Jump to content




  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. I feel like that should answer your first question. Reading through your posts I wonder if we agree more than it seems. I acknowledge that there is no firm definition of evil in the series. The difference is that it does not frustrate me as much as it seems to frustrate you. Furthermore, stating "All evil originates from the Dark One" would require a rigorous definition of evil in any philosophical work. In fiction though, presented the right way it's satisfying. True, but think of it this way. RJ/BS were writing a work of fiction. It is not intended to teach us anything, yet it is good enough to make us question (hence this entire forum). I have a terrible mind for quotations, but isn't there some sort of quotation saying the best authors present questions that their readers feel compelled to mull over? (I think I slaughtered that). Still, you are definitely entitled to your opinion if you want a more rigid philophical base to the series, that's up to you. I do think though that the DO being the source of all evil is consistent to the themes of the book as is the necessity of evil. Alternatively, consider this. The book is never so condescending as to tell the readers what is right and what is wrong. You might enjoy it if the book had a more specific definition of evil, but I think any definition would be troublesome. For example, if good and evil were portrayed as a battle between harmony and discord, the book would have lost a lot of the depth it had. Because we don't know what evil is, we are forced to look at all the little complications in the book. For example, would the Dark One really have gone for a single battle in the end if chaos were all he were capable of? With this vague definition we don't have a rigorous understanding of how the Dark One works or how his death could destroy choice, but evil is one of those words for which we could definitely imagine it. I'm not sure I agree. For most of the series it is very clear what is bad and what is good. But we still have several members of the light (Seanchan, Whitecloaks, Elaida, and even the Sharans) serving the shadow unwittingly. Similarly we see Lanfear helps Rand gain Asmodean while following her selfish goals of obtaining Rand. Ultimately, none of the characters know which is which (Brandon Sanderson's writing is a little more black and white. I think he fails with Rand, even though he tried to present flaws, he makes Rand too perfect). So why should we? That doesn't mean that there isn't some distinction somewhere, and that doesn't mean we can't identify the extremes. RJ/BS show the full spectrum. We never feel any pity for Trollocs or Myrddraal because they are purely evil. The DO being pure evil and the DO being the source of evil isn't too different. Maybe the Rand scene was heavy handed, but the idea is still good. As I said before, Shadar Logoth was entirely a reaction to the shadow. For all that the hatred of Shadar Logoth was focused on the Shadow, they emulated the shadow. Used the shadow's own techniques against them. For all that they would utterly destroy the shadow if they could, the evil in Shadar Logoth is based fundamentally on a certain kind of respect for the shadow. I think that qualifies as evil caused by the Dark One. It certainly does not take away any moral responsibility. The entire theme of the series is balance. So good and evil are external, it is still an entirely internal decision to what extent you allow the shadow to fill you and to what extent you allow light. It's not the simple free will where we are independant beings that generate our own actions. We depend on the pattern, the Dark One, and presumably the Creator. Free will comes in when you consider to what extent you let those forces influence you. (Consider the Game of Houses. What is the only way we've heard of to go from a position of weakness to one of strength? You find the factions among your superiors, and play them off eachother going with whoever best fits your agenda. This is a similar idea). Yeah, great isn't it! Remember no character ever truly knows what's going on. That's what happens when you take a characters word for gospel! And again, I think you're getting free will and independence mixed up. I don't think it's full of holes. There was a lot that was left for the readers to figure out, and RJ did want some things to be left ambiguous. Did you honestly believe the way RJ was going, he was going to wrap everything up or even really explain what was going on? KoD was a mess of plot elements! But it held together. You claim it doesn't hold up to scrutiny? Let's examine your problems with the end. Dark One's death destroys choice. That's not a contradiction, nor does it contradict the concept of free will. We don't have enough information. To an extent that's legitimate, but can you really expect him not to leave something for the reader? Shadar Logoth. Again, just because the evil is directed against the DO doesn't mean it isn't a part of the evil he provoked in the world. What would Shadar Logoths hatred mean in a world without evil? Ultimately though, it boils down to our respective opinions. If you were disappointed with the end, that's fine. I just hope you understand why I like it and I hope I'm not misunderstanding your own disappointment.
  2. I wonder. Is that really necessary? The waygates essentially created an alternate world right? Why would the continued existence of the current waygates stop Aes Sedai from making a new set?
