Kurkistan

Tomorrow, tomorrow. Also, could you grab that spiritual connection quote for me, if you have it handy? P.S. Check my new member title.

Sorry, didn't mean to drag back the actual claims and analysis from that thread. I know now (thanks for that, Auotpwail ) that that whole "accel/decel" idea simply wouldn't work. I was attempting to refer only to the geometry of the projectile's movement in an attempt to clarify what you may have meant. As for train cars, old news and whatnot.

Nice to see some discussion. I'll just sit by and let Auotpwail & Co. take over for now. Like described at the end of this post? A projectile who's path is a line intersecting the geometric center of the bubble is not deflected at all, while deflection grows more and more severe as projectile paths diverge from such a "central" course?

So, as some of you may know, I posted a "Definitive" (cough cough) Allomantic FTL Theory awhile back. I'm still working on how to achieve FTL, but a smaller thought (which may lead to FTL in the end) has come to mind just now. In-between being ruthlessly gutted by that foul entity known as SCIENCE, I tried to analyze exactly what happened when coherent objects were moving while partially inside and partially outside of a time bubble. In that thread, I theorized that the object retained its shape through the entire process, with the parts transiting the edge the bubble accelerating/decelerating (depending on the bubble) as they switch "time zones" and so pulling/pushing the rest of the object and therefore increasing or decreasing the speed of the object as a whole. Satsuoni kindly pointed out that that would result in nigh-instantaneous infinite acceleration (that's calc for you), the effects of which, I surmise, would mirror this description, and which we most definitely don't see in AoL. That still leaves us with the problem of how exactly the borders of time bubbles work, and what happens to coherent object that pass through them. In the interim, I have come up with two different solutions, which I will hopefully here explain satisfactorily and maybe even bring back to FTL or other practical applications. The Distension Theory: It's been theorized that the entire object transits simultaneously when it contacts the edge of the bubble, which I initially found somewhat absurd, but a thought has occurred to me as to how it could work in practice. Suppose that the edge of the bubble is not well defined, and that objects entering or exiting the bubble actually "distend" its surface (like a real bubble, as it were). When the bubble "pops", then the object which, up to this point, has been distending the bubble's surface is suddenly on the other side of the border with the bubble resuming its normal, roughly spherical dimensions. So if you throw a spear out of a bubble, it "bulges out" until enough of the spear (measured as a proportion of mass? Of length? As just a set amount of distension that any given bubble can support?) has gone far enough away from the center of the bubble, at which point the bubble's surface retracts until it no longer encompasses any of the the spear, returning to its normal dimensions after the spear has completely gone it's own way back into real time. This raises the interesting question of whether the "distension" of the bubble would reach objects near the spear on its way out, as opposed to only affecting the spear itself. If a grain of sand was 1mm away from the spear shaft's path in real time, would it be temporarily engulfed by the bubble? If the bubble retracts from the spear before it fully exits the bubble's normal volume, will objects around the spear but inside the bubble be affected? In this model, the ground, trains, building, etc. all actually compress the bubble a bit: for instance, a time bubble cast such as to touch the ground results in a flat-bottomed sphere, Perhaps even poking at the bubble with a stick would distend it inward, at least until the "grab that stick and show it who's boss" threshold is reached. This would actually be eminently testable: if speed bubbles couldn't reach through very solid objects--like, say, the wall of a building or a steel girder--to affect objects on the other side, then the theory looks basically correct. If they can, then we're back to simply having objects teleport into and out of the bubble's area of effect with no rhyme or reason. In the case of the girder, we might even be able to observe objects in the girder's "shadow" be outside the bubble while objects to its sides are inside of the bubble. I prefer distending the surface of the bubble to simply having objects be "in" the bubble and then "out" of the bubble all at once because, in the second case, we either have objects physically teleporting out of the bubble or half of an object being inexplicably in the wrong "time zone" despite being over a known border between the two. Distension also plays into the idea of a "bubble," though Brandon's use of that word may be entirely coincidental. As a ridiculously far-off theory that I'm just laying claim to for the heck of it without really putting much thought or reasoning behind it, what if the "pressure" of an atmosphere actually severely limits the size of time bubbles? So, once we're in space, bubbles suddenly grow to be kilometers's across, actually making "teleporting FTL" (see my "Definitive" thread) feasible. The Compression Theory: The other theory is a bit more out there and might be ruthlessly cut down by my eternal foe, Actual Understanding of the Physical World and Its Limitations. So we know that objects do not want to both be partially in and partially out of a time bubble; in two different time zones but still the same object which just happens to exist on both sides of the bubble, retaining the same shape with its pieces bound together by molecular bonds and whatnot. If that happens, we get infinite acceleration and the world blows up. However, what if the physical characteristics of an object actually change the border of a time bubble? So a 2m pole "compresses" into a shorter pole as it exits a speed bubble, the border compressing the pole as it leaves and then expanding the pole back, more slowly, on the "real time" side of the bubble in order to allow both sections to be traveling at the same speed, relative to their time zones. This allows the sections to be connected and still not pulling at each other. As the pole continues its transit, it compresses and expands so as to maintain this balance, and eventually leaves at its original 2m length. This could be tested by either observing and remembering (if it's that obvious) or photographing an object as it traverses the edge of a time bubble, assuming that the visual distortion isn't too bad. I might be able to hand-wave this with relativity stuff, "the ladder fits in the garage while you move it in, but not when you stop moving it," but I honestly don't know enough to make a good case. I feel as if I may have stumbled upon something here, with the borders of time bubbles pouring out some ridiculous energy to compress and expand objects as they pass, perhaps harness-able as "where the lost energy from thermodynamic issues goes in certain Allomantic interactions." I'll leave it to greater minds to decide. Conclusion: While I came up with the second theory first, I'm actually kind of liking the first one better. It may be that my baby-mind simply can't grasp the complexities and/or impossibilities present in the second theory, but I actually like how intuitive distension is for time bubbles. Even if neither of these theories is satisfactory, we still need to come up with some explanation for what exactly happens when objects enter or leave time bubbles. Partial entry/exit won't work, instantaneous complete entry/exit just doesn't make sense, and the solution has to be out there. TL;DR: You didn't think you'd actually get off that easily, did you?

