The name of Kosh
David Frazer
[Spoiler space for people who haven't seen `Walkabout']
[some more spoiler space]
I've just watched `Walkabout' and here's a theory about what the new Vorlon said. If
`we are all Kosh', then perhaps it is a descriptive word or a title. For instance, all
ambassadors may be Kosh, or perhaps it designates a rank or caste to which ambassadors
belong. Perhaps `ambassador' is a very loose rendering of `Kosh', whose meaning can be
understood only in the context of Vorlon society (about which no human knows enough).
Anyway, it's a theory.
Another thought. Could Kosh have increased Lyta's telepathic strength? Since she's
never confronted a Shadow before, she doesn't know how much energy she needs.
David Frazer.
dfr...@netcomuk.co.uk
`Il faut cultiver notre jardin.' VOLTAIRE
Mr P.M. Martins Ferreira
David Frazer (dfr...@netcomuk.co.uk) wrote:
: [Spoiler space for people who haven't seen `Walkabout']
: [some more spoiler space]
: I've just watched `Walkabout' and here's a theory about what the new
Vorlon said. If
: `we are all Kosh', then perhaps it is a descriptive word or a title. For instance, all
: ambassadors may be Kosh, or perhaps it designates a rank or caste to which ambassadors
: belong. Perhaps `ambassador' is a very loose rendering of `Kosh', whose meaning can be
: understood only in the context of Vorlon society (about which no human knows enough).
: Anyway, it's a theory.
A theory I'm inclined to agree. But that still leaves one question in the
open; old Kosh's name was "Kosh Naranek". Does this new Vorlon carry the
"Naranek" bit as well? If "Kosh" is the title, or the caste, or whatever,
then maybe "Naranek" was the true name...?
: `Il faut cultiver notre jardin.' VOLTAIRE
How very true...! The man may have lived two centuries ago, but "Candide"
is as wonderful and correct as always!!
Pedro
Mark Lawson
Paul Harper wrote:
>
> sa...@signman.demon.co.uk (Sarah Baker) said :
>
> >It was the period known only as Sun, 18 Aug 1996 20:55:02 -0700, and
> >David Frazer <dfr...@netcomuk.co.uk> knew that the time was right to
> >stand up and proclaim:
> >
> ># [Spoiler space for people who haven't seen `Walkabout']
> ># I've just watched `Walkabout' and here's a theory about what the new Vorlon said. If
> ># `we are all Kosh', then perhaps it is a descriptive word or a title.
I think "Kosh" refers to the collective of souls or whatever that makes
up a Vorlon. When Lyta carried a part of Kosh, she was carrying some of
the souls, in a similar fashion to that in which the unwitting Sheridan
seems to be. "As long as you're still here, I'll always be here"
indeed...
> ># Another thought. Could Kosh have increased Lyta's telepathic strength? Since she's
> ># never confronted a Shadow before, she doesn't know how much energy she needs.
> >Lyta HAS to be stronger than a P5 now, I can't honestly believe that
> >she could have done what she did otherwise...but if she were simply
> >a P5 think what a P12 could do to a shadow vessel...
I think she's more than a P5... don't know if she realises it yet
though.
The pilot suggested that the P ratings were a measure not only of thhe
strength of a telepath, but also of their level of training... maybe
Lyta is much more powerful now than before, but lacks the knowledge and
skill to use it yet. I'm beginning to make her sound like Luke Skywalker
now. Bugger.
> Didn't a shadow vessel get right-up-close when Bester was onboard the
> White Star ? One was frozen off at some considerable distance by
> Lyta. Assuming Psi-ability follows the usual cube of the distance rule,
> what P number does that give her ?
Ah... but Bester didn't try to disable that one, it got close enough to
smell a psi, then did a runner. I get the feeling that the ship in
Walkabout would have done the same if it felt it was up against a real
threat..
I think she deserves a P45 from Psi Corps...
Misterel.... Danananananananana.... BatKosh!
Michael Barnes
David Frazer, in the tradition of of dfr...@netcomuk.co.uk, wrote:
>[Spoiler space for people who haven't seen `Walkabout']
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>[some more spoiler space]
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>I've just watched `Walkabout' and here's a theory about what the new
>Vorlon said. If `we are all Kosh', then perhaps it is a descriptive word
>or a title. For instance, all ambassadors may be Kosh, or perhaps it
>designates a rank or caste to which ambassadors belong. Perhaps
>`ambassador' is a very loose rendering of `Kosh', whose meaning can be
>understood only in the context of Vorlon society (about which no human
>knows enough).
>
>Anyway, it's a theory.
Funny, I suggested yesterday that Vorlons may be a race of Doctors.
After all, Both Franklin and Hobbs get addressed as Doctor.
>Another thought. Could Kosh have increased Lyta's telepathic strength?
>Since she's never confronted a Shadow before, she doesn't know how much
>energy she needs.
<Whoosh Tinkle> Perhaps.
--
"Listen my child you say to me, I am The Voice of your history.
Be not afraid - come follow me. Answer my call and I'll set you free."
http://www.tcp.co.uk/~litening
We learn, we adjust and we move on. It's what humans do.
Paul Harper
sa...@signman.demon.co.uk (Sarah Baker) said :
>It was the period known only as Sun, 18 Aug 1996 20:55:02 -0700, and
>David Frazer <dfr...@netcomuk.co.uk> knew that the time was right to
>stand up and proclaim:
>
># [Spoiler space for people who haven't seen `Walkabout']
>#
>#
>#
>#
>#
>#
>#
>#
>#
>#
># [some more spoiler space]
>#
>#
>#
>#
>#
>#
>#
>#
>#
>#
>#
>#
>#
>#
>#
>#
>#
>#
>#
>#
>#
>#
># I've just watched `Walkabout' and here's a theory about what the new Vorlon said. If
># `we are all Kosh', then perhaps it is a descriptive word or a title.
>
>Or even a character trait? Maybe "Kosh" means Stubborn in Vorlon and
>because Kosh is "kosh" he has that name: "We are all Kosh" meaning "we
>are all stubborn..." Maybe the "Whole" of the Vorlons is mnade up of
>all these various character traits and to lose one part is to lose
>that trait forever...
>
># Another thought. Could Kosh have increased Lyta's telepathic strength? Since she's
># never confronted a Shadow before, she doesn't know how much energy she needs.
>
>Lyta HAS to be stronger than a P5 now, I can't honestly believe that
>she could have done what she did otherwise...but if she were simply a
>P5 think what a P12 could do to a shadow vessel...
Didn't a shadow vessel get right-up-close when Bester was onboard the
White Star ? One was frozen off at some considerable distance by
Lyta. Assuming Psi-ability follows the usual cube of the distance rule,
what P number does that give her ?
Regards,
Paul.
--
-- From "Twinkle Butt"
-- A .sig's all well and good, but it's no substitute for a personality.
--
-- "Twinklebutt Central" : http://www.icihqgis.demon.co.uk
Andrew Wright
In article <3217E5...@netcomuk.co.uk>,
David Frazer <dfr...@netcomuk.co.uk> wrote:
>[Spoiler space for people who haven't seen `Walkabout']
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>[some more spoiler space]
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>I've just watched `Walkabout':::snip:::about which no human knows
>enough).
>
>Anyway, it's a theory.
And a very nice theory it is too! Personally, I still read "we are all
Kosh" to mean that all the Vorlons are "Kosh" they are all one and the
same. However, the differing encounter suits seem to indicate some
individualism. Confused? By jms? Never?
>
>Another thought. Could Kosh have increased Lyta's telepathic strength? Since
>she's
>never confronted a Shadow before, she doesn't know how much energy she needs.
>
I am sure of it. A P5 going up against a BattleCrab, come on! Even Bester
didn't dare focus on the ship in SoT. Mind you, that one did run away,
whereas the one in Walkabout didn't. Perhaps that means the shadows can
tell the difference between a P12 and a (supposed) P5. Can't wait for
Bester to meet Lyta though.
Andrew
--
Andrew Wright
A.Wr...@roehampton.ac.uk <*> and...@stardock.u-net.com
"Channel 4 was our last, best hope..."
