|
Post by Kage2020 on May 1, 2004 11:15:43 GMT -5
Point 1 - Name for 'our universe'? Hmmn... given that you like sticking to the 'fluff', how about with just stick with the "matterium"? Point 1.1 - Beacons While the analogy between beacons and 'lighthouses' is a valid one - after all, it has been used a myriad of times in reference to the Astronomican itself - requiring that you put these at the end of 'important warp routes' just doesn't make sense. If they're still within the range of the Astronomican then, supposedly, that is sufficient. Again, though, the 'fluff' is entirely glitchy on this (i.e. if the Astronomican is so important what other reference points do they go by? a single point is obviously not sufficient... if they use other references point whis is the less of the Astronomican deemed inappropriately in the 'fluff' to "end warp travel"?... blah blah). And if they are attributed to the Astropathic Choir present on the world (i.e. Astropathic Enclave which is present as a function of an 'integrated' world of the Imperium, whether such integration is parasitic or not) then why do not all worlds present such beacons? (Then again, perhaps they do...) Point 2.0 - Rleative travel speed in 'stable warp pathways' Erm, no. I think there must have been some more confusion, though I also understand that this was further described later on. In the entire post I was suggesting that stable warp pathways act to make calculated warp jumps more secure in that that they offer a point of 'dynamically stable' warp space which, when coupled with a current act to radically reduce the bifurcation (and trifurcation, etc.) of probabity branches used in modelling transit and making such calculations secure. Navigators have the same advantages with the ability of being able to react to those probability branches, i.e. if one disminishingly small probability becomes an actuality... Point 2.1 - Conflicting imagery on 'stable warp pathways' Ah, I thought that was the type of image that you were working on. It was implicit through the rest of your argument. The purpose of this is ultimately the same as "GW subsector maps"... Point 2.2 - Facilitation of Navigation <grin> Almost as bad as what incited the analogy. Ah yes, the GW subsector maps. Draw a few lines between systems and leave it at that? I personally have a natural 'exchange' between all systems (hence my reference to the glitchy 'order cells' but one which can be obfuscated by the 'chaos factor') which can create a similar phenomenon... but kind of. As I said the concept is glitchy in and of itself. Both GW Subsector Maps and the 'warp tunnel/current/stable' path serves too obvious a tactical function to be differentated from the requirement by GW to create an artefact of 'high' and 'low' ground (and therefore of 'tactical areas') to be necessarily accepted as a 'true' artefact of warp travel without consideration of the concept that it is, like much other 'fluff', ad hoc... Point 3 - Warp Routes and "Sub Choirs" They're around. But the point is that they're used as a mini-Astronomican, not as a means of guiding ships to individual plants. Rather they have a spere of effect which is unnecessary within the scope of the Astronomican. (Or a reasonable extension, in areas where the warp is particularly turbulent and the 'Astronomican' is blanked out... but these areas tend to be exceptionally, exceptionally rare...) So, no. At present there doesn't seem reasonable for any world to have an 'micro-Beacon'. They are not required except beyond the range of the Astronomican. Of course, every world has the potential of creating a beacon if they're willing to burn out their Astropaths in so doing... Point 4 - Duration of Time in "Warp Analysis" <grin> And I get told off for ignoring bits of 'fluff' that don't fit into my interpretation, even upon careful consideration... (There is the reasonable concept that such 'observations' are not constant, but rather 'snapshots' and, indeed, the very nature of these would for me make this a necessity...) As to where it is done 'constantly', then the above quote from WD139 suggests this. Or, to repeat the quote "...All warp-drives incorporate navigational mechanisms. When the ship is in real space, these monitor the ever shifting movements of the part of the warp corresponding to the ship's current position. By observing these movements in the warp it is possible to calculate a course, corrective manoeuvres, and approximate journey time to a proposed destination. Calculation relies on the assumption that the warp-currents observed from real space don't change significantly during flight..." (WD139, again). Your 'insistence' that it does not change is non-sensical in the way that I'm reading your argument. We're already operating on the "coin-flipping" argument. The increased duration between observation of 'start conditions' and precipitation into the warp creates an inherent uncertainty but still does not mean that a "safe route" is created. To re-iterate. "Navigational mechanisms" check out the warp to see what the local conditions are. If they're too nasty you don't jump. If it looks reasonable favourable for a jump, the conditions are analysed from a 'start point' and a 'course' mapped out as best as possible. When the computer says you jump, you jump into the 'current' that it predicted... if it predicted wrong (gotta love probability; the 'dendritic branchings of proability' mentioned above) then you're in trouble. Again, though, there is no creation of an objectively safe route, just the prediction of the 'best course'... I'm going to directly quote this for emphasis. The counter-argument is already consistent with the 'fluff' as is, broadly, yours. There just seems to be significant misinterpretation going on. Point 4.1 - Warp 'Sensors' and Warp Drives Hmmn... I predicted that argument in the above. Suffice to say that I feel that it's a mal-image to include a warp drive which doesn't have any 'navigational mechanisms' when the 'fluff' states that all warp drives include them... But then again there is always the probem of specific statement through the creation of a narratively interesting situation... Point 5.0 - Are Navigators Quicker? You say it is because of calculations, I say it is a combination of calculation to determine relatively safety combined with a much lesser time on calculation when conditions are 'favourable'... Why? Mainly because I don't think that the calculation "creates" a safe route, but rather suggests the safest route and given that the Warp is not a steady-state Newtonian system then the period between observation and precipitation must necessarily approach zero (i.e. get smaller, but could still be hours or even longer) to maintain those favourable conditions. As the period between observation and point of entrance into the warp diverges, the probability of the 'route model' calculated diminishes making a probable successful journey into an increasignly improbable successful journey. As to your reasons why 'navigators are quicker', I have never argued those points. And you also forget that they are far, far more flexible. Point 6 - Lack of Warp Maps Temporary localised warp maps are a necessity of the 'navigational mechanisms' mentioned in the 'fluff'. As to comparison with the maps for Red October... why not when one thinks about synthesis? How do you think those maps were created in the first place? You accurately map them through other means... detail sonar maps, etc. What then is a 'temporary local warp map' required in the 'navigational mechanism'? A snapshot of the conditions of the warp over a given volume of real-space (V) analogous to warp space (V'). Put enough of these together and you build up a picture... Yes, some bits are constantly moving but then again there are major flow currents, eddies, or whatever the seem to be fairly stable... After all, how were your Finding Nemo warp currents located? Or even stable sections of the warp such as the Sargassos Phenomenon? Or the repeating Pendulum Tide... Hmmn, sounds a bit catty. Apologies. Kage
