Twice Dawns the Day

[PrncRny]

I've done some light searching and couldn't find any recent topics on this subject, but that doesn't guarantee this topic hasn't been touched on before. I recently came across a youtube video with an accomanying link which gave me a wonderful idea for how a day can dawn twice.

If this idea has already come up, please refer me to the thread so I can see the discussion.

 

 

The whole video is interesting, but the relevant point is about 5 minutes in. Listen to that whole part.

 

http://www.darylscience.com/downloads/DblSunset.pdf

 

This is the accompanying article they used as a partial source.

 

Based on this, starting on a high mountain (dragonmount or some other high point), watching sunrise, then going to the base it can be seen again.

 

Interesting.

[Naggash]

Interesting, but wrong.

It's been proven that this section of the prophecies refer to

an eclipse

.

Btw, why spam 3 times the same thread?

 

EDIT: Just in case you want prove, I suppose there are interviews or theories that could be linked, but you needn't more than

this

.

It's a link to aMoL cover.

[Terez]

Interesting, but wrong.

It's been proven that this section of the prophecies refer to an eclipse.

 

It has not, in any way shape or form.

[Thrasymachus]

Shouldn't this be in the spoiler's section anyway?

[Pinzarn]

Interesting, but wrong.

It's been proven that this section of the prophecies refer to an eclipse.

Btw, why spam 3 times the same thread?

 

EDIT: Just in case you want prove, I suppose there are interviews or theories that could be linked, but you needn't more than

this

.

It's a link to aMoL cover.

 

Proven...no. Perhaps the best guess at this point...yes.

 

After all, the prophecy could be speaking of something symbolic rather than physical. Especially when you consider that the Dragon has been called the Lord of the Morning and the Prince of Dawn. With the resurrection theories going around out there, wouldn't the resurrection of the Lord of the Morning (or Prince of Dawn) all of a sudden start fulfilling the prophecy as well?

[Pinzarn]

Shouldn't this be in the spoiler's section anyway?

 

This is speculation, not a hard spoiler from the book.

[Terez]

We're supposed to discuss anything revealed on the covers in the spoiler section.

[Naggash]

How can you possibly doubt that the prophecies refer to the ******* having seen that cover? Too much for a coincidence. If it were to be another fenomenom involved it would no longer be "twice dawns"

[Pinzarn]

Right, so the thread is not about the cover, just one person's reply.

[Pinzarn]

How can you possibly doubt that the prophecies refer to the eclipse having seen that cover? Too much for a coincidence. If it were to be another fenomenom involved it would no longer be "twice dawns"

 

And the cover could also be a red herring.

[Naggash]

How can you possibly doubt that the prophecies refer to the eclipse having seen that cover? Too much for a coincidence. If it were to be another fenomenom involved it would no longer be "twice dawns"

 

And the cover could also be a red herring.

I strongly doubt they would put an eclipse in the cover just to find out later that it doesn't exist. But yeah, I suppose it could happen...

[Suttree]

How can you possibly doubt that the prophecies refer to the eclipse having seen that cover? Too much for a coincidence. If it were to be another fenomenom involved it would no longer be "twice dawns"

 

Spoilers mate, not the right place to bring this up...

[Naggash]

How can you possibly doubt that the prophecies refer to the eclipse having seen that cover? Too much for a coincidence. If it were to be another fenomenom involved it would no longer be "twice dawns"

 

Spoilers mate, not the right place to bring this up...

The whole post should be moved to aMoL. Sorry for that. I intended to put the eclipse thing in spoiler bar as well, but it sliped my mid. Gonna change it right now.

[Terez]

How can you possibly doubt that the prophecies refer to the ******* having seen that cover?

 

Because eclipse ≠ dawn. And for many other reasons, discussed on the spoiler thread for the cover. We know there will be an eclipse, but a natural eclipse could not possibly fulfill the prophecy.

[Pinzarn]

How can you possibly doubt that the prophecies refer to the [event]? Too much for a coincidence. If it were to be another fenomenom involved it would no longer be "twice dawns"

 

And the cover could also be a red herring.

I strongly doubt they would put [that event] just to find out later that it doesn't exist. But yeah, I suppose it could happen...

 

That would be the nature of the red herring. The prophecy could be fulfulled by something else. What is on the cover could still occur, but has nothing to do with the prophecy.

 

Once again this goes back to your "proven" comment. I agree that the event is the most likely fulfillment of the prophecy; however, until RAFO is done, there are other possibilities.

