shardblades), liquid (i.e. the Well of Ascension, Cultivation's perpendicularity), and gas (i.e. the mists, stormlight).

How do you think considering the realms with one-to-one correspondence would allow access to more power?