|
|
|
Post by CELS on May 1, 2004 12:14:24 GMT -5
Point 1 - Name for 'our universe'? Hopefully, I'm not the only one who likes to stick with the fluff. Matterium it is Point 1.1 - Beacons All worlds would not have such beacons, because only the best psykers can become Chosen, used by the Astronomican. Given that these last for about three months before they burn out, it's fairly understandable why every world doesn't have them. Keeping a choir of alpha- or beta-level psykers, each of whom last for no longer than three months, is quite a drain. In fact, I'm not sure the Anargo sector would even have any worlds important enough to warrant such an expenditure. I don't know how the Astronomican works. All I'm proposing is how these beacons would work. If I must explain how the Astronomican works in order to do that, then I'll just drop the idea alltogether. It was never that big a deal anyway Point 2.0 - Rleative travel speed in 'stable warp pathways' Ah. Agreed then. Point 2.1 - Conflicting imagery on 'stable warp pathways' How is the purpose of my idea of warp routes ultimately the same as "GW subsector maps"? Point 2.2 - Facilitation of Navigation You're right, the GW subsector maps are hard to explain, given the nature of warp travel as we see it. I'll not try to explain them. Point 4 - Duration of Time in "Warp Analysis" Well, we have to ignore something! And I'd rather ignore something from a White Dwarf from before the beginning of time than the image that later fluff and fiction has created I'm not suggesting that the warp engine "creates" a safe route, and I agree that it just predicts the best route. Point 5.0 - Are Navigators Quicker? I seem to agree with you on this, except for the points that I argued (and I know you didn't argue them. That's why I did ) Point 6 - Lack of Warp Maps We seem to agree on this as well. As for how warp routes are discovered... A Navigator sits in his pedestal gazing over the warp on his way to Blarchnorg VII. He sees some powerful currents on his left, and decides to steer his ship in that direction. As it turns out, those currents are incredibly stable and powerful, and bring him to his destination in one piece. The next time he's out flying in the warp on his way to Blarchnorg VII, he notices the same pattern of warp currents. He tries them again, and is yet again amazed at their speed and stability. He repeats this course the next 50 trips, and tells his Navigator friend about it, and it's soon known as Route 5413. Of course, the pre-Imperial colonists that first came to the Anargo sector might not have had Navigators, and would have used 'warp sensors' What's "catty" btw?
|
|
|
Post by Destecado on May 1, 2004 13:17:24 GMT -5
1. Name of the Universe
Materium sounds fine or perhaps "real" space
1.1 Beacons
The analogy of a light house might be too primitive an image. Instead they could be thought of as an approach beacon. Most airports have these. They tell planes when they are entering the flight path.
They might also serve another purpose. What if these Beacons also feed telemetry to the ships to allow them to make a jump. If anyone is familiar with weather forcasting, they use a system called doppler radar to track storms and other weather patterns. Perhaps the telepaths at these instilations track changes in the warp and feed this data to ships calculating warp jumps.
Of course this above information is based on the beacons being there for calculated jumps. Personally i feel if there are beacons, they are there more for navigators.
I've given some thought to navigators travelling through the warp. Since we've talked of the warp as possible a fluid medium, what if navigtor uses something akin to mental sonar to navigate the warp. The thrid eye acts as both transmittor and receptor for the mental sonar waves.
Beacons could either be used to boost the range of this sonar sight or act as markers for the navigators to home in on. what are your thoughts.
2. Relative Travel Speed in Stable Warp Pathways
I have to consider this idea more before responding.
5. Navigators Quiker
It is not so much that they are quicker in computations. It would be very difficult to out pace a computer in computations per second. A navigator instead does much of the things a computer would waste processing time on intuitavely. Take swimming as an example. When you first learn, you have to concentrate on doing a certain stroke properly or kickng your feet at the proper time.
As you become more proficient, you spend less time thinking about the proper way to swim and just do it. Its done more by feel than by raw data input.
Let me put it in context of sailing. The polynisain people are extremely accomplished sailors. They sailed from the Philopenes to the hawaiian islands without aid of a compass or maps. Their language has over a hundred words to describe different types of waves and ocena conditions.
I remember reading a book about this when I was in Hawaii. I'll see if I can find some links to explain this concept of intuitive sailing in better detail.
|
|
|
Post by Kage2020 on May 1, 2004 15:14:48 GMT -5
The point at which the 'numbering/bullet' system of replying to points becomes problematic is when topics become redundant (i.e. they are re-named, see "Point 1") and when more than one person comes out to chat about something... With the caveat that I really should be writing a literature review at the moment (and I hate them since I can never do them! they sound like plagerism!)... Point 1 - Name for 'our universe'? Matterium it is. I tend to use that or 'real space'... every now and again I'll sleep into spacetime, but we all have our little problems. Point 1.1 - Beacons There seems to be a horrendous misunderstanding here, and I'm not sure whether it is on behalf of CELS or because GW has gone and added a new bit of minor 'fluff' which I'm not aware of. In all previous discussions I have not come across this, but there we go... The Chosen are those secondary psykers that are not considered suitable for Soul Binding (e.g. they are not quite powerful or young enough to be of service). These individuals become the Chosen who are taken to the Forbidden Fortress... and that's it. I have seen no indication that the Chosen have an existence beyond the Forbidden Fortress (erm, or at least the Dome of the Astronomican in the Himalayas). Unlike Astropaths they are not distributed throughout the Imperium, but are rather used to form the Astronomican itself. Astropaths can mimic small-scale "psychic beacons" through their own powers, but they are most definitely not Chosen. It is less of defining what the Astronomican does, since that is pretty easy to understand if one remains on the superficial level. Rather, it is the nature of psychic beacons themselves... Point 1.1 - Psyker Grade versus Class It's pretty interchangeable how you use these terms, but there is a significant difference between them. Class is composed of three general terms: Primary, Secondary and Tainted. Primary psykers are those that can withstand (broadly) the taint of Chaos, secondary are those that cannot without Soul Binding, and the Tainted are, well, tainted. Alpha-plus, alpha, beta, delta (etc.) psykers are graded in terms of power. It is entirely feasible for a secondary psyker to be of a higher grade than a primary (say, alpha over the primary's beta-grade) just as, arguably, the tapping of corrupt powers gives Tainted some of their nastier abilities... To reiterate, 'psyhic beacons' are created by Astropaths. The Astronomican is created by the Chosen of the adeptus astronomican. Point 1.2 - Analogies of 'beacons' I think now we're beginning to split hairs in analogies, but the point is valid. A lighthouse is a variable pulse navigational system with the 'pulses' found in the Astronomican being used to extend this argument. However, it is still an omni-directional beacon in much the same way that a star is. (And in that way one could equally make the analogy between a star and a corona... or is that photosphere, I forget.) Point 1.3 - Telemetry from 'psychic beacons' There is some suggestion that this is used by Navigators with the Astronomican, but to extend it to 'calculated warp jumps' is problematic in that it requires a 'pick up', i.e. either a Navigator or an Astropath, the latter of which wouldn't be much help. ( Contra the idea that powerful navigators, i.e. 