Channelers at the Last Battle.

[Majsju]

If the DO destroys the Wheel, time shifts from cyclic to linear. Now, why would the DO want this? Well, for starters linear time means change is possible, and the DO needs change in order to remake the world. And without the Wheel, no need to worry about pesky Heroes being spun out, or ta'veren running around causing trouble.

[Fryn]

Wouldn't it also mean the end of saidin/saidar? they get their power from the turning of the wheel don't they? I know they drive the wheel of time, but is the inverse true?

[Sabio]

Didn't the portal stone take Rand to a world where the DO won (well where Hawkwing lost) and becuase he won everything was dead?  Ishy said how many times the final battle has been fought throughout history, so if the wheel was stopped there would be no more final battles and he would be victorious forever.

[Cockta]

... I agree that the DO wants to destroy the wheel and all of time. Which I guess you don't think is what the DO wants, and I apparently misread control and destroy.

 

The book references show him more as a destroyer than a controler. He wants to control so he can destroy. If he wanted control he wouldn't want to destroy the wheel of time. The best insight to the DO is Ishy as he seems to be the only forsaken to understand the DOs ultimate goal. The rest think he plans to remake the world as he sees fit and place them in charge.

"The death of time will bring me power such as you could not dream of, worm"

If the wheel of time is broken then so is the one power. Without the wheel to push and pull the two they have no basis. The DO thinks little of the one power, and you see quotes like "precious one power" used by Ishy in a jesting manor.

 

Destroying The wheel seems to be his goal to me, at which point he will have control of everything and nothing. I don't see him wanting control over the wheel which teh creator made though.

 

 

 

That was actually a marvelous post, Fryn. I am not joking here, because it is a good post. It explains why the DO want to destroy the Whell of Time, but then the only thing he would have to do is to burn every copy of the books of the Wheel of Time, lol  :D Just kidding.

 

But seriously, I totally agree with you Fryn. The DO doesn't share power. Now he does share power, to some extent, but that is because he is not completely free, and still needs his Chosen ones to do his dirty work.

[balefireruinssteaks]

yea, the flaw of the Forsaken and all the Darkfriends is that they believe that the Dark One is just trying to gain control of the world, and then he's going to hand it over to them or something.

 

The Dark One is evil absolute, and evil has no loyalties or sense of honor.  If getting a bunch of people to help you achieve your goal lets them believe that they will somehow inherit part of that reward, then the Dark One is going to let them think that, and then destroy them in the end.

 

It's kind of like when the Aes Sedai brought forth the first a'dam.  I'm sure she thought that this would be a way to gain leverage with the forces in power and also somewhere in her mind she thought that she would be immune to the leashing because she created it and brought it to them.  But in the end, after a'dam were created and duplicated, they leashed her as well, turning on her.  It's like this with the Dark One.

[Cockta]

It's a bloody cold world.

[Guest Ravik]

that is going to take the One Power, I'm quite sure it is not going to be done with glue or planks.

Not done with glue or planks is the only possible alternative to the OP? Glad we could sort that out. In other words, it will take the OP because you say so.

Are you trying to be funny or clever? Because you failed at both.

[Guest Ravik]

If the DO destroys the Wheel, time shifts from cyclic to linear. Now, why would the DO want this? Well, for starters linear time means change is possible, and the DO needs change in order to remake the world. And without the Wheel, no need to worry about pesky Heroes being spun out, or ta'veren running around causing trouble.

Linear? Far from it. Do you know what linear functions are? In mathematics something nonlinear describes something chaotic. Since the DO is the lord of chaos he is going to be the opposite of linear, logicaly. Time is linear as it is there, it is desciribedas a closed regular line, a wheel. The DO wants it broken and randomised. Since everything is repetative determinism rules. But because determinism rules the DO can not ever win. I would describe him as a reductio ad absurdum that sets the function right in logics.

[Fryn]

I always had the feeling that the lord of chaos was the DOs name for the dragon. The DO loves chaos, but it seems more convienent that when the forsaken say let the lord of chaos reign it is more about letting rand live (the no kill order). Rand does cause an awful lot of chaos and wasn't afraid of using balefire.

 

The DO being the lord of chaos doesn't fit with what some of the forsaken have said. Chapter 6 of LoC with Damandred's PoV makes it sound like he doesn't know why the LoC has to rule, which pretty much points to teh LoC not being the DO.

[Majsju]

If the DO destroys the Wheel, time shifts from cyclic to linear. Now, why would the DO want this? Well, for starters linear time means change is possible, and the DO needs change in order to remake the world. And without the Wheel, no need to worry about pesky Heroes being spun out, or ta'veren running around causing trouble.

Linear? Far from it. Do you know what linear functions are? In mathematics something nonlinear describes something chaotic. Since the DO is the lord of chaos he is going to be the opposite of linear, logicaly. Time is linear as it is there, it is desciribedas a closed regular line, a wheel. The DO wants it broken and randomised. Since everything is repetative determinism rules. But because determinism rules the DO can not ever win. I would describe him as a reductio ad absurdum that sets the function right in logics.