http://wot.wikia.com/wiki/Reddit_Fantasy_Bookclub_Q%26A_with_Brandon_Sanderson_28_February_2011

I have read it. Thank you for your concern, but while "Shardwielding" (which I have already hypothosized is "Admin powers" for Shards unlocked by being a real "owner" of them, read: KR) may well be a thing, Tamzin Ashevai was clearly referring to Shallan simply having a Shardblade as requiring some kind of power, which we know is not true. That was what I responding too.

There is no such thing as "the power to wield a Shardblade," as a specific power. You grab it, you own it, and then you can summon and use it. Also, since, as has been quoted multiple times, the Shardblade is the fruit of her sin, not the root of it, then she most likley got the Shardblade as a result of the death of her father. Shallan could conceivably have grabbed it and then used it, but it's nigh impossible for a Shardblade to be taken against its (living) owner's will, suggesting that she grabbed it during or after the time when her father died, but did not use it to kill him.

Get out. ...so I can meet you at the door and shake your hand. Down with Nintendo! *Hides*

I'm a lone wolf, wolfing alone through a wolf-eat-wolf world of transcription, but I suppose it's time for this lone wolf to find other lone wolves, and so become a pack of lone wolves, running alone together. Here's a Doc with 0:00-6:05 of .https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Jqb9DE3BoKjRm-pHb1ecHZyh-J3uSYhwpTxBNnfZiic/edit

No, Tor-Forge was something else from many moons ago. I don't have any dibs on the AMOL panel. I suppose a Google Doc could be helpful, although I find that simply listening to the entire interview one last time while reading along with my transcription tends to catch most errors at the end of the day.

No, it wasn't me. It was Harakeke. Turos designed a font to write Alethi and I wrote a Java program that transforms English text into phonetic Alethi using Turos's font conventions.

I don't see why kandra couldn't go all exoskeletal on us, and I imagine that a mistraith would still eat something with an exoskeleton.

It's in the Epigraph letter from WoK, presumably written by Hoid. http://stormlightarchive.wikia.com/wiki/The_Way_of_Kings's_Epigraph_Letter As for messing with canonical terms, Splinters/Splintered/Splintering is really quite confusing, as we saw just now, Windrunner. I don't imagine we'll be discussing both at the same time enough to really warrant a "fannon" term. *Stolidly doesn't think of how deeply involved he was in the "Surging <Feruchemical quality>" debate* If we did use them enough, though, I think we'd be fine going all "Shardholder" on the distinction.