'sorcerers', can navigate.) Point 1.4 - How do Navigators 'navigate'? Using 'sonar' imagery might be valid, but translates essentially to "Astral Sight". Summary - I think it would be reasonable to suggest at this point that the presence of 'psychic beacons' is at this point unnecesary in the Anargo sector. Navigation is facilitated by the Astronomican... erm... for Navigators, anyway. Calculated warp jumps self-evidently do not require the Astronomican, nor would they be reactive to micro-beacons, and have their own problems anyway. Point 2.0 - Relative travel speed in 'stable warp pathways' Always seems to come down to a matter of explanation... Point 2.1 - Conflicting imagery on 'stable warp pathways' I'm not saying that your purpose is the same, just that the GW subsector maps are a means by which worlds can be given strategic significance when warp drives ultimately create a situation in which a 'front' cannot be achieved. This is, if you remember, a part of the original problem with the Pendulum Tide. Point 2.2 - Facilitation of Navigation I have the sneaky suspicion, CELS, that means you see it like "warp travel" itself, i.e. it requires conformance without questioning? Point 4 - Duration of Time in "Warp Analysis" There are very few images beyond Navigated travel in GW literature, CELS. It still seems that we broadly see how the 'analysis' works, but you like to keep a long period where I feel that the period between 'observation' and 'precipitation' must be necessarily short. That leaves some latitude in the nature of 'observation' and the period in which data must be gathered. Point 5.0 - Are Navigators Quicker? Ah, the weakness in my argument. I sometimes neglect some bits of information on the tactic assumption that they are automatically considered. My bad... I'm not always one for stating the obvious except when writing up, in which case it's called "being verbose" if you're nice! Destecado's comments parallel my thoughts on this matter. (And there really is no need to post a swathe of links regarding Polynesian sailing to explain the idea of intuition vs. science!) Point 6 - Lack of Warp Maps Yep, it seems more a problem of communication of concepts then anything else. I get the sneaky suspicion apart from the desire to tenaciously grip on certain concepts based upon pre-established imagery, we both share the same rough approach. It is, after all, based upon the same overall facts. Point 6.1 - Dicovery of Warp Routes A fair enough point, though one which once again established the pre-eminence of Navigators while ignoring the previous 'fluff'. Perhaps the calculated 'observed' drives might be thought of as more akin to local knowledge upon which subsequent details can be built upon or, more likely, integrated with the 'larger picture'? Put another way, why is there such a thing as a harbour pilot? They exist becuase of their local knowledge. It doesn't mean that this could not be shared by others, just that they have specific knowledge. The same thing here with 'local pilots', i.e. those that normally remain in a single subsector (the smaller civil ships)... Limitations of communications becomes a problem in the same means as your Navigator-dominated model. But I find it somewhat tenuous to suggest that 'warp sensors' would not be used to build up a local map which could then be extended as 'general knowledge'... That the Navigators maintain privileged information of non-local systems seems obvious to me... Generally ascribed as 'scratching eyes out' and applied to 'girlie fighting' as well as a general approach to discussion; the making of snide comments to the detriment of others. Everyone tends to do it when their hackles are up... I just admit to it! Kage
|
|
|
Post by CELS on May 2, 2004 6:55:44 GMT -5
What are you doing writing a literature review, Kage? Point 1.1 - Beacons I don't understand what horrendous misunderstanding you're talking about, Kage. Perhaps you should tell me where I've misunderstood? As you know, I didn't play back in Rogue Trader days, so I have only Critical Hit and the Fluff Bible to go by. From Critical Hit (the latter claiming to have WD140 as its source) I quote: "Primary Psykers are not invulnerable to daemons and other psychic aggressors, but their training gives them a fighting chance against all but the most potent of these creatures." "Astropaths are selected from the second ranking of psykers, those whose powers are considerable but inadequate to resist the dangers of possession or daemonic corruption." "Some Primary and Secondary Psykers are reserved for the Adeptus Astronomica. They are handed over to complete their training under the auspices of that organisation."From this, it seems you are mistaken that the Chosen are the secondary psykers that are not considered suitable for Soul Binding. "The pinnacle of an Acolyte's existence is to be selected as one of the Chosen. This is a considered a great honour. The Chosen are regarded as occupying a unique and rarefied level of existence far beyond that of the Instructors or even the Master of the Astronomican"Considering that the Astronomican recruits both Primary and Secondary psykers, it's not unlikely that the Chosen are for the most part Primary psykers. I did not suggest that these chosen would have an existance outside the Forbidden Fortress though. They seem too precious to be sent around the galaxy. Point 1.2 - Psyker Grade versus Class Was not fully aware of this distinction, so thanks. As for psychic beacons being created by Astropaths... if you say so. I've officially resigned from this discussion Point 2.2 - GW's subsector maps Conformance without questioning? Not at all. I'm suggesting that we leave them out of the Anargo sector, and don't really go out and say that these subsector maps are either valid or invalid. Point 4 - Duration of Time in "Warp Analysis" Well, I don't know how we should resolve this issue, since it's more a question of imagery than actual logic. My alternative would make calculated jumps slightly more dangerous though. Out of interest, how long time do you consider would be needed to do this 'observation analysis', assuming that the route is relatively 'normal' (if there's such a thing) Point 6.1 - Dicovery of Warp Routes My only point is that warp routes and/or "stable warp pathways" are by definition the only stable parts of the warp that are worth putting on a map that is supposed to last. If the rest of the warp was so predictable that you could use the same maps year after year to travel through it, then most of the warp would by definition consist of stable warp pathways. The image I have of the warp though, is that most of it is constantly shifting with little logic behind it (of course, chaos theory suggests that there is a logic behind it, even if it's chaotic), so that maps are useless except for the stable warp pathways.
