Re: Digest V4 #400

From: TTrotsky_at_aol.com
Date: Wed, 14 May 1997 18:18:16 -0400 (EDT)

Steve Martin disagrees with my comment that the Gloranthan stars have measurable parallax, on the grounds that RW ancient astronomers couldn't measure the parallax of RW stars. I fail to see the relevance since Glorantha isn't the RW. Since ES can no longer be considered an accurate description of the Gloranthan heavens, I certainly won't stick my head out and say Steve is wrong. But IMO the Sky Dome is a real thing, and therefore ought to have a finite distance. OTOH, I'd say the same about the Red Moon, and that apparently is wrong!

Joseph Troxall points out that Glorantha should have no horizon on the not unreasonable grounds that it is flat. On the face of it, this would seem to be true. But I recall Greg, when asked about the world's shape at Convulsion 3D, saying 'Glorantha is flat, but it looks as if it is round' or words to that effect. At the time, I interpreted this to mean that it does have a horizon.

     How come? Don't ask me! There has, I believe, been some discussion about light rays being curved on Glorantha, although I rather suspect this wouldn't work. If anyone wants to convince me otherwise, could they do it through private e-mail? I can just tell it's gonna involve geometry, and I think we've had enough of that! Personally, I think it's just one of those things you have to say are 'just magic' and not try and come up with a rationalistic 20th century explanation for. Which is kind of an unusual thing for me to say, but there you are.

All hail the Reaching Moon,

    Trotsky

---