Andrew Wright
In article <32188428...@news.demon.co.uk>,
pa...@icihqgis.demon.co.uk (Paul Harper) wrote:
:::snip:::
>
>Didn't a shadow vessel get right-up-close when Bester was onboard the
>White Star ? One was frozen off at some considerable distance by
>Lyta. Assuming Psi-ability follows the usual cube of the distance rule,
>what P number does that give her ?
>
Huh? Could you explain your reasoning behind this one Harper?
John Cummings
In article <3218218b...@news.demon.co.uk>, Sarah Baker
<sa...@signman.demon.co.uk> writes
>said. If
># `we are all Kosh', then perhaps it is a descriptive word or a title.
>
>Or even a character trait? Maybe "Kosh" means Stubborn in Vorlon and
>because Kosh is "kosh" he has that name: "We are all Kosh" meaning "we
>are all stubborn..." Maybe the "Whole" of the Vorlons is mnade up of
>all these various character traits and to lose one part is to lose
>that trait forever...
My personal view is that the whole of the Vorlon Empire are/is one
conciousness (SP). By this I mean they are literally one being, be it
of energy or whatever, and they have the ability to sub-divide into
smaller parts. Each if these parts then can funtion on its own but
linked in some way to the whole. God, it sounds like the Borg...... :-)
>
># Another thought. Could Kosh have increased Lyta's telepathic strength? Since
>she's
># never confronted a Shadow before, she doesn't know how much energy she needs.
>
Too early to tell this, they need a few more experiments.
>Lyta HAS to be stronger than a P5 now, I can't honestly believe that
>she could have done what she did otherwise...but if she were simply a
>P5 think what a P12 could do to a shadow vessel...
>
Again I don't think we have been spoon fed enough info. yet.... but she
shure looks well on it ;)
--
Babcom95, 540@Wolf359, L1@Babcom96
"The Universe is full of mysteries. Consider this one of them..."
Commander Jeff Sincair - Series One
Chris Yates
>[Spoiler space for people who haven't seen `Walkabout']
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>I've just watched `Walkabout' and here's a theory about what the new Vorlon
>said. If
>ambassadors may be Kosh, or perhaps it designates a rank or caste to which
>ambassadors
>belong. Perhaps `ambassador' is a very loose rendering of `Kosh', whose meaning
>can be
>enough).
>
Could be.. good theory.. Particularily since Kosh had a 'second' name of
Naranek. Maybe that was his name, and Kosh was just his
title/role/caste whatever :)
Oh speaking of.. Did anyone in any of the three series of B5 ever
mention that Kosh had this second name ?????? Can anyone remeber ?
Human VCR's step forward ... - "Mine's a Jovian Sunspot" :)
--------------- Chris Yates <Ne...@cube.demon.co.uk > ----------------
"We won't start this fight, but by god we'll finish it!"
- Sheridan, "Severed Dreams"
David Firth
In article <3217E5...@netcomuk.co.uk>, David Frazer
<dfr...@netcomuk.co.uk> writes
>[Spoiler space for people who haven't seen `Walkabout']
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>[some more spoiler space]
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>I've just watched `Walkabout' and here's a theory about what the new Vorlon
>said. If
>`we are all Kosh', then perhaps it is a descriptive word or a title. For
>instance, all
When he said "we are all Kosh" are we assuming he meant the vorlons are
all kosh? Maybe the "we" included the humans and the minbari. Kosh could
be a reference to the soul without the confines of a physical body - as
in Angel perhaps! Maybe all souls outside a body are equal - no human,
no minbari etc.
--
David Firth
Ian Robert Walker
In article <3217E5...@netcomuk.co.uk>, David Frazer
<dfr...@netcomuk.co.uk> writes
>[Spoiler space for people who haven't seen `Walkabout']
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>[some more spoiler space]
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>I've just watched `Walkabout' and here's a theory about what the new Vorlon
>said. If
>`we are all Kosh', then perhaps it is a descriptive word or a title. For
>instance, all
>ambassadors
>belong. Perhaps `ambassador' is a very loose rendering of `Kosh', whose meaning
>can be
>understood only in the context of Vorlon society (about which no human knows
>enough).
>
A good one thou. In the middle ages ambassadors were clerics, so Kosh
could mean something like cleric or priest.
--
Ian G8ILZ
I have an IQ of 6 million, | How will it end? | Mostly
or was it 6? | In fire. | harmless
Jonathan Silverlight
In article <32197aa2...@news.easynet.co.uk>, Peter (pet...@easynet.co.uk) writes:
>On Mon, 19 Aug 1996 18:22:12 +0000, and...@stardock.u-net.com (Andrew
>Wright) wrote:
>
>>In article <32188428...@news.demon.co.uk>,
>>pa...@icihqgis.demon.co.uk (Paul Harper) wrote:
>>
>>>sa...@signman.demon.co.uk (Sarah Baker) said :
>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>Didn't a shadow vessel get right-up-close when Bester was onboard the
>>>White Star ? One was frozen off at some considerable distance by
>>>Lyta. Assuming Psi-ability follows the usual cube of the distance rule,
>>>what P number does that give her ?
>>>
>>Huh? Could you explain your reasoning behind this one Harper?
>
>something is propogated through a three dimensional space, its
>strength relative to the strength at the point of origin decreases as
>the cube of the distance from the origin. Thus, for example, if a
>lightbulb is illuminating a room, the intensity of the light at a
>point 5 metres away from the bulb is 1/125 (ie, 1/(5^3)) of the
>intensity 1 metre away. Paul is, quite reasonably, I think,
>hypothesising that telepathic power follows the same rule.
>
>(Ummm...is 'intensity' the right word? I forget - it's nigh on twenty
>years since I last studied any physics.)
>
>What the distances involved are is difficult to say, but suppose that
>Bester froze one out at 1 kilometre whilst Alexander managed it at 2
>km, that would make Alexander four times as powerful a telepath as
>Bester. Hmmm.....
>
>(Is the P scale logarithmic, BTW?)
>
>The point at which I'm not sure that I agree with Paul is his
>statement that the shadow vessel got right up close to Bester in Ship
>of Tears - my recollection is that it, too, was frozen out at some
>distance. However, I might be mistaken - perhaps I ought to go and
>rewatch that episode.
>
>Peter.
>
>Now available in HTML at
>http://easyweb.easynet.co.uk/~petert/
>
These nested "*** said" are getting out of hand !
It isn't quite as bad as Peter said because it's an inverse square
law for radiation, not inverse cube. However, I don't see why
telepathy should follow any such law, except fot the "line of
sight" rule imposed by the Great Maker for plot reasons.
Perhaps the point is that Bester wasn't concentrating on the
Shadow, while Lyta was giving everything she had. I'm sure that
the Shadow in was right up close; it was Lennier who reported it.
Bester didn't feel it.
"While all answers are replies, not all replies are answers"
Peter
>In article <32188428...@news.demon.co.uk>,
>pa...@icihqgis.demon.co.uk (Paul Harper) wrote:
>
>>sa...@signman.demon.co.uk (Sarah Baker) said :
>>
>>>It was the period known only as Sun, 18 Aug 1996 20:55:02 -0700, and
Robin Lester
In article <4vbju7$q...@lucy.swin.edu.au>
083...@bud.swin.edu.au "Timothy Hock Seng Tan" writes:
> Robin Lester (r...@glester.demon.co.uk) wrote:
> : In article <3217E5...@netcomuk.co.uk>
> : dfr...@netcomuk.co.uk "David Frazer" writes:
>
> : > [Spoiler space for people who haven't seen `Walkabout']
> : >
> : >
> : >
> : >
> : >
> : >
> : >
> : >
> : >
> : >
> : > [some more spoiler space]
> : >
> : >
> : >
> : >
> : >
> : >
> : >
> : >
> : >
> : >
> : >
> : >
> : >
> : >
> : >
> : >
>
> : Here's my theory, we know Vorlons have pretty major telepathic powers.
> : Thus they have evolved into a network of minds, all inside each others
> : head and thus become one being. This would explain not only why they are
> : so pissed off when on of them dies (it diminishes all of them) but
> : how the rest of the Vorlon empire knew instantly when Kosh mk1 had died
> : plus also why they are all Kosh. Kosh being the sum of the parts.