  3. The ways were mentioned. That was how the Trollocs got into Caemlyn. Also, I agree with Rand4747.
  4. I chose Tuon. I loved reading her sections. Her odd opinions made for entertaining reading, especially when she interacted with Mat (my number 2).
  5. Short version: There is very little evidence that the dark one can affect the pattern when the bore is closed and cause evil. There is also little or no evidence that he can't. The twist, that the Dark One's death destroys choice, is unsupported factually, but fits the thematic content of the series fairly well. It could have been foreshadowed better, but I like it the way it is. Finally, since there was little evidence either way, I think it was BS/RJ's call to throw that in there, and I don't think it came from nowhere.
  6. I'll answer your bonus question first because it is the easiest: "YOU CANNOT GIVE OBLIVION. REST IS NOT YOURS. ONLY TORMENT." pg 890 ​Verin's comment that the Dark One seems to reward selfishness Shadowspawn Shaidar Haran's pleasure in giving pain the absolute unforgiving nature of the Darkfriend hierarchy the Dark One's "world without light" There are countless examples in the book that evil is nothing special. It's just what ever is bad and morally wrong. This isn't a dictionary, so I can't tell you how the book defines morality, but from the evidence presented and several other examples I can infer what I think evil in this book is. Of course, my inferences are colored by my ideas of right and wrong just as yours are, which is where we run into subjectivity. It's possible that there is a clear moral split between the influence of the Creator or that of the Dark One, or maybe it's as vague as the Dark One merely emphasizes what we would call "bad" tendencies in people. The book does not clearly delineate this, but neither should it, since it is a work of fiction, not philosophy. That does not mean it's not well defined for Randlanders. If you want more just ask and I'll continue this thread of thought. Now the meat and bones! First I'll say I agree with you on one point. There is relatively little direct evidence in the books to support the assertion that the Dark One at all times affects the pattern that heavily. Here's where I disagree with you. I believe there were just enough little hints and clues hidden in the book so that this does not qualify as a completely unsupported twist ending. The difficulty is that a lot of the evidence is thematic (which is why I use so many "imaginary examples," I thought they'd be better at getting the point across). This is because it's from the third person limited perspective. We see everything colored by the character's perspectives, and no one truly knows how the world works (Well, Rand supposedly learns, but he has only a few pages after that realization) Here's the in-book explanation: The Creator created the wheel and the wheel of time runs. There are no endings and no beginnings to the turning of the wheel of time. From Rand's perspective we see that even when the bore is sealed up, the Dark One is the source of all evil. It's just that he can't take a direct hand in events (much like the Creator presumably voluntarily allows the wheel to weave as it will, the Dark One's prison forces him to do this). As Kael mentioned, there is no direct evidence or claims, but it does not come out of nowhere. The wheel of time guide mentions that when the bore was originally opened, for about 50 to a 100 years the Dark One directly influenced the hearts and minds of people in AOL ("If motivations for war and hate were removed, then so were the resultant activities. The Bore changed all of that. The fabric of society began to unravel under the onslaught of the Dark One’s influence." The Guide, taken from http://wot.wikia.com/wiki/Collapse). Suttree found this quote (it's on the 13x13 wall. I'm not sure how to quote interviews though. Oh well) "They are not in a mindless state of Compulsion. Their former personality is twisted, the darker elements that everyone has to some degree elevated while what might be called the good elements are largely suppressed. I don't mean things like courage, which is usefuleven to villains, but they are unlikely to be very charitable, for example, and forget any altruistic impulses. Call it being turned into a mirror image of yourself in many ways. It is very unlikely that a channeler forcibly turned to the Shadow could find a way back to the Light unaided. For one reason, by virtue of the twisting he or she had undergone, it is very unlikely that he or she would have any desire to do so." Robert Jordan I think this establishes the idea that the Dark One can influence peoples emotions with the bore open. With the bore closed, there is no direct evidence either way of the extent of the Dark One's influence on the pattern. Lews Therin, the forsaken and Birgitte are the only living characters that experienced life before the bore. Secondary and tertiary information is limited. Here's what we know. War was nearly forgotten, and poverty was gone. There was still crime, and the harshest punishment for channelors was to forswear their crimes on what is now the oath rod. We know the Chair of Remorse survived the breaking, though its original purpose is lost in time, I think its very existence