I think we've settled on "Shattered" as a less confusing alternative to saying that a Shard has been reduced entirely to Splinters, with no larger, consciousness-guided "main" part. So Endowment, while it has Splinters, still (presumably) has a single larger whole, so is not "Splintered" in the sense that Hoid (if it wasn't Hoid I'll eat my copy of the book) used in The Letter.

The Google+ Hangout. http://www.theoryland.com/intvmain.php?i=755#27 EDIT: @Windrunner No worries. I blame Hoid.

Forgive me if I continue to misunderstand, but you said "Also, on Roshar, the two Shards we know are currently there for sure are both Splintered." Perhaps this is simply a result of over-loading the word "Splinter," but that sentence implies that we know that Cultivation is Splintered, as in shattered (a better word, if I do say so. Thanks for the ambiguity, Hoid ) and no longer in any way a coherent whole.

I think you may be misunderstanding what exactly the existence of Splinters implies. A whole Shard with a living Shardholder is capable of consciously splitting off a small part of its power. Endowment does this all the time with Returned, Ruin and Preservation put small amounts of their power in humanity, and Leras split a lot of his power into the mists. A Shard can also be Splintered (verb) against its will, as with Aona and Skai, which also results in a large number of Splinters (noun) being created. As far as we know, Cultivation consciously created spren and is still intact, although it's still up in the air as to whether or not spren have enough power to count as Splinters in their own right (see: humans on Scadrial for non-Splinters who hold part of a Shard's power). We know that Honor was Splintered (verb) at some point, but have no reason to believe that Cultivation is not, by the large, intact.

I have to disagree on this too. While it is odd that--as far as I know--we have never seen any negative consequences from using Mental Allomancy (and there very well might still be a few consequences lurking out there) I doubt that this is one of them.

All spren are either of Honor, of Cultivation, or a mix. It's a fair conclusion to call them Splinters. Writing for Charity Interview Edit: In fact, I would hazard that the first "something" is probably "Splinters." http://coppermind.17thshard.com/wiki/Splinter

Well don't I feel sheepish. Okay, new analysis, then: Oh, so Ahven is at least doing something to maintain his illusion, what with his "wide, innocent eyes" and "smiling foolishly" at the party. Strike two. Moving on again: Brandon's skill writing fight scenes has definitely improved. I really lacked a sense of location during the fight, starting with Jerk's (that variation on his name brings me undue pleasue) location in relation to the guards. Also, how big is the balcony? Where are the guards on the balcony? Which way are they facing? Jerk was on the roof, then suddenly a guard goes down (silently?) with a stiletto in the back (falling down silently too, apparenlty, since Jerk still took care to set the other guard's body down gently). Then Jerk is choking the other guard (with both hands, presumably? Then why isn't the guard attacking him back? What kind of weapon did he have anyway? Oh, it was a sword? Well thanks for telling me that after the fight scene was over!). Then Jerk (still choking the guard with both hands?) "whipped out his chokecloth [using his third arm, presumably], spinning behind the man and wrapping the cloth around [the guards] neck." Either Jerk grew an arm or he was subduing a trained guard to the point of complete silence and near immobility using one hand. I might be being ungenerous here, since the scene does give an impression of a fast Stab->Choke->Chokecloth sequence ("The guard got in a single claw at Jek's arm before a twist of the chokecloth..."), but that begs the questions of how far apart the guards were, how big the balcony was, their facing, obstacles in Jerk's path, just how slow the reaction time of the guard was, and so on. Even if we do allow for this to be a plausable sequence (Jerk is very close to the second guard and stifles him for just a moment with one hand while simultaneously pulling out the chokecloth with the other [an interpretation which would have been helped by a semicolon or conjunction between the two actions rather than a full stop], with the choke->garroting sequence all taking place in the same moment), it's still rather confusing. That was a bit harsher than I intended, but I really mean this as praise for how well Brandon's writes fight scenes now; they all seem so simple, but it really is frighteningly easy to mess them up. With Brandon nowadays, the reader never even has to think about these kinds of questions.