> : OK, I know what your thinking, how come the new Vorlon ambasidor didn't
> : know exectly what had happend at the time of death? Well if you consider
> : how your computer works when it's part of a net. The other computers
> : and the server don't know exectly what your PC is doing, all the time.
>
> ...Or maybe the Shadows were somehow blocking Kosh's link with the rest of
> the Vorlon group mind. Problem with this, is, why can't the Shadows block
> Lyta when she tried to stop the battlecrabs?
>
Because there were no shadows around at the time? Remember it's abducted
members of the younger races that are on board battlecrabs.
--
Rob R...@glester.demon.co.uk
`It is bad enough to know the past; it would be intolerable to know the
future' - W.S Maugham
Andrew Clover
and...@stardock.u-net.com (Andrew Wright) wrote:
[Things about Walkabout]
.
.
.
> A P5 going up against a BattleCrab, come on! Even Bester didn't dare
> focus on the ship in SoT.
Perhaps he doesn't know he can. He left before Garibaldi read from the
Summer Special Bumper Book of G'Quon.
If he knew, maybe he'd not have needed help from the B5 crew.
BCNU, AjC
Andy Beales
Mark Lawson <mla...@dmu.ac.uk> wrote:
>Paul Harper wrote:
>>
>> sa...@signman.demon.co.uk (Sarah Baker) said :
>>
>> >It was the period known only as Sun, 18 Aug 1996 20:55:02 -0700, and
>> >David Frazer <dfr...@netcomuk.co.uk> knew that the time was right to
>> >stand up and proclaim:
>> >
>> ># [Spoiler space for people who haven't seen `Walkabout']
** Time of the snipping **
>> Didn't a shadow vessel get right-up-close when Bester was onboard the
>> White Star ? One was frozen off at some considerable distance by
>> Lyta. Assuming Psi-ability follows the usual cube of the distance rule,
>> what P number does that give her ?
>Ah... but Bester didn't try to disable that one, it got close enough to
>smell a psi, then did a runner. I get the feeling that the ship in
>Walkabout would have done the same if it felt it was up against a real
>threat..
Maybe because hyperspace boosts telepathic ability , it probably
thought there was a psi corp convention on board and legged it
sharpish.
>I think she deserves a P45 from Psi Corps...
I somehow don't think she'd go to pick up the award ;-)
>Misterel.... Danananananananana.... BatKosh!
Does that mean Ivanova is Cat woman ?
*thinks of black outfit and whip*
*FAINT*
"Is there a non-stim using doctor in the group ?" 8-)
Andy Beales
----------------------------------------------------------------------
| And remember , being saved by a vorlon means |
| never having to say your're sorry |
| Andy Beales email to an...@bodman.demon.co.uk |
| Bodman on IRC Wolf 97 no. 67 Spoo number 700 |
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Richard Summers
>Timothy Hock Seng Tan wrote:
>.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
> ...Or maybe the Shadows were somehow blocking Kosh's link with the rest of
> the Vorlon group mind. Problem with this, is, why can't the Shadows block
> Lyta when she tried to stop the battlecrabs?
>
Battlecrabs eh.. Just image what they could do if you had them in your pants!
Richie
Chris
and...@stardock.u-net.com (Andrew Wright) writes:
>pa...@icihqgis.demon.co.uk (Paul Harper) wrote:
>>># [Spoiler space for people who haven't seen `Walkabout']
>>># [some more spoiler space]
>:::snip:::
>>
>>Didn't a shadow vessel get right-up-close when Bester was onboard the
>>White Star ? One was frozen off at some considerable distance by
>>Lyta. Assuming Psi-ability follows the usual cube of the distance rule,
>>what P number does that give her ?
>Huh? Could you explain your reasoning behind this one Harper?
Is he trying to say that Lyta managed to freeze a the shadow ship from
quite a distance, whereas one got right up close to the White Star while
Bester was on board ? Implying that she's 'harder' than Bester.
Of course, this doesn't hold. Bester didn't even know the shadow ship
was there (or at least he didn't say anything to that effect), whereas
Lyta was solidly concentrating on stunning her one.
Cheers,
Chris
David G. Bell
In article <esM37TAe...@newbrain.demon.co.uk>
I...@newbrain.demon.co.uk "Ian Robert Walker" writes:
> In article <3217E5...@netcomuk.co.uk>, David Frazer
> <dfr...@netcomuk.co.uk> writes
> >[Spoiler space for people who haven't seen `Walkabout']
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >[some more spoiler space]
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >I've just watched `Walkabout' and here's a theory about what the new Vorlon
> >said. If
> >`we are all Kosh', then perhaps it is a descriptive word or a title. For
> >instance, all
> >ambassadors may be Kosh, or perhaps it designates a rank or caste to which
> >ambassadors
> >belong. Perhaps `ambassador' is a very loose rendering of `Kosh', whose
> meaning
> >can be
> >understood only in the context of Vorlon society (about which no human knows
> >enough).
> >
> >Anyway, it's a theory.
>
> A good one thou. In the middle ages ambassadors were clerics, so Kosh
> could mean something like cleric or priest.
I'm not sure you've got that right, but priests were often the only
people around who could read and write, which is why the word "clerk"
comes from "cleric", and a clerk in Holy Orders is an old legal term for
priests (and possibly others in the Church).
So Kosh might be a caste-name, or it might be a skill, or maybe both at
the same time. Like the names Baker and Chandler.
--
David G. Bell -- Farmer, SF Fan, Filker, Furry, and Punslinger..
David G. Bell
In article <32188428...@news.demon.co.uk>
paul_...@ici.co.uk "Paul Harper" writes:
> sa...@signman.demon.co.uk (Sarah Baker) said :
>
> >It was the period known only as Sun, 18 Aug 1996 20:55:02 -0700, and
> >David Frazer <dfr...@netcomuk.co.uk> knew that the time was right to
> >stand up and proclaim:
> >
> ># [Spoiler space for people who haven't seen `Walkabout']
> >#
> >#
> >#
> >#
> >#
> >#
> >#
> >#
> >#
> >#
> ># [some more spoiler space]
> >#
> >#
> >#
> >#
> >#
> >#
> >#
> >#
> >#
> >#
> >#
> >#
> >#
> >#
> >#
> >#
> >#
> >#
> >#
> >#
> >#
> >#
> ># Another thought. Could Kosh have increased Lyta's telepathic strength?
> Since she's
> ># never confronted a Shadow before, she doesn't know how much energy she needs.> >
> >Lyta HAS to be stronger than a P5 now, I can't honestly believe that
> >she could have done what she did otherwise...but if she were simply a
> >P5 think what a P12 could do to a shadow vessel...
>
> Didn't a shadow vessel get right-up-close when Bester was onboard the
> White Star ? One was frozen off at some considerable distance by
> Lyta. Assuming Psi-ability follows the usual cube of the distance rule,
> what P number does that give her ?
Maybe it's a question of intent.
And that ship that encountered the White Star when Bester was on board
did turn and run -- at that time maybe it knew a lot more than Bester
about how dangerous a telepath could be, and the information that this
strange ship is carrying a very powerful telepath, and attacking Shadow
supply routes, could have been very important.
And that's maybe why Lyta couldn't stop the distress signal, and why
four shadow ships turned up. How many more were on the way?
Timothy Hock Seng Tan
Robin Lester (r...@glester.demon.co.uk) wrote:
: In article <3217E5...@netcomuk.co.uk>
: dfr...@netcomuk.co.uk "David Frazer" writes:
: > [Spoiler space for people who haven't seen `Walkabout']
: >
: >
: >
: >
: >
: >
: >
: >
: >
: >
: > [some more spoiler space]
: >
: >
: >
: >
: >
: >
: >
: >
: >
: >
: >
: >
: >
: >
: >
: >
: > I've just watched `Walkabout' and here's a theory about what
: > the new Vorlon said. If `we are all Kosh', then perhaps it is a
: > descriptive word or a title. For instance, all
: > ambassadors may be Kosh, or perhaps it designates a rank or caste
: > to which ambassadors belong.
If that's the case, perhaps Neranek is his real name, & Kosh is his
title. Cf Reverend Smith: Smith is his name, Reverend his title.