is suggestive. It does not seem like something Dark Friends would think of to use for torture. Lews Therin/Rand believes even without the bore, war would eventually have destroyed the AOL. ​As you can see, the information provided suggests that there was always evil even when the bore was sealed up. The quote from the Guide above shows that they never overcame it. They just created incentives for people to be nice to each other. In otherwords, they never eliminated choice, just made it less beneficial to choose evil. The central question is what is the source of evil? Is it humanity or the DO? The evidence above doesn't answer the question in any way, but I think it does highlight that question. So question for you, what in-book evidence is there that it originates with humanity? So, now let's address your question. (1) How did BS/RJ earn the right to claim that all evil stems from the Dark One? My answer is in thematic content. Robert Jordan emphasized the importance of balance in the pattern over and over. If you think about it, allowing the Dark One to be killed, or acknowledging that it would be best if he was killed would have invalidated a large portion of the series. Still, free will? If you read carefully and really think about it, BS did spend quite a bit of time building this up. One of the most important lessons the three ta'veren learn throughout the series is not only how little choice they have in their actions, but how to deal with it. When Rand becomes darth Rand, we quickly learn that he does have a choice afterall, and he very nearly destroys the world. It is in this context that we enter the last battle. (2) How does all of this work? What distinguishes this from "bad poetry in the guise of philosophy?" Nothing really. It's just your opinion. Brandon Sanderson's and Robert Jordan's views on the world leaked into the story as they wrote. That's fine, what author doesn't do that? The "guise of philosophy" part isn't supposed to explain the real world, but Randland and the pattern. As for the bad poetry part, if that's how you interpret it, it's entirely your choice. But that is just your opinion. Personally, I wonder if it conflicts with your views of the world? Finally, one question for you. How does it not stand up to scrutiny? I don't see any contradictions. I'll admit that it could have been forshadowed better, though personally I liked this level of foreshadowing. It fit perfectly, but it still caught us by surprise (for the record, before I read AMOL, I didn't like the idea that the Dark One could be killed, but I really liked how that was handled). ​
  7. @CanUFeelTheLove?: That's a very black and white way of thinking of it. In fact, he is opposed to free will. Balance is a major theme in wot, but not just for all good there must be evil. Think of Saidin and Saidar. They work together and against each other in the turning of the wheel of time. When a circle of men and women meld flows together, the weaves are much stronger than the sum of the strength of the channelers. When Rand cleansed saidin, he used the repulsion between saidar and saiden to force a stream of saidin through the filter and cleanse the source. The DO is not a force of good. But he is a force that's necessary for good to exist (think of the borderland notion of beauty. A single flower placed just so in a barren field of rocks. The beauty of the flower is only emphasized by the plain surroundings. Thus the plain surroundings play a role in the beauty of the image precisely because of their lack of beauty)
  8. Of course, the Randlanders have a major public relations advantage. If they can politically undermine the Seanchan first, then I could see the Seanchan empire toppling without much of a fight.
  9. But they haven't. I just opened my book and reread that scene (pg 472-476). When Egwene suggests that, Fortuona argues back. She never agrees to it and before the argument gets too far Egwene mentions that sul'dam are marath'damane and then the whole conversation breaks down. In the end, Fortuona agrees to preserve borders, to give the Sea Folk autonomy, to not collar any marath'damane off of Seanchan lands and to aid the forces of light in the last battle. That's all. I still say the Seanchan are a very real threat to Randland. You're right, fighting to kill channelers is a far easier fighting to capture them, but the Seanchan will kill when they have to. The thing about a war though is that there will be battles involving channelers where the Seanchan are outmatched, and when the Randlanders are outmatched. Randlanders will kill the Seanchan channelers. Seanchan will capture Randland channelers. With gateways this will be an excellent opportunity for the Seanchan. I could see raiding parties set up specifically to capture damane. Also consider. At least near the beginning of the war the Randlanders would probably be merciless with the Sul'dam, but very few would understand that the damane truly belong to the Seanchan. Beyond that, as I said before, the Seanchan are a frighteningly efficient empire. Their advantages are not limited to just damane. I'm not saying they'll win for sure in a war against the Randlanders, but if the empire is stable and even if they haven't retaken the homeland, they will not be an easy nut to crack.