|
|
|
Post by Kage2020 on May 2, 2004 8:30:59 GMT -5
Don't ask me. I've given up on them. I've got four to write for one chapter and I'm horrendous at summarising specifics... I work much better with concepts. <sigh> Point 1.1 - Beacons What the misunderstanding with beacons? I thought that it was a misunderstanding of what I was saying with regards to calculated warp jumps and what they do... we're mostly working on the same principles but for one thing, and that's later... Point 1.1.1 - Primary PsykersThis is where the numbering system gets weird and where the quotation system works much better, but anyway. It's kind of fun. Looks like a simplified version of my chapter... A valid point with regard to primary psykers. Perhaps I should have used ' "immune" ' to represent what I was after, i.e. under normal circumstances the psyker is strong enough to withstand Chaos. When specific interest arrives at their door then they're in as much trouble as everyone else! Kind of... Point 1.1.2 - Astropaths Yes, astropaths are secondary psykers, as I mentioned, i.e. requiring the Soul Binding. By inference form the 'fluff' on the Chosen, however, they are also given over to the adeptus astra telepathica if they are either primary or secondary but lacking other suitable criteria for Imperial service (i.e. being young enough since they are subsequently going to have been trained and then distributed throughout the Imperium). Erm, that last applying to Astropaths anyway. 1.1.3 - The Chosen This is one of those points where implicit argument comes through. Alternative features were coming into play, i.e. the age of the candidate. Those that are strong enough but too old, for example. Those that who are not mutants yet have some form of disease that make them inappropriate... Remember that the adeptus astra telepathica operates as a eugenics program as much as anything else! So, no. No mistake being made except possibly in my ability to put my thoughts over in a clear fashion at the moment. (Again, if you knew what I was specifically writing you would understand.) As to whether recruited individuals into the adeptus astronomican is composed in the majority of primary or secondary psykers? I'll leave that to personal interpretation. As to saying that they were not distributed, my apologies. I was mislead by the first paragraph under "Point 1.1 - Beacons" in the post before your last (i.e. where you talk about the Chosen in context of Astronomican, then alpha-/beta-grade psykers and then with reference to the 'soul burn' out of the Chosen, etc.). My bad. Point 2.2 - GW's subsector maps Fair enough. I believe, however, that Minister was keen on integrating them to make BFG possible. Which goes some way to proving the point... Of course, one could use them to indicate 'trade routes' rather than 'warp pathways', although that in itself gets into the nature of warp pathways in the first place... Point 4 - Duration of Time in "Warp Analysis" I'm not sure that it is entirely a matter of imagery and lack of logic, but of course I would say that. As I see it the two arguments are: - Long Duration (CELS): Observation of the warp is made and then a long duration is left between that duration while analysis is made. This analysis serves to 'perfect' the journey, with the longer the calculation being made (minutes --> hours --> ?days) the greater the safety, i.e. a "safe route is created".
- Short Duration (Kage): Observation of the warp is made, potentially taking a 'large' if unstated period of time (likely low-speed frames; I'm reminded of 'real-time weather maps'), and then once complete (including analysis of stability of warp phenomenon) the calculation takes place rapidly such that the duration between finished observation and precipitation into the warp are necessarily as small as possible.
So we've got "unspecified observation + (unspecified) long duration analysis" with "(unspecified) long observation + short analysis". Could quite easily balance out... It is for this reason that I say that, ultimately, we're arguing the same thing but with a misunderstanding that we are doing this. I merely suggest that analysis has to be as short as possible merely because the Warp is 'constantly changing', a feature that is constantly pointed out. If the duration between the time of observation and analysis and precipitation is large (i.e. because of the analytical period) then there is an increasing probability that the warp conditions would have significantly changed. This would then invalidate any calculations that were made; instead of a fairly stable current you find yourself jumping into a whirlpool, or whatever. On the other hand, if you've been observing the warp for an unspecified period of time to determine the relative stability of warp phenomenon and, finding it is suitable to jump (or even not 'suitable'/necessarily safe) you make the jump, but the period from finalised observation/decision to make the jump is small so as to minimalise the changes within the warp... The greater the change, the more your 'start conditions' diverge from the last observation and the greater the chance for misjump and catastrophe... That's all... I'm fairly sure that this creates a situation as in the 'fluff' but without reference to the "creation" of a safe route (getting into the idea that we make what we perceive, i.e. consensual reality... a bit orky). The exact period of observation, analysis, and so forth are entirely up for grabs... I don't, however, expect to see a civil ship taking a calculated jump waiting for months for the 'perfect wave'; just the best that they can find in a period of time that they're willing to wait. This schema also gives a rather substantial reason for the concept of 'high grounds' and 'beacheads' when compared with 'warp gates' (in the new definition of the world)... Of course, that does tie into the nature of those warp gates... Point 4-1 - Duration of Observation of Warp, Analysis of Warp Currents, Route Calculation and Precipitation No idea. I just know that the period between 'route calculation' and 'precipitation' should be small and, indeed, 'route calculation' and final 'observation of the warp' (with the decision to jump) should also be as small as possible... Point 6.0 - Dicovery of Warp Routes Then it's a 'fluff' discrepancy, once again I'm afraid. I am now merely suggesting that composite images created by the 'warp sensors' could be used to create a 'local knowledge' that does not necessarily extend to a 'global/galactic knowledge'. Once again there are the parallels with the 'aquatic metaphor' or, even, a wood's guide of the 'terrestrial metaphor'... Point 6.1 - Order and Chaos I merely mention the 'harmonious warp' and how 'stable areas' could be constructed as reflective of the emerging 'order' present before Chaos. That is they are artefacts of the previous existence. In that schema Chaos is that which corrupts the previous order... This does not preclude order-withiin-Chaos, however. Kage
|
|
|
Post by Destecado on May 3, 2004 11:00:49 GMT -5
Point 6.1 - Order and Chaos
I think this topic needs to be left up to a discussion of the nature of the warp rather than being brought up here. While it touches on the subject at hand, to discuss it at any length might detract from the current topic.