: > Perhaps `ambassador' is a very loose rendering of `Kosh', whose
: > meaning can be understood only in the context of Vorlon society
: > (about which no human knows enough).
: Here's my theory, we know Vorlons have pretty major telepathic powers.
: Thus they have evolved into a network of minds, all inside each others
: head and thus become one being. This would explain not only why they are
: so pissed off when on of them dies (it diminishes all of them) but
: how the rest of the Vorlon empire knew instantly when Kosh mk1 had died
: plus also why they are all Kosh. Kosh being the sum of the parts.
: OK, I know what your thinking, how come the new Vorlon ambasidor didn't
: know exectly what had happend at the time of death? Well if you consider
: how your computer works when it's part of a net. The other computers
: and the server don't know exectly what your PC is doing, all the time.
...Or maybe the Shadows were somehow blocking Kosh's link with the rest of
the Vorlon group mind. Problem with this, is, why can't the Shadows block
Lyta when she tried to stop the battlecrabs?
<snip>
B C'ing you! 8-)
TiTan
Robin Lester
> [Spoiler space for people who haven't seen `Walkabout']
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [some more spoiler space]
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> I've just watched `Walkabout' and here's a theory about what the new Vorlon
> said. If
> `we are all Kosh', then perhaps it is a descriptive word or a title. For
> instance, all
> ambassadors may be Kosh, or perhaps it designates a rank or caste to which
> ambassadors
> belong. Perhaps `ambassador' is a very loose rendering of `Kosh', whose
> meaning can be
> understood only in the context of Vorlon society (about which no human knows
> enough).
>
> Anyway, it's a theory.
>
Here's my theory, we know Vorlons have pretty major telepathic powers.
Thus they have evolved into a network of minds, all inside each others
head and thus become one being. This would explain not only why they are
so pissed off when on of them dies (it diminishes all of them) but
how the rest of the Vorlon empire knew instantly when Kosh mk1 had died
plus also why they are all Kosh. Kosh being the sum of the parts.
OK, I know what your thinking, how come the new Vorlon ambasidor didn't
know exectly what had happend at the time of death? Well if you consider
how your computer works when it's part of a net. The other computers
and the server don't know exectly what your PC is doing, all the time.
> Another thought. Could Kosh have increased Lyta's telepathic strength?
> Since she's
> never confronted a Shadow before, she doesn't know how much energy she needs.
>
I doubt it, she was struggling a lot to control the shadow ship while the
Minbari telepaths were having no trouble with a ship each, and from what
I've heard Psy Core has major telepathic training while Minbari telepaths
have no strict training program.
Raj Rijhwani
In article <DwE6x...@liverpool.ac.uk>
ferr...@liverpool.ac.uk "Mr P.M. Martins Ferreira" writes:
> David Frazer (dfr...@netcomuk.co.uk) wrote:
> : [Spoiler space for people who haven't seen `Walkabout']
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> : [some more spoiler space]
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> A theory I'm inclined to agree. But that still leaves one question in the
> open; old Kosh's name was "Kosh Naranek". Does this new Vorlon carry the
> "Naranek" bit as well? If "Kosh" is the title, or the caste, or whatever,
> then maybe "Naranek" was the true name...?
My thought exactly. And if "We are all Kosh", does that simply mean that
"Kosh" equiv "Ambassador", equiv "Vorlon", or even wider "citizen" or
"sentient". You notice Neither Kosh has ever referenced anyone directly.
Perhaps this is because in doing so it would give the game away. I half
expect to hear a phrase along the lines of "Greetings, Kosh Sheridan" or
even "Greetings, Kosh Valen" some time later.
The first age? A life of isolation on a single lump of rock.
Second age? A life amongst other alien races.
The third age may simply be acceptance into the higher order.
--
Raj Rijhwani (umtsb5/16) | This is the voice of the Mysterons...
r...@courtfld.demon.co.uk | ... We know that you can hear us Earthmen
sca...@fido.zetnet.co.uk | "Lieutenant Green: Launch all Angels!"
http://www.courtfld.demon.co.uk/raj/ (demon, and gods, willing...)
Raj Rijhwani
> Didn't a shadow vessel get right-up-close when Bester was onboard the
> White Star ? One was frozen off at some considerable distance by
> Lyta. Assuming Psi-ability follows the usual cube of the distance rule,
> what P number does that give her ?
Radius-squared. Dissipation being proportional to the surface area of
a sphere.
We never got any indication of proximity. We just got a shot of a Shadow
vessel rapidly decelerating then turning tail and running. With no other
reference points. This was immediately after Lennier had detected it on
instruments, so you can probably take it that it was some way off.
Raj Rijhwani
In article <32197aa2...@news.easynet.co.uk>
pet...@easynet.co.uk "Peter" writes:
> On Mon, 19 Aug 1996 18:22:12 +0000, and...@stardock.u-net.com (Andrew
> Wright) wrote:
>
> >In article <32188428...@news.demon.co.uk>,
> >pa...@icihqgis.demon.co.uk (Paul Harper) wrote:
> >
> I'm not Harper, but Paul's reasoning makes perfect sense to me. As
> something is propogated through a three dimensional space, its
> strength relative to the strength at the point of origin decreases as
> the cube of the distance from the origin. Thus, for example, if a
> lightbulb is illuminating a room, the intensity of the light at a
> point 5 metres away from the bulb is 1/125 (ie, 1/(5^3)) of the
> intensity 1 metre away. Paul is, quite reasonably, I think,
> hypothesising that telepathic power follows the same rule.
Except that it's r-squared not cubed. Consider the light bulb inside a
huge opaque balloon. (OK pointless exercise, but do it.) Inflate that
balloon to a radius of, say, 1 metre. All of the energy radiated by the
light bulb is reaching the inner surface of the balloon (discounting
negligible absorption by the inflating medium). Now, inflate the balloon
to 2 metres. The light bulb is still emitting the same radiation, but
the inner surface of the balloon has quadrupled (proportional to the
square of the increase in radius) so the energy reaching any unit of area
is now one quarter what it was at radius 1m. Called the "Inverse Square
Law".
Paul Harper
and...@stardock.u-net.com (Andrew Wright) said :
>:::snip:::
>>
>>Didn't a shadow vessel get right-up-close when Bester was onboard the
>>White Star ? One was frozen off at some considerable distance by
>>Lyta. Assuming Psi-ability follows the usual cube of the distance rule,
>>what P number does that give her ?
>>
>Huh? Could you explain your reasoning behind this one Harper?
This one Harper has a reason ?
Regards
Michael Barnes
Chris Yates, in the tradition of of Ne...@cube.demon.co.uk, wrote:
>In article <3217E5...@netcomuk.co.uk>, David Frazer
><dfr...@netcomuk.co.uk> writes
>>[Spoiler space for people who haven't seen `Walkabout']
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>[some more spoiler space]
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>Oh speaking of.. Did anyone in any of the three series of B5 ever
>mention that Kosh had this second name ?????? Can anyone remeber ?
>
>Human VCR's step forward ... - "Mine's a Jovian Sunspot" :)
Crab Nebula!
And now for a word.
Richard P. Grant
In article <cjh.840558113@cjh>, cjh@ (Chris) writes:
>
>>>># [Spoiler space for people who haven't seen `Walkabout']
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>>># [some more spoiler space]
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Lyta was solidly concentrating on stunning her one.
>
YM "Lyta was solidly stunning, and I lost concentration". HTH.
> Cheers,
>
> Chris
>
>
--
Richard P. Grant MA DPhil rpg...@molbiol.ox.ac.uk
Nuffield Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Oxford.
http://users.ox.ac.uk/~lady0266
"I'm not repressed anymore"
Mr P.M. Martins Ferreira
Michael Barnes (lite...@tcp.co.uk) wrote:
: >Oh speaking of.. Did anyone in any of the three series of B5 ever
: >mention that Kosh had this second name ?????? Can anyone remeber ?
If you mean "Naranek", the reporter in "And now for a Word" mentioned
it.
Pedro
N. J. Hollinghurst
In article <DwHpJ...@liverpool.ac.uk>,
But considering the Vorlons' native tongue is all <teetle>s and <tootle>s,
surely all "names" they provide are either borrowed/descriptive words
or are made up (for suitably inscrutable reasons, no doubt).