^Ok, let's dig a bit more into thematic comparison (as opposed to canonical speculation), then. I much prefer Taravangian's "disability" in WoK (his perceived low-grade not-smartness (as intelligent as a normal person, really [pg 64])) to that of "Taravangian Prime." As a modern reader, you can't help but heavily look down upon a culture which equates deafness with idiocy, unnecessarily alienating the reader from Alethi culture right off the bat. It also makes the WoKP Alethi nobility look like fools, not the cunning, backstabbing lot they are in WoK, since apparently the entire peerage has fallen for this transparent ruse. Taravangian works hard for his illusion of (permanent) mediocrity, while, as far as we can see, Ahven just behaves normally and everyone assumes he is mentally disabled because of how his voice sounds. EDIT: On a re-read, I just saw that Ahven had "wide, innocent eyes" and was "smiling foolishly" during the party, implying that he is actively maintaining an illusion of mental disability. Still odd that he would be labeled as such in the first place, though, given that I'm assuming he wasn't quite this conniving as a small child. I also like the (massive) buildup to the Taravangian reveal, while Ahven's plotting isn't surprising because we've known the character for all of five minutes. Really, the whole chapter just goes to make the Alethi look absolutely terrible and incompetent, preening fools who deserve anything that they get--this perception is not just a result of Jerk's skewed viewpoint: that viewpoint (the savagery of the East) is reinforced by the objective fact of their highly irrational prejudice against the disabled, the apparent foolishness of their guard placement (as helpfully pointed out by Jerk), and the apparent foolishness of their nobility. The Alethi in the WoK are a fallen people--though they don't know it--great and glorious, but misguided. The Alethi in WoKP are just misguided. EDIT: Oops. As helpfully pointed out by Peter, it's the Vedens, not the Alethi. That makes a substantial portion of my analysis less useful, though I suppose the same criticisms could be applied to the implications about Jah Keved. We don't have as much to compare directly to the WoK though, so still less useful overall. I guess my memories of the first scene of the WoK are stronger than the memory of something I read a day ago. That's a good sign, right?

I was about to go so OT that heads would spin, but just posted a new thread instead.

So, Brandon/Peter are putting up deleted scenes for the WoK, and I feel the need to discuss them. First Scene An interesting scene overall. "Jek's" Truthlessness is definitely different from Szeth's, with WoK heavily implying that he can never be free, while this version suggests that a single kindly master could wish this genie out of the lamp. There is even the implication that the stone simply not being possessed by someone would be enough to free Jek. As noted here, Szeth is compelled (whether magically or by his honor) to collect his Oathstone when it is discarded by the Parshendi in WoK. Jek also fails to display or even hint at Lashings or his Shardblade in this version. I am interested to see how much of the Shin culture expounded (and expounded and expounded and expounded--I'm glad that Brandon has since learned that a little mystery never hurts) on in the deleted scene is retained at the end of the day. I didn't get that sense of superiority (eastern savages and all) in the final WoK, mostly just "they're a bit blasphemous what with their stone-walkery and jewel-wearing, but just a bit ignorant and strange." The deleted scene also implies that Shinovar is chock-full of deadly assassins and cunning warriors (the comments about incompetent eastern assassins and how all easterners count as children as far as Shinovar's "Truth" warrior code is concerned), while warriors are the lowest of the low, "those who take," in the WoK. Perhaps "those who take" are particularly good at their jobs even in the WoK, but we also see that Shinovar is dangerously insular and, from what we can see, radically peaceful in the interlude in WoK. Not quite the aggressive, assassin-happy Shin of the deleted scenes, with Jek "trained through hours of practice beneath his father's tutelage" for what would--in the world of the WoK--essentially amount to being a despised slave. Any other thoughts or insights?

I'm in the "jump in and look back later crowd," believing the viewpoint characters as a rule. I did pick up on Kaladin just about immediately, if I recall correctly: I think the first bridge run, when the arrows all missed him, I was like "oh, so he has the same powers as Szeth. That's nice" and then I had to wait half a book for him to figure it out himself. That and Shallan's shardblade (although only after she tried to draw it) were basically the only "big" things I've spotted ahead of time, both in WoK. I'm not looking down my nose here since I never catch anything else, but I was actually surprised that we were supposed to "figure those out." Maybe I'm just getting wily as I read more of Brandon's writing. EDIT: Oh, and Zas, it's really best to quote the whole thing:

New (old) interview linked to in the blog, I'll also call 3:00-5:00 in Part 2. Come one people! I can't do it all myself! EDIT: Did up to 6:05.