Point 6.0 - Discovery of Warp Routes
I think that the discover of the warp routes should be left up to the navigators. They and the ships they travel on would be like modern day explorers, forging paths into the dark reaches of the galaxy. These explore ships or "pathfinders" (trail blazers) could have been fitted with senstive diagnostic equipment that collected telemetry on the warp as the ship proceeded through.
This data could then be used to identify the most "stable" portions of the warp. This data could then be fed into the navigation computers making calculated jumps possible. I don't feel that the warp is as chaotic as it is made out to be, at least not the portion close to the materium where warp travel occurs.
Warp Maps would only "map" the area close to the materium. The base map would not show warp currents, it would for the most part be an overlay of "real space" with all of the stellar bodies and other phenomenon marked.
This would be part of the data collected from the trail blazer missions, the effects of real space bodies on the local warp. From how the mapping of the warp has begun to be described, it sounds more like meteorlogical forecasting than cartography.
Part of meterological forecasting looks at the land masses or bodies of water over which the weather patters are emerging for hint as to how they may form or progress. as an example, A storm comming from the windward side of a mountain will deposit most of its rain in a certain are as the mountain pushes up the wind currents to higher elevations. Similarly it should be able to calculate based on the readings (more than one pass through the warp) how the currents or warp itself would be shaped by these objects.
With this information as a base, additional telemetry and data could be fed into the model of local warp space in order to form a picture of how the warp is floowing in order to calculate a jump.
As I have indicated, a calculated jump is only a forecast of what the warp space will be like, it can be wrong (just like the weather report), but it is the best estimation based on the available data at hand.
The data however is meaningless without a base model of the local warp space to start from. A starting point is need on which to hang any information. Perhaps there are systems on ships pioletd by navigators that record the telemetry of the voyage (much like the original trailblazer missions). This would allow for the adjustment of the local warp space model and allow the programers of the calculated jumps to verify the accuracy of the forecasts.
Calculating a warp jump like forcasting the weather relys on hard scientific data, but it is also somewhat of an artform. There would probably not be a major discrepancy in their interpretations, but some minor differences would probably come out. In weather forecasting, these minor differences would be no big deal, but in calculating a warp jump, the devil is in the details.
|
|
|
Post by Kage2020 on May 3, 2004 12:03:57 GMT -5
Point 6.0 - Discovery of Warp Routes Taking the route that 'navigators discover warp routes' is one of those situations where the image and purported compartmentalisation of the Imperium do not match 'reality'. (In fact, I would say that the image is only the superficial stance meant to create 'the cool'.) But for the present I would suggest that the obvious approach be taken: Navigators deal in the large scale, while 'warp sensor' images deal in the local phenomenon. Entirely within the 'fluff' while adding detail. Simple. Point 6.1 - Warp Maps... Which is all that we're ever talking about... Point 6.2 - Calculated warp jump as estimate Yes... but from an accurate 'starting point', but that gets into the same 'ole arguments above. It's easier to figure out how the warp works, it would seem, then defining concepts of the 'Heart'... Kage
|
|
|
Post by Destecado on May 3, 2004 13:27:11 GMT -5
Point 6.0 - Discovery of Warp Routes Taking the route that 'navigators discover warp routes' is one of those situations where the image and purported compartmentalisation of the Imperium do not match 'reality'. (In fact, I would say that the image is only the superficial stance meant to create 'the cool'.) But for the present I would suggest that the obvious approach be taken: Navigators deal in the large scale, while 'warp sensor' images deal in the local phenomenon. Entirely within the 'fluff' while adding detail. Simple. Yes, I'm going back to using quotes, because I have no idea what your above statement was in reference to. Were you saying that the initial models of the warp should not be made by navigators? Could they have made warp probes to carry out these data gathering missions (sort of like early weather baloons)? How would they have created the original model from which to work? Point 6.0 - Discovery of Warp Routes Point 6.2 - Calculated warp jump as estimate Yes... but from an accurate 'starting point', but that gets into the same 'ole arguments above. It's easier to figure out how the warp works, it would seem, then defining concepts of the 'Heart'... I don't want to cloud the issue, but something just occured to me that might also factor into calculating a warp jump or using a navigator for a warp jump. In your article about the nature of warp space, I believe you indicated that it was base in part off the White Wolf concpet of the Umbra. In that game system, to transition from our reality into the penumbra (or vice versa) a person would have to pass through the gauntlet. The gauntllet is the barrier between the different dmensions. Depending on the number of successes roled it travel through the gauntlet can be instantaneous to a couple of minutes (to longer) I see this as the surface tension between dimensions. It would be analguous to the surface tension on a body of water or the atmosphere around a planet. In the above explanation of the gauntlet, it should be noted that the thickness of the gauntlet can vary from place to place. The higher the thickness, the more difficult it is to move between the dimesions. If you are jumping into a body of water, from any height, there are several variables that are important. Your angle of entery, speed at time of entery, oxigenation (or wave action) in the body of water. If the water is agitated (by wave action) it well help to break up the surface bonds and allow you to slip more easily into the water from greater heights or at greater speed. If instead the water is very still, the surface tension can make it feel like your diving into a concrete slab. Entering the atmosphere of a planet has similar issues. If your entry vector is off you could burn up in the atmosphere or skip off the atmosphere entirely. Much of the calculation time might be making sure that the ship is on the proper appraoch vectors to transition smoothly into the warp. The transition from the materium to warp space might be where the time dialation occurs. It would be like approaching the event horizon of a black hole. Maybe warp engines create an artificial singularity around the ship to protect it from the transition. The higher the value of the barrier between the materium and the warp, the more intense the singularity, hence a longer time dialation. Travel in the warp should not be effected by time if it is a higher dimension. based on the standard model of our own universe, time is thought to exists as the fourth dimension......actually that is an intetresting thought, the barrier between the materium and warp space might be the fourth dimension. This of course is not to say that the warp does not have its own troubles. time would still pass on the ship for purposes of events occuring during warp travel. By making a singularity around the ship, they are in effect taking a little bubble of space-time with them. This is what reinforces the reality of the ship and makes it less subject to the chaootic laws of the warp. over time this bubble can be broken down and the ship become subject to the warps reality (look at chaos ships) but for the time needed to make your typical jump, it should be sufficient. This idea is similar to the the theory of quantum cosmology by Stephen Hawkings. www.damtp.cam.ac.uk/user/gr/public/qg_qc.htmlwww.deoxy.org/h_kaku2.htmThink, for example, of a large collection of soap bubbles, suspended in the air. Normally each soap bubble is like a universe unto itself, except that periodically it bumps into another bubble, forming a larger one, or splits into two smaller bubbles. The difference is that each soap bubble is now an entire ten-dimensional universe. Since space and time can exist only on each bubble, there is no such thing as space and time between the bubbles. Each universe has its own self-contained "time." It is meaningless to say that time passes at the same rate in all these universes. This feeds into your idea of warp space touching upon and connecting all other dimensions. Rather than being a higher dimension, it could be the intervening space between the soap bubbles of reality.