Nick
Andrew Wright
In article <32197b4e...@news.demon.co.uk>,Well, within the context of the question you raised, which Peter answered.
Andrew Wright
In article <32197aa2...@news.easynet.co.uk>,
pet...@easynet.co.uk (Peter) wrote:
:::snip and clean:::
The uk.media.tv.sf.babylon5 charter and FAQ
Can be obtained from
http://www.ps.ucl.ac.uk/~jmorley/B5-FAQ/B5-FAQ-INDEX.html
READ IT
Or DIE
And some
m
o
r
e
s
p
o
o
a
n
d
t
h
e
n
s
o
m
e
>
>I'm not Harper, but Paul's reasoning makes perfect sense to me. As
>something is propogated through a three dimensional space, its
>strength relative to the strength at the point of origin decreases as
>the cube of the distance from the origin. Thus, for example, if a
>lightbulb is illuminating a room, the intensity of the light at a
>point 5 metres away from the bulb is 1/125 (ie, 1/(5^3)) of the
>intensity 1 metre away. Paul is, quite reasonably, I think,
>hypothesising that telepathic power follows the same rule.
>
>(Ummm...is 'intensity' the right word? I forget - it's nigh on twenty
>years since I last studied any physics.)
OK, so this is an argument based on physics. OK, fine, now the reasoning
behind it has been explained, I follow it.
However, before the group goes into physics overload, can I just suggest
something. How do we know telepathy obeys physics? (OK, I know "You can'a
break the laws of physics captain") Seriously, this assumes that telepathy
propogates through space like light, or any other EM radiation. Do we have
any support for this?
>
:::snip:::
>
>(Is the P scale logarithmic, BTW?)
No idea. Someone mentioned that it also accounts for the degree of training
the teep has had, not just absolute 'strength'.
>
>The point at which I'm not sure that I agree with Paul is his
>statement that the shadow vessel got right up close to Bester in Ship
>of Tears - my recollection is that it, too, was frozen out at some
>distance. However, I might be mistaken - perhaps I ought to go and
>rewatch that episode.
>
The other complication was that Bester was in hyperspace, and he mentioned
that hyperspace increases / extends the range of a teep. See what I mean
about physics? We now have two bits of non-science floating around the
arguement.
So, to conclude, I am none the wiser really, but still quite happy. Teeps
have a range, but we don't know how to explain it.
Rose Harrison
Sarah Baker wrote:
>
> It was the period known only as Sun, 18 Aug 1996 20:55:02 -0700, and
> David Frazer <dfr...@netcomuk.co.uk> knew that the time was right to
> stand up and proclaim:
>
> #
> #
> #
> #
> #
> #
> #
> #
> #
> #
> #
> #
> #
> #
> #
> #
> #
> #
> #
> #
> #
> #
> #
> #
> #
> #
> #
> #
> #
> #
<snip>
>
> Lyta HAS to be stronger than a P5 now, I can't honestly believe that
> she could have done what she did otherwise...but if she were simply a
> P5 think what a P12 could do to a shadow vessel...
We don't know what the P rating of the Minbari telepaths was - could be
that they were more than P5's.
What about the Shadow vessel firing at the WS and missing when there was
only Ivanova on board? Did it miss on purpose or did Susan with her 'not
even P1' have something to do with it? I suspect she did since the
Shadows come across as the type of who fire first and then ask questions
(if they bother to ask questions that is) and then there was her escape
back to 'the path' when she was in the machine. So what P rating is
Susan, she was even trying to confuse the ship.
Rose
Martin Hardgrave
In article <AE410031...@stardock.u-net.com>, Andrew Wright
<and...@stardock.u-net.com> writes
>However, before the group goes into physics overload, can I just suggest
>something. How do we know telepathy obeys physics? (OK, I know "You can'a
>break the laws of physics captain") Seriously, this assumes that telepathy
>propogates through space like light, or any other EM radiation. Do we have
>any support for this?
No we don't. The Centauri Emperor collapsed on B5, and it didn't take
years for the Centauri telepaths back on Centauri Prime to realize this.
This seems to imply "instantaneous" communication (thus a violation of
the laws of physics).
--
Martin
York, UK
"From hell, Hull, and Halifax, good Lord deliver us!"
Ben Dooks
Rose Harrison (R.Har...@bilston.ac.uk) gabbled:
: <snip>
Yes they do, more like 'What do you want' sort of questions ;-)
The very probably reason that they didn't destroy it was to find
out about this new ship they hadn't seen before, but looked a bit
vorlonish so they'd better take a look at it just-in-case(tm)
-- Ben Dooks bjd...@york.ac.uk, http://www.york.ac.uk/~bjd101/
-- What use is your brain? It dosen't run Windows(tm) applications
Peter Chambers
In message <32197aa2...@news.easynet.co.uk> Peter wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Aug 1996 18:22:12 +0000, and...@stardock.u-net.com (Andrew
> Wright) wrote:
>
> >In article <32188428...@news.demon.co.uk>,
> >pa...@icihqgis.demon.co.uk (Paul Harper) wrote:
> >
> >>sa...@signman.demon.co.uk (Sarah Baker) said :
> >:::snip:::
> >>
> >>Didn't a shadow vessel get right-up-close when Bester was onboard the
> >>White Star ? One was frozen off at some considerable distance by
> >>Lyta. Assuming Psi-ability follows the usual cube of the distance rule,
> >>what P number does that give her ?
> >>
> >Huh? Could you explain your reasoning behind this one Harper?
>
> I'm not Harper, but Paul's reasoning makes perfect sense to me. As
> something is propogated through a three dimensional space, its
> strength relative to the strength at the point of origin decreases as
> the cube of the distance from the origin. Thus, for example, if a
> lightbulb is illuminating a room, the intensity of the light at a
> point 5 metres away from the bulb is 1/125 (ie, 1/(5^3)) of the
> intensity 1 metre away. Paul is, quite reasonably, I think,
> hypothesising that telepathic power follows the same rule.
>
> (Ummm...is 'intensity' the right word? I forget - it's nigh on twenty
> years since I last studied any physics.)
>
> What the distances involved are is difficult to say, but suppose that
> Bester froze one out at 1 kilometre whilst Alexander managed it at 2
> km, that would make Alexander four times as powerful a telepath as
> Bester. Hmmm.....
>
> (Is the P scale logarithmic, BTW?)
>
> The point at which I'm not sure that I agree with Paul is his
> statement that the shadow vessel got right up close to Bester in Ship
> of Tears - my recollection is that it, too, was frozen out at some
> distance. However, I might be mistaken - perhaps I ought to go and
> rewatch that episode.
1 Lightbulbs,etc. It is an "inverse square" law.
Simply put the *area* the light falls on grows with the square
of the distance. So intensity is *inverse square*.
2 We do not have any evidence that TP works by light or similar.
It is stated by Bester (in ST) that it works better in hyperspace.
Light works badly in hyperspace, so does radio (ADS).
3 Telepaths need a 'line of sight', supposedly. But Bester seemed
to sense the guards behind some crates in ST. Possibly the
telepath just needs to know that there is some target, or have
faith in a target. See Larry Niven's "Patchwork Girl" for a story
where a PSI scans a landscape by looking at a hologram of it taken
in real time by a satellite. A 'line of sight' n'est'pas?
Inverse cube and log(P) ratings are most unlikely, I am afraid.
--
============================================================================
"I can't decide whether they are clever men pretending to be stupid
or stupid men pretending to be clever."
"Try bone idle."
Inspector Hobson and Jill Swinburne, The Beidebecke Connection
Peter
>
>Except that it's r-squared not cubed.
Oh, yes - that sounds familiar. I stand corrected. (I said it was a
long time since I studied any physics, didn't I? Just shows that I've
forgotten what I once knew. Oh, dear. Senility sets in...)
Barry O'Neill
cjh@ (Chris) wrote:
>and...@stardock.u-net.com (Andrew Wright) writes:
>>pa...@icihqgis.demon.co.uk (Paul Harper) wrote:
>>>># [Spoiler space for people who haven't seen `Walkabout']
>>>># [some more spoiler space]
>>:::snip:::
>>>
>>>Didn't a shadow vessel get right-up-close when Bester was onboard the
>>>White Star ? One was frozen off at some considerable distance by
>>>Lyta. Assuming Psi-ability follows the usual cube of the distance rule,
>>>what P number does that give her ?