  10. What about the dragon's peace? The Seanchan are part of that too, so I doubt there will be war for at least a few years. The Aiel seem to interpret Avi's vision as a sign that they can't go to war with the Seanchan. However well that works out, if the da'mane problem is not solved then war will break out in a few generations almost exactly like Avi's vision (though it will probably be a war with all of Randland, not just the Aiel). I'm not so certain of the outcome between the Seanchan and Randland. If I'm wrong and the war happens right away, then yes the Seanchan have a disadvantage, but think about advantages they have. They have more than da'mane. Their culture is super organized, which is extremely good for war. They were barely bloodied in the last battle, whereas a significant portion of Randland forces were thoroughly reduced. I doubt anyone would count the Last battle a victory for the light if it hadn't been a war of annihilation. Finally, Randland just lost all of its great generals. The Seanchan generals (if you remember from the earlier books) are generally better than ordinary Randland generals, though if Mat turns against Seanchan that threat is more than neutralized. I could see it both ways. It depends on whether Mat has more influence on Tuon or vice versa (Mat can't go without Tuon's acceptance. Without his ta'veren he'll have a hard time escaping her). The biggest advantage of Seanchan though is their warped sense of honor. I could see them sending strike forces like the raid against the White Tower, but far more devastating. Also, remember that though the Seanchan have fewer da'mane than Randland has channelers, Seanchan can easily gain more during the war while Randlanders loose theirs, so any Randland victory would have to be quick. If the war happens in a few generations, then it depends on how easily the Seanchan won the war in Avi's vision. If it was very easily, then I don't see it going any differently. If the war was a close one, then the wheel weaves as the wheel will.
  11. I don't know, it certainly felt fitting to me. The wheel is about balance, not good not evil. It seems to me like we're forgetting that Rand was a champion of the wheel, not the creater. Killing the Dark One or letting the Dark One destroy the pattern. It seems fitting to me that they're one and the same. It extends the cyclical nature of the wheel not just to time, but to the very foundation of the struggle with the Dark One: morality. I'm not Christian, and my biblical knowledge isn't very strong, but think Adam and Eve, except that God managed to forbid Satan from tempting Eve. It seems to me like Adam and Eve's time before the fall is a lot like AOL, which was the pinnacle of the light on the wheel (before the bore of course). There was still darkness and crime in AOL, and Adam and Eve were still capable of making bad decisions. But if God had made the tree of knowledge inaccessable and blocked out all evil influences, then Adam and Eve would have had no choices. Similarly Rand's vision is evidence that the pattern is created to allow the Dark One some measure of influence. He cannot influence chance or the world itself unless the bore is open, but he can certainly tempt. If you want further evidence, think about the AOL after the bore opened. I believe it was in the world of wheel of time book, apparently there was a century between the opening of the bore and the war of power. During this time civilization declined as people grew more discontent and violent. I've always interpreted this as a sign that the Dark One can affect human nature. The effects are less pronounced in the third age, but I think that's mostly because of the mindset of the age. Thus, if the Dark One died, the little voice we all have suggesting we do whatever we wish, even if it is wrong, would disappear. Humans couldn't do evil if they didn't understand what it was. Also, I don't think the evil of Shadar Logoth is separate from the Dark One even if it is directed against him. It's an evil that was inspired by the Dark One. I doubt hatred would have any meaning without the Dark One.
  12. It's strongly implied that they already averted going down that path. Maybe the encyclopedia or a Q&A will confirm. I don't know, it seems to imply to me that avoiding that fate is possible, but not probable (which means if an outrigger were ever based in the fourth age, they'd definitely avert it). On a slightly unrelated note, in Avi's vision we see most nations retain their national identity from the end of the third age (at least for a couple of generations), but we also have the fourth age excerpts which come from countries never mentioned in the book. I don't have my books with me, so does anyone know about how long after the last battle these excerpts are supposed to be written? Does this have anything to do with a supposed Raven/Dragon empire or some other unrest?