|
|
|
Post by CELS on May 4, 2004 7:21:12 GMT -5
Dammit, the system failed! I blame Kage Point 2.2 - GW's subsector maps Of course, one could use them to indicate 'trade routes' rather than 'warp pathways', although that in itself gets into the nature of warp pathways in the first place... Still doesn't make sense, BFG-wise. If Abaddon is invading Blarchnorgh IV, he doesn't care too much about following trade routes. You could say they were trade routes, but it doesn't really solve anything. [/b] Observation of the warp is made, potentially taking a 'large' if unstated period of time (likely low-speed frames; I'm reminded of 'real-time weather maps'), and then once complete (including analysis of stability of warp phenomenon) the calculation takes place rapidly such that the duration between finished observation and precipitation into the warp are necessarily as small as possible[/quote] I didn't realize this is what you were saying. We've got no problem then. I was just worried that you didn't agree that all calculations were made beforehand, which is basically the point of my argument. Point 4-1 - Duration of Observation of Warp, Analysis of Warp Currents, Route Calculation and Precipitation No idea. I just know that the period between 'route calculation' and 'precipitation' should be small and, indeed, 'route calculation' and final 'observation of the warp' (with the decision to jump) should also be as small as possible... Fine by me, as long as ships doing calculated jumps spend a lot more time preparing for warp jumps than Navigated ships. I want Navigated ships to have significant advantages over non-Navigated ships, since the fluff makes every effort to stress the importance of Navigators. Point 6.0 - Dicovery of Warp Routes Then it's a 'fluff' discrepancy, once again I'm afraid. I am now merely suggesting that composite images created by the 'warp sensors' could be used to create a 'local knowledge' that does not necessarily extend to a 'global/galactic knowledge'. Well, what do you propose to do about it? To me, warp maps beyond stable routes are about as useful as a map of Europe showing the weather in the different countries. It'll be valid for less then a day, and then probably be utterly useless for a long time. Still, you have some places that constantly have the same weather, such as Bergen, Norway which has rain about 320 days a year Point 6.0 - Discovery of Warp RoutesI think that the discover of the warp routes should be left up to the navigators. Why, when warp drives have the ability to map the warp without Navigators? After all, if the non-Navigated ships learn that they're using the same routes time and again, it won't be long before they establish them as standard routes.
|
|
|
Post by Kage2020 on May 4, 2004 8:30:51 GMT -5
Yes, I'm going back to using quotes, because I have no idea what your above statement was in reference to. Told you! Were you saying that the initial models of the warp should not be made by navigators? Not strictly. I merely point out the manifold possibilities. Navigators are ideal for mapping large-scale phenomenon. Could they have made warp probes to carry out these data gathering missions (sort of like early weather baloons)? How would they have created the original model from which to work? It's a natural progression, at least on the micro-scale, to how warp drives work. If you've got "time lapse" photos of the actions of the warp it is possible to build up the models if you have the knowledge... For a later point, however, do 'average captains' have this knowledge to generate models? Doubtful. But tha doesn't mean that they cannot understand the movements of the warp in a way that broaches upon the Navigator's "art". In your article about the nature of warp space, I believe you indicated that it was base in part off the White Wolf concpet of the Umbra. Then I must have mis-stated. Rather the concept was created and then, when I was subsequently introduced to Mage the Ascension I noted some similarities. If anything the concepts were generated out of Zindell's Requiem for Homo Sapiens, general concepts on the nature of "astral space" (combining Qabbalistic imagery), and some lines out of Watson's Inquisitor/Draco... In that game system, to transition from our reality into the penumbra (or vice versa) a person would have to pass through the gauntlet... As I said, some of the information is glitchy, but instead I have them 'bouncing' along the lower-manifold... In the above explanation of the gauntlet, it should be noted that the thickness of the gauntlet can vary from place to place. The higher the thickness, the more difficult it is to move between the dimesions. Fairly standard with the concept of 'demon ground' and such warp/real space overlaps. The transition from the materium to warp space might be where the time dialation occurs. It would be like approaching the event horizon of a black hole. Interesting concept... not sure what to make of it at the moment, especially given the return journey. Maybe warp engines create an artificial singularity around the ship to protect it from the transition. Beginning to sound like GW imagery of the Geller Field, which has always been dubious and a direct steal from Traveller. actually that is an intetresting thought, the barrier between the materium and warp space might be the fourth dimension. Beginning to appeal to me, although problematic given that's where I locate the Webway. Then again, given how I believe that operates, not at all... Yep, definitely beginning to appeal to me. It also links to any idea that I discarded in the translation of the Torison/manifold concept into 40k (I used it elsewhere before until I noted the possibilities of inclusion)... Other names for the lower-manifold was 'universe space' as opposed to the 'god space' of the upper manifold (which I think more of as the Realms of Chaos)... By making a singularity around the ship, they are in effect taking a little bubble of space-time with them. <sigh> Yes, it's the Geller Field... I'm against that idea only because it makes little sense with the earlier 'fluff', destroys the concept of space hulks and reinforces the concept that the warp is constructed of 'daemon bodies'. While I wish to keep the concept of the Geller Field, I would be keen on moving away from the simplistic idea of 'turning it off is bad'. The spacetime bubble is one of those features, as well as sounding drastically like the concept from Spelljammer and Traveller and, in that way, blurring the distinction of the warp. This feeds into your idea of warp space touching upon and connecting all other dimensions. Rather than being a higher dimension, it could be the intervening space between the soap bubbles of reality. And now we're sounding a tad like Dark Conspiracy and the concept of proto-dimensions, which I must admit was there at the initial 'design stage' given the "Dimension Walk" ability on the web-page (when I modelled psyker abilities as psionics rather than the more appropriate magic).