What makes you think telepathy follows physical rules? Think. Now
think harder. Can you quantify the difference?
>>Huh? Could you explain your reasoning behind this one Harper?
> Is he trying to say that Lyta managed to freeze a the shadow ship from
>quite a distance, whereas one got right up close to the White Star while
>Bester was on board ? Implying that she's 'harder' than Bester.
At the time, I'd say she was more dangerous than Bester. In SoT,
Bester was in relaxed mode, no line of sight etc, whereas when Lyta
stopped the Shadow ship in its tracks, she'd just discovered who was
responsible for Kosh's death. Works for me.
> Of course, this doesn't hold. Bester didn't even know the shadow ship
>was there (or at least he didn't say anything to that effect), whereas
>Lyta was solidly concentrating on stunning her one.
I think we can assume Lyta spent her time with the Vorlons more
productively than writing postcards home...
Barry
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Barry O'Neill | These views are my own and are
Senior Consultant | necessarily representative of
Professional Software Development | the views of my employer - me.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Crowley
In article <vkJj5GAv...@deira.demon.co.uk> Martin Hardgrave <Mar...@deira.demon.co.uk> writes:
> In article <AE410031...@stardock.u-net.com>, Andrew Wright
> <and...@stardock.u-net.com> writes
> >However, before the group goes into physics overload, can I just suggest
> >something. How do we know telepathy obeys physics? (OK, I know "You can'a
> >break the laws of physics captain") Seriously, this assumes that telepathy
> >propogates through space like light, or any other EM radiation. Do we have
> >any support for this?
>
> No we don't. The Centauri Emperor collapsed on B5, and it didn't take
> years for the Centauri telepaths back on Centauri Prime to realize this.
> This seems to imply "instantaneous" communication (thus a violation of
> the laws of physics).
This sort of SF has to have FTL communication, so you've just got to
ignore what you know about relativity and treat the Universe as a sort
of Newtonian thing, with absolute standards of simultaneity and
motion.
Mind you, they've still got a few mistakes in their physics. If
Sector 14 is three hours away in normal space, it's got to be right
next door, and it's hard to see how it could stay right next door if
Epsilon 3 is orbiting a star. Was B4 built orbiting Epsilon 3 too?
Was building B5 in the same place such a good idea?
--
__
\/ o\ Paul Crowley
/\__/ pcro...@csl.co.uk
Angus Marshall
Martin Hardgrave (Mar...@deira.demon.co.uk) wrote:
: In article <AE410031...@stardock.u-net.com>, Andrew Wright
: <and...@stardock.u-net.com> writes
: >However, before the group goes into physics overload, can I just suggest
: >something. How do we know telepathy obeys physics? (OK, I know "You can'a
: >break the laws of physics captain") Seriously, this assumes that telepathy
: >propogates through space like light, or any other EM radiation. Do we have
: >any support for this?
: No we don't. The Centauri Emperor collapsed on B5, and it didn't take
: years for the Centauri telepaths back on Centauri Prime to realize this.
: This seems to imply "instantaneous" communication (thus a violation of
: the laws of physics).
Heh. Young Pterrence Pratchett has an explanation for this - "Kingons".
Particles of royalty which instantaneously move from one seat of power
to another on the death of the incumbent.
(Experiment involving merely torturing princes to send messages over long
distances were discontinued)
Why should telepathy obey the laws of physics? They don't (AFAIK)
cover anything to do with thought processes yet (and if the B5
physicists had sussed out enough of the GUT to explain telepathy,
wouldn't there be some work on mechanical contrivances for non-teeps
going on? Shields and/or Teep-phones?)
_________ | Angus M. Marshall BSc FRSA, School of Informatics,
| | | University of Abertay Dundee, Bell St., Dundee
___ _|____=___ |_ ___ | DD1 1HG U.K. Vox: (+44) (1382) 308600
/ \(_) (_)/ \ | Fax: (+44) (1382) 308877
|`-'|o| _______ |o|`-'| | http://www.tay.ac.uk/mcsweb/staff/amm/
| |/| (_______) |\| | | "It wasn't a wrong answer. It was a right answer,
|___|--\_________/--|___| | ........................to a different question."
Ben Fell
You know Martin Hardgrave <Mar...@deira.demon.co.uk> has been on the
soapbox again when you read:
>In article <AE410031...@stardock.u-net.com>, Andrew Wright
><and...@stardock.u-net.com> writes
>>However, before the group goes into physics overload, can I just suggest
>>something. How do we know telepathy obeys physics? (OK, I know "You can'a
>>break the laws of physics captain") Seriously, this assumes that telepathy
>>propogates through space like light, or any other EM radiation. Do we have
>>any support for this?
>No we don't. The Centauri Emperor collapsed on B5, and it didn't take
>years for the Centauri telepaths back on Centauri Prime to realize this.
>This seems to imply "instantaneous" communication (thus a violation of
>the laws of physics).
They're only *laws* because *we* say so. Personally, I think a lot of
Physics is almost pure speculation. I mean, how much do we really
*know*? Very little, I'm sure. The human race and the planet it
inhabits are a hell of a lot less significant than we like to make
ourselves out to be.
Contentious, maybe (especially on a NG that seems to be stuffed to the
gill implants with scientists) but couldn't Newton and Einstein have
been wrong? Okay, they drew their conclusions from extensive
observation, but on a galactic scale, isn't their observation
incredibly limited?
*-*
ben....@bbc.co.uk - Spoo 1999
A personality is no substitute for a .sig
Stephen Bates
Martin Hardgrave <Mar...@deira.demon.co.uk> writes:
>In article <AE410031...@stardock.u-net.com>, Andrew Wright
><and...@stardock.u-net.com> writes
>>However, before the group goes into physics overload, can I just suggest
>>something. How do we know telepathy obeys physics? (OK, I know "You can'a
>>break the laws of physics captain") Seriously, this assumes that telepathy
>>propogates through space like light, or any other EM radiation. Do we have
>>any support for this?
>
>No we don't. The Centauri Emperor collapsed on B5, and it didn't take
>years for the Centauri telepaths back on Centauri Prime to realize this.
>This seems to imply "instantaneous" communication (thus a violation of
>the laws of physics).
Well, doesn't the whole jump-gate/hyperspace bit kind of go against
physics *as we know it today*? The same goes for communication in
Babylon 5. Sheridan could contact Earth and talk to someone there
in real time with hardly any delay at all.
Thus I'd say telepathy doesn't obey the *present* law of physics (which
is by no means complete and may or may not be somewhat "wrong").
Doesn't normal communication in B5 space use tachyon beams or something?
Maybe the same technique applies to telepathy communication?
In which case maybe telepathy uses tachyons? Or atleast some particle/wave
that can travel faster than light.
Steve.
--
>>> !DO NOT POST SPOILERS FOR EPISODES YET TO BE SEEN IN THE UK! <<<
> Posts about recently shown episodes should contain SPOILER space! <
>> For a umtsb5 FAQ, email faq-r...@arakeen.demon.co.uk or read <<
>>>> http://www.ps.ucl.ac.uk/~jmorley/B5-FAQ/B5-FAQ-INDEX.html <<<<
Richard P. Grant
In article <4vhfte$m...@morgana.netcom.net.uk>, bon...@netcomuk.co.uk (Barry O'Neill) writes:
> cjh@ (Chris) wrote:
>
>>and...@stardock.u-net.com (Andrew Wright) writes:
>
>>>pa...@icihqgis.demon.co.uk (Paul Harper) wrote:
>
>>>>># [Spoiler space for people who haven't seen `Walkabout']
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>>>># [some more spoiler space]
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Bester was in relaxed mode, no line of sight etc, whereas when Lyta
> stopped the Shadow ship in its tracks, she'd just discovered who was
> responsible for Kosh's death. Works for me.
Wow, you can stop Shadow ships?
Richard
(disappointed because he was slow getting K9 off the mark)
>
> I think we can assume Lyta spent her time with the Vorlons more
> productively than writing postcards home...
