Amhuxh.355
net.space
utcsrgv!utzoo!decvax!ucbvax!mhtsa!ihnss!eagle!mhuxt!mhuxa!mhuxh!lute
Tue Mar 23 12:15:58 1982
Reply to USTN critic
Your remark that my H.G. Wells analogy is incorrect, and that my theory of
USTN (Universal Space-Time Nexus) belongs on sf-lovers only shows that you
missed the point of the analogy.

Granted, that the time machine moved spatially due to celestial motion relative
to its originating point in space, but relative to all other points on earth
it was NOT capable of moving spatially.  The time-machine itself had no means
of moving itself except temporally!  (remember, near the end of the story, the
hero had to drag the machine a few yards away from its original position so
that when taken to a particular year in the future it would not materialize in
the chambers of an enemy?)

Also, please keep in mind that just because someone uses a popular
science-fiction story for an analogy to make a theoretical point, DOES NOT
mean that the theoretical point is also science fiction!

I would enjoy hearing from anyone else who has thoughts on the existence or
properties of USTN.


                                       --Jim Collymore

-----------------------------------------------------------------
gopher://quux.org/ conversion by John Goerzen <[email protected]>
of http://communication.ucsd.edu/A-News/


This Usenet Oldnews Archive
article may be copied and distributed freely, provided:

1. There is no money collected for the text(s) of the articles.

2. The following notice remains appended to each copy:

The Usenet Oldnews Archive: Compilation Copyright (C) 1981, 1996
Bruce Jones, Henry Spencer, David Wiseman.

You are viewing proxied material from gopher.quux.org. The copyright of proxied material belongs to its original authors. Any comments or complaints in relation to proxied material should be directed to the original authors of the content concerned. Please see the disclaimer for more details.