 

We are not talking maths here, we are talking time. Or to be more precise, time in a work of fiction. For the DO to be able to remake the world, a shift to linear time is necessary. Keeping cyclic time would mean keeping the control mechanism that the Wheel is, and that is not exactly a good thing if you want to maximise Chaos.

[Guest Ravik]

It's not math. You look like a Man. Utd. fan, therefore you are probably an Englishman, you should have heard for a guy called Bertrand Russel. What I'm speaking about is philosophy and logics. Reshaping the world is a mater of mataphisics, and by that philosophy. I'm just approaching the subject in the manner of analytic philosophy, meaning that I'm using modern logics as my chief tool. So, repeto, saying that the DO wants to achieve chaos by making things linear is like saying that he wants to color the world black by using just white color. He wants to break the Wheel and then randomise everything that was orderly.

 

[Majsju]

You did not read a word of what I just said, did you?

Well, perhaps you could read what RJ said then...

If you think of history being in a loop, then time must be in a loop. The Greeks were the first, as far as we know, to think of time being linear which allows for change. Almost every other culture prior to them had believed in circular time, if time is a wheel there is no possibility of change. Whatever I change now, whatever injustices I correct, the wheel will inevitably return, the inequities will return, there is no possibility for change, therefore there is not impetus to change. So time and history are in a loop in this world, a large enough loop..ahit is really quite immense.

Btw, I am most certainly not from England.

[Cockta]

Yeah Ravik, he is from India!

[Guest Ravik]

My bad, don't be offended. I'm from Serbia.

It realy doesn't mater if RJ called it linear, it's wrong. And I'm a good enough authority on the usage of philosophical terms.

[Majsju]

Not from India either ;D

 

Thing is, what RJ says is the only thing that matters, since he created this world, and thus created the rules for it.

 

Although, based on your posts here, I am not exactly convinced that you would be any kind of "authority" in the field of philosophy, so attempting to use such claims to support your theory may not be the best of ideas. Just saying...

[Graendals favourite]

Philosophy is one thing, but physics is another, and time is a physical dimension, a measure of time a physical quantity. There is space and there is time, or there is space-time. Classical physics often studies how a system behaves, and it is assumed that time is linear, so you have the quantity f(t) that changes according to time t, and once a certain t₀ has passed it will not come again.

 

Thus, assuming the indexes run through some higher, absolute and linear time, there will always be, both that t₀<t₁<t_n-1<t_n (n>2 in this instance),

and t₀-t₁=t_n-1-t_n.

 

circular time will mean that t_0+k=t_n+k (n>0)(k is real),

t₀<t₁<t_m-1<t_m (0<,m<n, m>2 in this instance).

 

That is linearity means that time always goes at the same pace and that it never turns back, while circular time means that it repeats itself at fixed intervals but there is no guarantee that its pace stays the same.

 

Another way to say this is that in f(t), if time is linear, you can express t as an unlimited function of a Cartesian coordinate, if it is circular, you can express t as an unlimited function of the circular coordiate phi.

[Guest Ravik]

Thing is, what RJ says is the only thing that matters, since he created this world, and thus created the rules for it.

 

Although, based on your posts here, I am not exactly convinced that you would be any kind of "authority" in the field of philosophy, so attempting to use such claims to support your theory may not be the best of ideas. Just saying...

LOL!

And just who are you to question me? I most certainly am an authority in the field of philosophy, that is beyond any question. RJ did create the world and the rules in it, but he was not above mistakes. My point is that you CAN NOT say that the DO desires anything linear! Now, if it is stil unclear to you why things are as they are, I will explain again. Take my advice and stop speaking of things and using terms you don't understand, I'm sure you managed to impress a lackwitt or two but you look quite dumb in playing the alpha male here.

Philosophy is one thing, but physics is another, and time is a physical dimension, a measure of time a physical quantity. There is space and there is time, or there is space-time. Classical physics often studies how a system behaves, and it is assumed that time is linear, so you have the quantity f(t) that changes according to time t, and once a certain t₀ has passed it will not come again.

 

Thus, assuming the indexes run through some higher, absolute and linear time, there will always be, both that t₀<t₁<t_n-1<t_n (n>2 in this instance),

and t₀-t₁=t_n-1-t_n.

 

circular time will mean that t_0+k=t_n+k (n>0)(k is real),

t₀<t₁<t_m-1<t_m (0<,m<n, m>2 in this instance).

 

That is linearity means that time always goes at the same pace and that it never turns back, while circular time means that it repeats itself at fixed intervals but there is no guarantee that its pace stays the same.

 

Another way to say this is that in f(t), if time is linear, you can express t as an unlimited function of a Cartesian coordinate, if it is circular, you can express t as an unlimited function of the circular coordiate phi.

Redundant.

You missed my point. Nonlinear equations and functions are used to represent chaos, this is done in mathematics and physics. Right?

[Graendals favourite]

That time is linear does not mean that what happens in time has any regularity. If you want chaos, introduce the highly irregular function g(t), but make it so that t(s)has the property that s<r means that t(s)<t®, so that time is no longer circular. You can have all sorts of wars though time goes forward in our world, suns go out even if they never were replaced. If the DO wants to change the world as a system, it needs to have non-circular time or no permanent changes are possible.