|
|
|
Post by Kage2020 on May 4, 2004 8:32:01 GMT -5
Still doesn't make sense, BFG-wise. If Abaddon is invading Blarchnorgh IV, he doesn't care too much about following trade routes. Again, that comes down to wargame logic and the requirement to create tactical 'high' and 'low' grounds. Warp drives as originally described made the creation of a front impossible... The simple approach to warfare that GW advocates require the presence of a front. Hence the subsector maps. Unless, of course, the argument is that conveniently all Imperial worlds are joined by stable warp pathways and currents, and that they also have them joining the various subsectors... You could say they were trade routes, but it doesn't really solve anything. True, since the reason that these routes exist is rather obvious. I didn't realize this is what you were saying. We've got no problem then. I knew it was just an inability of myself to be able to say what I wanted in the way that I wanted... I was just worried that you didn't agree that all calculations were made beforehand, which is basically the point of my argument. Noooo... That was the whole point of why you wanted the time between final observation, calculation and precipitation to be as small as you could. Otherwise the warp situation became increasingly divergent from the model/route and the course corrections determined. Fine by me, as long as ships doing calculated jumps spend a lot more time preparing for warp jumps than Navigated ships. Oh yes! Navigator wants to make a jump, he essentially throws a switch and then deals with the situation. Of course, if local warp space conditions are not conducive to that then even they are not going to throw that switch... One does not jump into funnel of a tornado. I want Navigated ships to have significant advantages over non-Navigated ships... since the fluff makes every effort to stress the importance of Navigators. Navigator advances work on a number of levels. Firstly, precipitation is that much easier and doesn't strictly require the utilisation of 'warp gates' (new definition; ones which would give significant advantage to calculated jumps). They only need to be in the warp zone... They also can make jumps instantaneously, assuming that the warp drives have 'recharged'. Then they can react to given circumstances, as we've already discussed... The other advantage in mechanistic sense? I really don't see an astronavigation program having anything more than a skill rating of around 2-3. Navigators will regularly have skills rather higher than this... and even on a "calm day" in the warp, the advantages of programmes are going to be minimal... It is quite literally far harder, more dangerous and slower to travel by calculated warp jumps... But the advantage of them is that you don't need a Navigator, a feature which can create a significant draw. What it does mean is that, for the most part, calculated jumps are restricted to spatially near objects (i.e. stars within a subsector) or, if you're willing to risk it, dangerous "trans oceanic" journeys to subsectors. But given the nature of restriction of Imperial shipping (temporary charters) doing such is frought with danger... So we're back to how it is, in essence, modelled in the game. But with a tad more description. Of course, working this into mechanics is going to be interesting since I'm not overtly fond of the ones that I've come up with... That is for another thread, however. Well, what do you propose to do about it? To me, warp maps beyond stable routes are about as useful as a map of Europe showing the weather in the different countries. The piont is that over the long-term, civil shipping will be able to build up a map of the local circumstances including stable areas, long-term eddies and currents, etc. That is all. Why, when warp drives have the ability to map the warp without Navigators? They have the ability to take 'snap shots' of the warp, yes. Over millennia continual observation will be akin to a map but it doesn't invalidate the importance of navigators... Just that local knowledge is sometimes more important than wide-ranging theories... It puts the people back in the picture and means that not everything is slaved around Navigators while also not devaluing the position of Navigators. The majority of the arguments that I've seen tend to remove the people and over-emphasise the Navigators... It's just like saying that if you switched off the Astronomican then all warp travel would stop... Kage
|
|
|
Post by Destecado on May 4, 2004 9:59:00 GMT -5
It also links to any idea that I discarded in the translation of the Torison/manifold concept into 40k (I used it elsewhere before until I noted the possibilities of inclusion)... Other names for the lower-manifold was 'universe space' as opposed to the 'god space' of the upper manifold (which I think more of as the Realms of Chaos)... <sigh> Yes, it's the Geller Field... I'm against that idea only because it makes little sense with the earlier 'fluff', destroys the concept of space hulks and reinforces the concept that the warp is constructed of 'daemon bodies'. While I wish to keep the concept of the Geller Field, I would be keen on moving away from the simplistic idea of 'turning it off is bad'. The spacetime bubble is one of those features, as well as sounding drastically like the concept from Spelljammer and Traveller and, in that way, blurring the distinction of the warp. And now we're sounding a tad like Dark Conspiracy and the concept of proto-dimensions, which I must admit was there at the initial 'design stage' given the "Dimension Walk" ability on the web-page (when I modelled psyker abilities as psionics rather than the more appropriate magic). If you wish to call it the geller field, then that's fine, but please let me finish my explanation of what I was intending. Let us continue with the soap bubble example. If you look at a soap buble, you will normally see swirling patterns of color and liquid as gravity pulls on the water which is in solution with the soap that created the bubble. This usually forms patters along the outside of the bubble which resemble streams or currents. The same would hold true on our universe as a bubble. The wave function of the particles would be drawn towards areas of high gravity or towards other anomalies. These would be the warp currents and eddies. In this model, the ship entering the warp would be a small bubble exiting the larger bubble of our reality. It would skim along the surface and then re-enter back to the larger bubble. The two "fields" interacting is the motive force that moves the ship. This can be seen when blowing bubbles. two bubbles that colide and seem to slide along eachothers outer skin. The warp space that the ships travel through is on the outer edge of the bubble, it is there fore somewhat reinforced by the reality inside of the bubble. That is why the gravitational forces inside effect the warp currents on the surface. The buuble model also creats the extreme curvature in the warp, that allows the ships to travel large distances in a short amount of time. As you move further away, they exert less of an impact. I was also not trying to say that the ship pulled an atmosphere into the warp with it. That would be silly. Rather, the geller field is an integrity field that reinforces the reality and laws of that reality that the ship is based on. We can all agree that the reality of deamons from the warp differs greatly from our own, when they are summoned in our reality, they become like bubbles or their reality within ours. The bubbles are under constant pressure from our own to expel them because they violate the given laws by which our reality works. This is why deamons must test for instability. The geller field similarly protects a ship outside of our main reality. The space between the bubble is not empty. It is rather completely potential energy. it could best be thought of as zero point or zero state matter. It has yet to have an outside force act upon it or direct it. This model is based on the idea that each possibility for a situation can spawn its own reality or universe. The paths or discisions that we make shape our universe, but the other potentials are not discared, but have their own realities. The void is made up of particles that have yet to be acted upon. This is sort of how new realities are formed, the zero state matter is intergrated into an existing reality or a new reality is formed around a consciousness acting within the zero state matter. This actually ties into an idea for the existance of wraithbone and zero state matter, but that can be discussed seperately. As for the webway, I see that as running trough the area that forms the outer edge of the bubble of our reality. It is seperate from the warp in this manner, but also seprate from reality as well. What are your thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by Kage2020 on May 4, 2004 12:25:06 GMT -5