Fnar.
Stephen Cooper
s...@sv1.smb.man.ac.uk (Stephen Bates) writes:
>Steve.
>--
My own guess would be that somehow telepathy uses hyperspace to get
around the S.O.L problem. We gather from "Ship of Tears", that some
telepathic abilities are hightened in hyperspace, could this not be
due to the veil of normal space being removed and the telepath being
on home ground, so to speak. If this is the case, then telepathy is
quite capable of breaking the S.O.L barrier, by going via hyperspace.
This then begs the question, what is hyperspace. Given that ship don't
appear to need special engines to travel though hyperspace, only to
form their own jump points. My own guess would be that hyperspace is
a high energy dimension, with similar physical laws to normal space,
but of much smaller apparent size. Ships travel at local speeds in
hyperspace, no faster than they do in normal space, only when the ship
jumps back into normal space, the distance travelled is vastly greater.
Therefore any communication of telepathic signal able to be broadcast
and revieved in normal space, through hyperspace could still travel at
speeds no greater than the S.O.L, but in actuality the information
would have been communicated at speeds F.T.L. This still begs the
question of why no time lapse in communications to earth, but I put
this down to artistic licence, over internal consistancy, or if you
need a S.Trek answer, there could be higher energy dimensions, that
cannot be enterred by physical objects like ships, but which can be
used for communications and telepathy.
Stephen R Cooper, Oxford, E.U.
===============================================================================
The above article is the personal view of the poster and should not be
considered as an official comment from the JET Joint Undertaking
===============================================================================
Mark Carroll
In article <19960821....@hightown.demon.co.uk>,
Peter Chambers <pe...@hightown.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>In message <32197aa2...@news.easynet.co.uk> Peter wrote:
>> On Mon, 19 Aug 1996 18:22:12 +0000, and...@stardock.u-net.com (Andrew
>> Wright) wrote:
>> >In article <32188428...@news.demon.co.uk>,
>> >pa...@icihqgis.demon.co.uk (Paul Harper) wrote:
>> >>sa...@signman.demon.co.uk (Sarah Baker) said :
>> >>
>> >>>It was the period known only as Sun, 18 Aug 1996 20:55:02 -0700, and
>> >>>David Frazer <dfr...@netcomuk.co.uk> knew that the time was right to
>> >>>stand up and proclaim:
>> >>>
>> >>>#
>> >>>#
>> >>>#
>> >>>#
>> >>>#
>> >>>#
>> >>>#
>> >>>#
>> >>>#
>> >>>#
>> >>>#
>> >>>#
>> >>>#
>> >>>#
>> >>>#
>> >>>#
>> >>>#
>> >>>#
>> >>>#
>> >>>#
>> >>>#
>> >>>#
>> >>>#
>> >>>#
>> >>>#
>> >>>#
>> >>>#
>> >>>#
>> >>>#
>> >>>#
>> >>
>> >>Didn't a shadow vessel get right-up-close when Bester was onboard the
>> >>White Star ? One was frozen off at some considerable distance by
>> >>Lyta. Assuming Psi-ability follows the usual cube of the distance rule,
>> >>what P number does that give her ?
>> >>
>1 Lightbulbs,etc. It is an "inverse square" law.
> Simply put the *area* the light falls on grows with the square
> of the distance. So intensity is *inverse square*.
>3 Telepaths need a 'line of sight', supposedly. But Bester seemed
>Inverse cube and log(P) ratings are most unlikely, I am afraid.
Yes, I'd agree! I would have thought that telepaths might need line of
sight to focus in on a 'victim' and direct any telepathic skills at them.
If it worked like an inverse square law or something, you'd think that
they wouldn't need to be directing their skill because any 'emanations'
would probably be radiating out in a uniform spherical shell or whatever.
I'd have thought that the whole point of the line of sight thing was so
that they could direct whatever it is they might be directing as a
_directional_ beam - if it works like radiation at all, which I doubt. The
point about the Centauri telepaths learning of the Emperor's death
near-instantaneously renders that theory rather unlikely, after all.
-- Mark
Mike Hubbard
On 22 Aug 96 11:15:51 +0100, a...@tremas.tay.ac.uk (Angus Marshall)
wrote:
>Martin Hardgrave (Mar...@deira.demon.co.uk) wrote:
>: In article <AE410031...@stardock.u-net.com>, Andrew Wright
>: <and...@stardock.u-net.com> writes
>: >However, before the group goes into physics overload, can I just suggest
>: >something. How do we know telepathy obeys physics? (OK, I know "You can'a
>: >break the laws of physics captain") Seriously, this assumes that telepathy
>: >propogates through space like light, or any other EM radiation. Do we have
>: >any support for this?
>: No we don't. The Centauri Emperor collapsed on B5, and it didn't take
>: years for the Centauri telepaths back on Centauri Prime to realize this.
>: This seems to imply "instantaneous" communication (thus a violation of
>: the laws of physics).
>
>Heh. Young Pterrence Pratchett has an explanation for this - "Kingons".
>
>Particles of royalty which instantaneously move from one seat of power
>to another on the death of the incumbent.
>
>(Experiment involving merely torturing princes to send messages over long
>distances were discontinued)
>
>Why should telepathy obey the laws of physics? They don't (AFAIK)
>cover anything to do with thought processes yet (and if the B5
>physicists had sussed out enough of the GUT to explain telepathy,
>wouldn't there be some work on mechanical contrivances for non-teeps
>going on? Shields and/or Teep-phones?)
Wasn't Dust supposed to do that sort of thing?
I once read an old SF book (possibly by Heinlein) where starships
communicate with pairs of telepathic twins BECAUSE telepathy is
instantaneous and not a speed-of-light phenomenon.
You could argue that telepathy goes through hyperspace, and the laws of
this universe do not apply to it because the telepathy particles/waves
are not in it at the time.
--
<*> Mike Hubbard. Hulme Community Computing. 0161-226 5088
"Sans arm. Sans chin. Sans jelly. Sans everything."
Raj Rijhwani
In article <4vhfte$m...@morgana.netcom.net.uk>
bon...@netcomuk.co.uk "Barry O'Neill" writes:
> cjh@ (Chris) wrote:
>
> >and...@stardock.u-net.com (Andrew Wright) writes:
>
> >>pa...@icihqgis.demon.co.uk (Paul Harper) wrote:
>
> >>>># [Spoiler space for people who haven't seen `Walkabout']
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >>>># [some more spoiler space]
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >>:::snip:::
> >>>
> >>>Didn't a shadow vessel get right-up-close when Bester was onboard the
> >>>White Star ? One was frozen off at some considerable distance by
> >>>Lyta. Assuming Psi-ability follows the usual cube of the distance rule,
> >>>what P number does that give her ?
>
> What makes you think telepathy follows physical rules? Think. Now
> think harder. Can you quantify the difference?
The simple reason that the brain is a physical entity, and itself is
bound by those laws. It *is* possible to quantify the difference. The
energy consumption of the brain in in various states of activity has been
investigated, as has the resultant EM radiation (miniscule though it is).
On the other hand wee are talking about a fiction that plausibly allows
everyday breaching of those laws anyway.
Mark Carroll
In article <3218218b...@news.demon.co.uk>,
Sarah Baker <sa...@signman.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>It was the period known only as Sun, 18 Aug 1996 20:55:02 -0700, and
>David Frazer <dfr...@netcomuk.co.uk> knew that the time was right to
>stand up and proclaim:
>
>#
>#
>#
>#
>#
>#
>#
>#
>#
>#
>#
>#
>#
>#
>#
>#
>#
>#
>#
>#
>#
>#
>#
>#
>#
>#
>#
>#
>#
>#
># Another thought. Could Kosh have increased Lyta's telepathic strength? Since she's
># never confronted a Shadow before, she doesn't know how much energy she needs.
>
>Lyta HAS to be stronger than a P5 now, I can't honestly believe that
>she could have done what she did otherwise...but if she were simply a
>P5 think what a P12 could do to a shadow vessel...
It seems reasonable to me to suppose that, when quantifying someone's
telepathic abilities, assuming one degree of freedom might not be enough.