  13. Now, let's consider a scenario where we're travelling Randland and we decide to dive out of the pattern and visit the Dark One in his comfy timeless abode. What do we see? Maybe we're disappointed. Every character in the book including Rand who claimed to actually experience lied to us and time actually passes in some form or other. Alternatively, he's right and time really does not exist outside the pattern. What does that mean? I don't know, and you don't know. No one has experienced it, and the book had little to say except Rand was unable to deal with it until he returned to touching the pattern. That does not mean we can't draw conclusions about it. First, you yourself noted that we have a contradiction if outside the pattern everything falls into a singularity. Then there is a definite lack of information, so I think we can assume there is space of some form or another. I also think the idea of the pattern is abstract enough that we can assume the Dark One does not live in space, but in an entirely different dimension. Thus space is not necessarily approximately Euclidean like it is for that. That might be one reason that Rand, seeing the pattern was forced to look at his own interpretation for it. Think about it. It's almost certain our perception would take a long time to adjust to say a warped four dimensional world. I could very well see any of us struggling to understand what we're seeing and interpreting it the way we've always been told it looks. What about time? Without time, there is no such thing as speed, but there is no such thing as change either. How can anything happen outside time? Here's where things get a bit iffy. Consider instead of time being frozen it seems to us to be infinitely accelerated. You go visit Shai'tan, drink some tea with Him and discuss his dear uncle the Creater. All of it simultaneously. You were opening the door to his humble abode at the exact same time that you drank tea and the exact same time that you first touched the teacup wondering how he found such marvelous Sea Folk porcelain all the way out here. How does relativity work in all of this? Well speed has no conception the way we imagine it, so if you want no exceptions there must be some equivalent to speed. Suppose all events are discrete in a timeless space. While the Dark One led you to his house you were essentially traveling light speed so everything became a singularity, but then you hit a force that was the Dark one which brought you to a stop outside his door. Now you weren't moving so everything appeared normal. We seperate this notion from our own notion of time by making everything discrete. When you return to the pattern, you remember a jumble of individual events. Each one was characterized by moving or not moving. That would probably seem timeless enough (I know, you can argue there is still some concept of time in that, but I admit I don't have the imagination to concieve of true timelessness. That doesn't mean it doesn't exist, but I hope this works as an approximation). So what conclusions about WOT can we draw from this since I made most of that up? We can draw the conclusion that it is possible for there to exist a timeless space which is not a singularity. From this looking at the pattern as a ring, the Dark One may not concieve of it as such, but he would could very well have some conception of shape. Sorry about the monster posts, but I was being as thorough as I could. So while Muken's model isn't necessarily correct (the books do not give us enough information to come up with a unique explanation for the physics of this) it is certainly a possibility and an interesting one in my opinion.
  14. You may assume the laws of nature are complete and consistent. In fact, since the series is full of hints that our own world is just one age in the wheel of time that is probably a good assertion (I wasn't thinking about that when I wrote the first post). That said, I would agree that consistency would be required for the world to make sense. Completeness would be nice as well, but the rules don't have to be OUR rules for the world to make sense. Just think about the Aelfinn world. RJ and BS actually made that world a perfect example of what I'm trying to say. Their world makes no sense to us because it is so different, but it has it's own set of rules and works like any other. It makes perfect sense to its inhabitants, and Mat et al were able to make conclusions about that world despite the odd way things worked. How did Mat realize the Aelfinn could control the shifting corridors to let everyone out? He noticed that the Aelfinn and Eelfinn had no problem navigating that world. He also noticed that his path to the chamber where he made the deal was extremely convoluted when he went on his own, but when he was led by a guide the path was perfectly straight. Besides, by your definition the very existence of the One Power is an anethema, so why analyze WoT at all? Muken pointed out that you can violate conservation of energy with gateways. It takes the same amount of energy to lift a rock two feet as it does to lift it a mile. Lifting objects with the power violates Newton's third law of motion. The power lifts the boulder, what is the opposite force? The channeler doesn't suddenly get any heavier. Any use of the power violates the second law of thermodynamics. The cleansing of Saidin demonstrated that the True Source is finite even if it is massive, yet RJ has said it can be used up if enough people use it simultaneously, but once its use is completed it is returned to the source. I think we can assume the source hasn't shrunk appreciatively since AOL. And what about Tel'aran'rhiod? The laws of thermodynamics certainly don't hold there, and physics comes custom-made. Two things. First, regarding relativity. I admit, I don't understand relativity as well as a physicist. I don't know the mathematics behind general relativity. Here's the thing though, the basic assumptions behind special relativity are very simple. There is no such thing as the true reference