If you wish to call it the geller field, then that's fine, but please let me finish my explanation of what I was intending. Just responding to what was up there... But what you describe would, in essence, be a superior Geller Field. The kind of Geller Field that I would be happy with... apart from the fact that I'm still keen on the fact that if you turn it off then you don't go "kaboom"! But on to the rest of the mail. The two "fields" interacting is the motive force that moves the ship. This can be seen when blowing bubbles. two bubbles that colide and seem to slide along eachothers outer skin. Good explanation. Upon a purely imagery point of view, I would be akin to a non-spherical field... though I understand that a spherical field is more likely. Perhaps I should begin to think about sub-sphere imagery instead! The warp space that the ships travel through is on the outer edge of the bubble, it is there fore somewhat reinforced by the reality inside of the bubble. In the model that the 'inside' of the sphere contains real-spacetime, this would be consistent. The warp after all reacts to the matterium. One point that does arise, however, is that of daemonic interaction with the 'ship'... it is something that is a constant image in the 'fluff' (cf. Farseer) but doesn't seem to suit this model, nor indeed the model of the Geller Field in general. As you move further away, they exert less of an impact. I was also not trying to say that the ship pulled an atmosphere into the warp with it. That would be silly. I wasn't suggesting that, though the Geller Field image is reminiscent of that. Indeed, you do have it pulling in a 'gravitational' field beyond that which it would have as a massive object... Rather, the geller field is an integrity field that reinforces the reality and laws of that reality that the ship is based on. Which is how it is described in the 'fluff', i.e. a lift of Traveller and one that I'm not too keen on given the nature of space hulks. As much as possible, and given the other images in the 'fluff', I think that we should avoid the transferred reality concept... ...But remember I do like the way that it explains the warp-bubble interaction... We can all agree that the reality of deamons from the warp differs greatly from our own, when they are summoned in our reality, they become like bubbles or their reality within ours. Not quite so sure about the second point... They react to the reality of the matterium and, likewise, I think it entirely reasonable for the reverse situation to apply. The bubbles are under constant pressure from our own to expel them because they violate the given laws by which our reality works. This is why deamons must test for instability. But when put that way it is consistent... As for the webway, I see that as running trough the area that forms the outer edge of the bubble of our reality. It is seperate from the warp in this manner, but also seprate from reality as well. What are your thoughts? That would be consistent with the lower manifold theory. With that said, while I rather like the simplicity of which the 'bubble' theory explains a number of features, it would also be inconsistent with some of the 'fluff'. The idea that all spacehulks must have an operating Geller Field, for example, is one that I really don't like... "It's a dusty space wreck millennia but luckily has managed to remained fueled with operating Geller Fields all of this time..." That and there is the part of me that wishes not to ignore that which has gone before. Thus matter is not destroyed within the warp... protection from daemons, yes, but more in the terms of 'shielding' (occult or otherwise)... Is this possible, or must we subscribe to the horrendous revisionist approach to GW in which case one of the premises of the project must be ignored (i.e. holism vs. revisionism). So, what to do...? Kage
|
|
|
Post by Destecado on May 4, 2004 13:41:52 GMT -5
Just responding to what was up there... But what you describe would, in essence, be a superior Geller Field. The kind of Geller Field that I would be happy with... apart from the fact that I'm still keen on the fact that if you turn it off then you don't go "kaboom"! But on to the rest of the mail. A ship can opperate within the "close warp" (the soap particles on the outside of the bubble). The geller field is not necessary. As I indicated, it is possible for zero state matter to enter into the reality bubbles, so it should be possible for things previously of that reality to reneter as well without being broken down to constituent parts. It can be said to be a form of resonance or particle cohesion. If you want to think about it a different way, you could say that each individual has their own geller field or personal reality. It has been called chi, personal energy or other names, but it is the personal energy field that keeps the predominant amount of your personl particles together in a given place. Over time, this does degrade or become "warped" by the surrounding reality. I have always found it interesting that alot of the ships inside of a space hulk appear to have merged into each other rather than having crashed nto each other. I always found the ideas of ships crashing into each other forming a space hulk to be kind of ridiculous, but like particles attracting or clumping together on the surface of the bubble sounds possible. The space hulks can be pulled back through by the orks, or there are fluctuations in the thickness of the outer wall of the bubble. If the space hulk reaches a certain mass it might actually be able to "fall" back through the outer bubble wall. One point that does arise, however, is that of daemonic interaction with the 'ship'... it is something that is a constant image in the 'fluff' (cf. Farseer) but doesn't seem to suit this model, nor indeed the model of the Geller Field in general. What the imperium considers warp entities I see as beings from another reality. Again if you imagine two bubble running into eachother, somethimes they merge together to form one larger bubble or take on an hourglass shape, with a common meeting point at the middle. The reality of the where deamons originate is more maleable than our own. As with the area of the warp just outside of the bubble, the two realities influence each other. As with two bubble joined together in the hourglass type, soap particles from the two buble mix and interact. The mixture of these two different realities may be what cause the formation of warp storms during the age of strife. The Eye of Terror could also be the meating point of these two realities. I wasn't suggesting that, though the Geller Field image is reminiscent of that. Indeed, you do have it pulling in a 'gravitational' field beyond that which it would have as a massive object... I apologize if I wasn't clear. The gravitational field is created by the engines as part of the formation of the Singularity (Geller Field) around the ship. It is pretty much making an artificial black hole to pop it out of reality or the bubble of reality. The force of the field is directly related to the thickness of the wall of the reality bubble at the point that the ship is jumping from. With that said, while I rather like the simplicity of which the 'bubble' theory explains a number of features, it would also be inconsistent with some of the 'fluff'. The idea that all spacehulks must have an operating Geller Field, for example, is one that I really don't like... "It's a dusty space wreck millennia but luckily has managed to remained fueled with operating Geller Fields all of this time..." I hope I explained this well enough earlier in my post, but I can give more detail if you feel it's needed. Is this possible, or must we subscribe to the horrendous revisionist approach to GW in which case one of the premises of the project must be ignored (i.e. holism vs. revisionism). I don't understand what you mean.
|
|