[Naggash]

How can you possibly doubt that the prophecies refer to the ******* having seen that cover?

 

Because eclipse ≠ dawn. And for many other reasons, discussed on the spoiler thread for the cover. We know there will be an eclipse, but a natural eclipse could not possibly fulfill the prophecy.

I'm aware you possibly know quite a lot more than me of the WoT universe, but I must continue disagreeing. Prophecies aren't accurate expected facts, they are more poetry and symbolism. Twice dawns the day matches perfectly it, for the sun would rise, then be hidden by the moon, then beggining to shine on the sky again (which is actually quite similar to a dawn).

 

That would be the nature of the red herring. The prophecy could be fulfulled by something else. What is on the cover could still occur, but has nothing to do with the prophecy.

 

Once again this goes back to your "proven" comment. I agree that the event is the most likely fulfillment of the prophecy; however, until RAFO is done, there are other possibilities.

To that I must agree. We won't know for sure until RAFO.

[JakeBarnes]

An eclipse is not a dawn. There is no horizon being breached during an eclipse.

[Thrasymachus]

Yeah, this is speculation about what's gonna happen in the last book. That pretty much guarantees that people are gonna bring in spoilers to talk about it, unless the OP specifically asks people not to, which he didn't do. I realize that threads live and breath and the topic sometimes shifts into spoilers territory, like when an Egwene appreciation thread indulges in speculation about how or whether she'll help Rand in the Last Battle, and people bring up the covers with the picture of Rand and a couple of women in a cave. But this is more on the order of someone posting a "What I think will happen to Jarid Sarand and his Andoran army."

[Terez]

How can you possibly doubt that the prophecies refer to the ******* having seen that cover?

 

Because eclipse ≠ dawn. And for many other reasons, discussed on the spoiler thread for the cover. We know there will be an eclipse, but a natural eclipse could not possibly fulfill the prophecy.

I'm aware you possibly know quite a lot more than me of the WoT universe, but I must continue disagreeing. Prophecies aren't accurate expected facts, they are more poetry and symbolism. Twice dawns the day matches perfectly it, for the sun would rise, then be hidden by the moon, then beggining to shine on the sky again (which is actually quite similar to a dawn).

 

As I said, there are several reasons why it can't be the fulfillment, notably that we know (from a double foreshadowing) that Rand will be dead for three days, and that the first dawn is for mourning, and the second for birth and presumably resurrection. A solar eclipse does not last that long, and even if you think the three days thing is separate somehow, then the max time for a natural solar eclipse is not long enough for anything interesting to happen at all. There are even more reasons than that, of course, but we've gone into this on the AMOL forum quite a bit.

[Naggash]

Oh, well, about that I just thought I couldn't apply our world's natural phenomenoms to those of the WoT. I mean, who knows how much could an eclipse last in Randland? And I say more, how much can the DO make it last? (I think it could be his doing, you know, darkness, shadow and everything, to discourage people; then Rand "rebirths" and dispells it).

But, well, I see your point.

[Terez]

That is why I said a *natural* eclipse could not possibly fulfill the prophecy, aside from the fact that eclipse ≠ dawn. And I don't see any reason to believe eclipses are naturally different in the WoT world.

[Arath Faringal]

If the Dark One can fix the seasons in place, something that would logically require manipulation of the orbit or axis of the earth, holding the earth and moon in place for a longer than normal eclipse probably wouldn't be a problem.

 

 

[Terez]

I'm not sure I believe the Dark One fixed the seasons at all. It might be explained by the Fisher King connection.

[yoniy0]

Shouldn't this be in the spoiler's section anyway?

It sure does. Thanks for noticing, and I would ask anyone to report these things (you have a little report button at the end of each post). Regardless of what you consider a major spoiler, we allow anyone who so desires a completely spoiler-free environment here on this board.

[FarShainMael]

An eclipse is not a dawn. There is no horizon being breached during an eclipse.

 

That does happen on the moon.. If you are standing one the moon's unlit side, just before its own sunrise, which occurs roughly once a month. Choose the right spot and you have a day that dawns once on earth, then once on the moon.

 

But that's an interpretation even more literal than the one Terez favours (which is on Theoryland somewhere). She may be right, at least partly; but it is also possible that the prophecy is poetic or symbolic rather than literal. Prophecies often are.

 

(Sorry to talk about you in the third person, Terez, BTW.)