frame and the speed of light is constant in all reference frames. That's it. Add that there is no way to tell the difference between gravity and acceleration and you've got all of relativity. So why do I assert that you can have a consistent world without relativity? Why, let's break the basic assumptions shall we? Choose, oh I don't know, Randland to be the true reference frame and abolish the light speed limit. Let's say with the one power there exists a weave that will tell you if you're accelerating or it's just gravity. I don't really care if photons are massless, I suppose in this context they'd have to have mass, but either way just make light act the way it should. There would also be some differences in how the star's act and Randlanders, once they reached our technological levels, would doubtless find very different results when they tried some major precision experiments. But who cares, this is a consistent world that makes sense. Any classical physicist could figure out the details and we have a world that makes sense which we can draw conclusions about. But wait! "You can't tell something is extended without taking the time to notice the extension." I'm not sure what this has to do space and time being connected. You can't do anything without taking the time to do it. It's one of the basics of living in a world with time (I'll get to worlds without time in a moment). That really has nothing to do with space. "You can only tell how long something lasts by comparing it to something else that's moving around in space." Not necessarily true. The human circadian rhythm is about 25 hours. That means we can roughly tell how long a day is even if we're stuck in a featureless dark room completely unable to tell how far anything has moved at all. Have you ever counted to 10 in your head? You probably counted at roughly one number per second. We definitely have some conception of time as separate from space. Mathematically, look at the simplest example of space: a vector space. There is no concept of time in the raw mathematical conception of space. It has to be added. In order to tell time with any accuracy we need to create machines that do it for us or measure natural events. Well, what natural events are there? There is no physical manifestation of time except for movement so how else do we measurement. We're not measuring time directly however, we simply assume that movement implies time and work from there. One last thing. This time I'm not skeptical, but I'm genuinely curious. There are suggestions of relativity in Aristotle's work? I didn't know that! What kind of suggestions?
  15. @jjp: It wasn't the Dark One that showed Rand what would happen if Shai'tan died. When the Dark One created the shadow worlds he did this by weaving fragments of the pattern. From what I could tell this seems almost like a mix of TAR, weaving the one power and the weaving of the pattern itself. Nevertheless, they essentially were creating mirror worlds which showed a single possibility given that certain things worked out. The Dark one wove the pattern to create a mirror world where he had won and eleminated all forms of compassion. Rand did the same thing but where he had killed the Dark One. The reason Rand believed it was because it was the pattern that showed him the outcome, not the Dark One. @Tud: You've repeatedly pointed out that an advanced culture has memory and you're skeptical that the second age would forget the bore and the Dark One. Consider this, assume the second age lasted 3000 years just like the last age. Then, as I believe Thrasymachus already explained, the beginning of the second age for Randlan ders would be the equivalent of 1500 years before the Epic of Gilgamesh for us. But that's not enough, so let's consider some more. You're claiming the second age should remember at least some fragments of events from the third age. Again, using the assumption (Which I understand is quite probably wrong) that every age is 3000 years, that is 18000 years! Can you tell me what gods the different tribal groups of humanity worshipped during those times? Can you tell me what rites they followed and why? It's quite possible that memory of the bore survived as some vague recollection of evil: memories that came indirectly from distant memories of war (which was already a disused words only really known to scholars). Finally, one last thing, realize to Randlanders, in a broad sense one turning of the wheel is roughly equivalent to the entire history of the human race. I find it very plausible that the bore and the Dark One would be long forgotten when the Second Age came again. @Muken: Regarding your conception of how the Dark One "sees" the wheel of time, brilliant! @Thrasymachus: I loved reading your posts, but I do disagree with a few things you said. Thermodynamics: you said theoretical physicists often do a lot of their work in fictional universes where none of the laws quite apply. You're right about that. However, all of the work theoretical physicists do involves creating models. In each of these fictional universes they work in, super-symmetry holds or the curvature of space is defined in a certain way. The important things are the assumptions. You created a model of the wot universe under the assumption that thermodynamics holds. As a consequence of that wot must be an open universe powered by the one power. That doesn't make Muken wrong though, since his assumptions did not necessarily require the laws of thermodynamics to hold. As for you're point about time and space, since this is fictional, we may do some metaphysics. Assume relativity no longer holds. The speed of light is the speed of light, but it is no longer a speed limit. Now, with this assumption, it is quite easy to see that space and time may be independent of each other. So the Dark One is outside time, but he has his own concept of space, one which is not a singularity. Thus it would be quite possible for him to have some concept of the geometry of a wheel. Edit: deleted a sentence
  • Create New...