[Guest Ravik]

If the DO trancends the Wheel, then we can look at the Wheel as a logical function or formulae(I'm not sure that you call it a function in English, in Serbian it is "iskaz"), in which when having A we introduce ¬A so as to perform an reductio ad absurdum which helps us in proving that our formulae is well formed. If this is the case, we can stop speaking about what the DO wants, since he is just a tool and can never win.

[Graendals favourite]

I actually think that in WoT, time in itself is not necessarily circular, but the Wheel forces circularity on it so the WoT world cannot really see outside it. So if outside the world there is linear time t, the wheel weaves the world in f(t) where f(t)=f(t+2pi) so that you can write f(t)=Aexp(b*i*t), where b is a real constant and A is almost a constant, however considering how small changes are possible through each turning, I suspect A to be a function of t as well. The Dark One is outside the world, but it must remove the exponential function from the time the world sees in order to make progress on the world.

[Cockta]

Haj suti vise Ravik, nisi vise interesantan.

 

Where u from, then, Majsju? The name Majsju reminded me of India.

 

Thus, assuming the indexes run through some higher, absolute and linear time, there will always be, both that t0<t1<tn-1<tn (n>2 in this instance),

and t0-t1=tn-1-tn.

 

circular time will mean that t0+k=tn+k (n>0)(k is real),

t0<t1<tm-1<tm (0<,m<n, m>2 in this instance).

 

I haven't come far enough in my education to understand anything of that. Is that some sort of physics-language?

[Guest Ravik]

Haj suti vise Ravik, nisi vise interesantan.

Усташо нисам ти дао дозволу да причаш. Only when spoken to.

A(cos(bt)+i*sin(bt))?

[Graendals favourite]

Cocta, no, it's just mathematical notation, though you would use it in physics too. Actually that is a little inaccurate, but I am too lazy to be more specific, and it is hard to type, anyway, without any special symbols. t stands for time, t₀, t with the index 0, is time at moment 0. So t_n is the moment of time n.

 

So in the first for linear I say moments in time always follow each other- moment zero is followed by moment 1- and then that moments of time are equally spaced out. In the first for circular I say that a identically a moment in time is the same moment as that which follows it in n moments, and in the other that before the moment becomes the same the moments nevertheless follow each other.

 

Yea, Ravik you can express that function with trigonometric functions too, but generally the exponential function is preferable since you are saved from remembering summation formulas, the exponential function is much simpler to handle.

[Majsju]

Ravik, for an "authority", youshow a surprising ability to completely miss the point.

 

Lets see if I can break it down as simple as possible...

 

Fact: Time is fixed in a loop, where everything repeats itself. Small changes are allowed, but the Wheel oppose any major drifts, and attempt to bring the Pattern back to normal.

 

Fact: Breaking the Wheel would remove this self-correcting device. Ie, greater change is possible.

 

Now, a being as powerful as the DO could have the ability to make change happen despite the efforts of the Wheel to correct the drifts. But it would not be the optimal course of action for the DO, since even though the Wheels efforts had been overpowered, there would still be oppostion with attempts to correct matters.

 

If the Wheel is destroyed however, and time is shifted from cyclic to linear, that obstacle is removed. The Wheel is no longer there to oppose the DO, and thus the DO has full control of the remaking of the world. This is the optimal course of action.

 

It is really quite simple when you consider the facts. Especially if you consider the facts while keeping in mind that we are talking about a fictional world. The DO is not real. Randland is not real. The Wheel is not real. Any attempts to use a philosophical discourse designed for our reality are by nature flawed from the start because of this.

 

Where u from, then, Majsju? The name Majsju reminded me of India

 

I am from Sweden, and Majsju is a Swedish word. Well, perhaps rather a term than a word...

[Guest Ravik]

Ravik, for an "authority", youshow a surprising ability to completely miss the point.

 

Lets see if I can break it down as simple as possible...

 

Fact: Time is fixed in a loop, where everything repeats itself. Small changes are allowed, but the Wheel oppose any major drifts, and attempt to bring the Pattern back to normal.

 

Fact: Breaking the Wheel would remove this self-correcting device. Ie, greater change is possible.

 

Now, a being as powerful as the DO could have the ability to make change happen despite the efforts of the Wheel to correct the drifts. But it would not be the optimal course of action for the DO, since even though the Wheels efforts had been overpowered, there would still be oppostion with attempts to correct matters.

 

If the Wheel is destroyed however, and time is shifted from cyclic to linear, that obstacle is removed. The Wheel is no longer there to oppose the DO, and thus the DO has full control of the remaking of the world. This is the optimal course of action.

 

It is really quite simple when you consider the facts. Especially if you consider the facts while keeping in mind that we are talking about a fictional world. The DO is not real. Randland is not real. The Wheel is not real. Any attempts to use a philosophical discourse designed for our reality are by nature flawed from the start because of this.

;D ;D ;D ;D ::) ::) ::) ::)