Request for Question Clarification by
journalist-ga
on
07 Jan 2005 15:13 PST
Greetings Panda1215,
I read Timeline just last week during a day of Airport Hades yet I
thoroughly enjoyed the plot theory (as I do with all of Crichton's
novels) despite the lost luggage and travel delays. :)
Below is a sample of what I'd enjoy discussing with a group, and if
you enjoy my curiousities then please request an answer from me and I
will offer more discussion possibilities. I realize that all groups
are different, and my style of questioning may be considered too
provocative or "far out." lol I offer a sample in case you may
prefer another Researcher's choice of interest.
Gordon's Claims
"The very concept of time travel makes no sense, since time doesn't
flow. The fact that we think time passes is just an accident of our
nervous systems. In reality, time doesn't pass; we pass. Time itself
is invariant. It just is." pp. 124-125
1. Gordon implies that we perceive time has passed when it is us that
have passed through it. Does this theory seem logical?
2. What, if any, are the spiritual consequences of perceiving time as
stationary and perceiving ourselves as the travelers?
3. Gordon goes on the refer to the universe as truly being a
"multiverse" - many realities as opposed to one. Had you ever
conceived of this notion before reading Timeline?
4. Would the multiverse exist in a side-by-side or stacked fashion, or
would it all be one --intertmingled-- at the same time? What would be
the advantages or disadvantages of each concerning time as you
perceive it? For instance, if the multiverse was a stacked affair
(not intermingled), would we perceive it taking longer to arrive at
certain "times" more than others?
I would also prepare some handout sheets about the String theory,
quantum foam, etc. The explanation given by Gordon is full of
existing scientific theory, and I'd want to discuss everyone's
perceptions on the actual theories the character references.
Quantum foam
http://www.astronomycafe.net/qadir/ask/a11792.html
String theory/M-theory
http://www.damtp.cam.ac.uk/user/gr/public/qg_ss.html
All the aspects of Gordon's explanation would be so intriguing to
pursue. I could get lost in there for a loooong while. Then there's
the matter of transport, and those little "imperfections" in
rebuilding the human structure. Then there's the matter of the
refuted "paradox of time" and the claims that no little act could
alter time. THEN there's the matter of "Where exactly *are* those
machines when they fade from view?" I could go on and on questioning
those topics. :)
Best regards,
journalist-ga