Lyta might still be a P5 but there might now be something qualitatively
different about her abilities... also, of course, we know little about
the coupling of a non-telepath to a Shadow ship: it may be child's play
for a more powerful telepath to disable a whole host of ships.
Of course, all this is rather speculative.
-- Mark
T.A.Wa...@student.lboro.ac.uk
In article <1996Aug22....@zippy.dct.ac.uk> a...@tremas.tay.ac.uk (Angus Marshall) writes:
>Martin Hardgrave (Mar...@deira.demon.co.uk) wrote:
>: In article <AE410031...@stardock.u-net.com>, Andrew Wright
>: <and...@stardock.u-net.com> writes
>: >However, before the group goes into physics overload, can I just suggest
>: >something. How do we know telepathy obeys physics? (OK, I know "You can'a
>: >break the laws of physics captain") Seriously, this assumes that telepathy
>: >propogates through space like light, or any other EM radiation. Do we have
>: >any support for this?
>: No we don't. The Centauri Emperor collapsed on B5, and it didn't take
>: years for the Centauri telepaths back on Centauri Prime to realize this.
>: This seems to imply "instantaneous" communication (thus a violation of
>: the laws of physics).
>
>Heh. Young Pterrence Pratchett has an explanation for this - "Kingons".
>
>Particles of royalty which instantaneously move from one seat of power
>to another on the death of the incumbent.
>
>(Experiment involving merely torturing princes to send messages over long
>distances were discontinued)
Let's just hope the Shadows don't catch on - if memory serves, it was
possible to stop a kingon by reacting it with its antiparticle, the
republicon - maybe the next cargo ship the Shadows take will have freezers
full of Home Guard and Free Mars members...
--
" You can get more with a kind word and a 2-by-4,
than you can with just a kind word"
Frankie Bligh
Mark Lawson <mla...@dmu.ac.uk> wrote:
>Paul Harper wrote:
>>
>> sa...@signman.demon.co.uk (Sarah Baker) said :
>>
>> >It was the period known only as Sun, 18 Aug 1996 20:55:02 -0700, and
>> >David Frazer <dfr...@netcomuk.co.uk> knew that the time was right to
>> >stand up and proclaim:
>> >
>> ># [Spoiler space for people who haven't seen `Walkabout']
snip otherwise freeagent wo'nt let me post!
>> Didn't a shadow vessel get right-up-close when Bester was onboard the
>> White Star ? One was frozen off at some considerable distance by
>> Lyta. Assuming Psi-ability follows the usual cube of the distance rule,
>> what P number does that give her ?
>Ah... but Bester didn't try to disable that one, it got close enough to
>smell a psi, then did a runner. I get the feeling that the ship in
>Walkabout would have done the same if it felt it was up against a real
>threat..
But Bester did'nt try to do anything active to destroy it either. Lyta
was actively projecting hostility towards it, which took quite a bit
of energy. How much energy would Bester have needed for the same
effect? Also what about the Minbari telepaths? presumably they come in
different categories too? in which case the one having the problems
may have been a slightly weaker one?
Another thought, can anyone remember if Ivanova has ever been on the
White Star when it has encountered Shadow ships? I can't remember, tho
I know she did'nt go to Ganymede, but did'nt she go on the raid in
MoH? This would suggest that she really is quite a weak telepath if
they did'nt detect her, but digressing further....Remember in VoA when
she was in the Great Machine, when she strayed from The Path, did'nt
she say about the Shadow presence "It knows my name". Maybe the Shads
did detect her on theWS in MoH and thats how they know her. If that is
the case, and she can learn how to use her Psi powers (she might trust
Lyta to train her, as she's not Corps) then she could be a valuable
asset to the AoL. I certainly hope so as she's my favourite character
and I hope all this speculation about her going bad is all wrong.
Frankie
-----------------------------------------
Frankie Bligh
Dept Biochemistry
Univ Nottingham
-------------------------------------------
Robin Lester
In article <4vipjh$f...@lyra.csx.cam.ac.uk>
ma...@chiark.chu.cam.ac.uk "Mark Carroll" writes:
> In article <19960821....@hightown.demon.co.uk>,
> Peter Chambers <pe...@hightown.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> >In message <32197aa2...@news.easynet.co.uk> Peter wrote:
> >> On Mon, 19 Aug 1996 18:22:12 +0000, and...@stardock.u-net.com (Andrew
> >> Wright) wrote:
> >> >In article <32188428...@news.demon.co.uk>,
> >> >pa...@icihqgis.demon.co.uk (Paul Harper) wrote:
> >> >>sa...@signman.demon.co.uk (Sarah Baker) said :
> >> >>
> >> >>>It was the period known only as Sun, 18 Aug 1996 20:55:02 -0700, and
> >> >>>David Frazer <dfr...@netcomuk.co.uk> knew that the time was right to
> >> >>>stand up and proclaim:
> >> >>>
> >> >>># [Spoiler space for people who haven't seen `Walkabout']
> >> >:::snip:::
> >> >>
> >> >>Didn't a shadow vessel get right-up-close when Bester was onboard the
> >> >>White Star ? One was frozen off at some considerable distance by
> >> >>Lyta. Assuming Psi-ability follows the usual cube of the distance rule,
> >> >>what P number does that give her ?
> >> >>
> >> >Huh? Could you explain your reasoning behind this one Harper?
> (snip)
> >1 Lightbulbs,etc. It is an "inverse square" law.
> > Simply put the *area* the light falls on grows with the square
> > of the distance. So intensity is *inverse square*.
> (snip)
> >3 Telepaths need a 'line of sight', supposedly. But Bester seemed
> (snip)
> >Inverse cube and log(P) ratings are most unlikely, I am afraid.
>
> Yes, I'd agree! I would have thought that telepaths might need line of
> sight to focus in on a 'victim' and direct any telepathic skills at them.
> If it worked like an inverse square law or something, you'd think that
> they wouldn't need to be directing their skill because any 'emanations'
> would probably be radiating out in a uniform spherical shell or whatever.
>
> I'd have thought that the whole point of the line of sight thing was so
> that they could direct whatever it is they might be directing as a
> _directional_ beam - if it works like radiation at all, which I doubt. The
> point about the Centauri telepaths learning of the Emperor's death
> near-instantaneously renders that theory rather unlikely, after all.
I've always though that brain waves work on the same principles as sound
and that the line of sight thing was just to focus on the source of the
brain waves so as not to get confused by other people's thoughts.
It's like the way a telepath will always check out the the acoustices
of a room before a deal - so that they will be able to get used
to the way the wave patterns will bounce around and get distorted.
Thus telepaths can block by putting up a wall of sound/thought
Knowing instantly of somones death in the case of Vorlons/Centauri
could be possible with this theory if you can accept how fast or far
brain waves travel. If they go fast and far through some medium such
as hyperspace it's quite possible that people fammiliar with one person's
particular pattern will be able to pick it up, or detect it's destruction.
This speed and saturation of brain patterns will also explain why Bester
couldn't scan Sherry in the start of SoT even though they were practicaly
alone. As Lyta said in MW `the only time a telepath doesn't here the voices
are when they are making love' (and thus are creating a block)
Following this theory though techically you should be able to listen to
anyone you're fammiliar with - no matter how far away they are.
However it can't be a directional beam thing otherwise Bester (in MW) would
not have been able to read Garibaldi and Sinclair in C&C talking about
cabin details while he was in the corridor outside.
--
Rob R...@glester.demon.co.uk
`It is bad enough to know the past; it would be intolerable to know the
future' - W.S Maugham
Raj Rijhwani
> (snip)
>
> Yes, I'd agree! I would have thought that telepaths might need line of
> sight to focus in on a 'victim' and direct any telepathic skills at them.
> If it worked like an inverse square law or something, you'd think that
> they wouldn't need to be directing their skill because any 'emanations'
> would probably be radiating out in a uniform spherical shell or whatever.
Well in the real world, no matter how tightly focussed a radio beam still
follows inverse square, because the focuse isn't perfect. There's always
some divergence. The formula still applies, just that it's the base area
of a cone rather than a sphere. Beam focussing simply ensures that the
the enrgy used is efficiently directed.
> I'd have thought that the whole point of the line of sight thing was so
> that they could direct whatever it is they might be directing as a
> _directional_ beam - if it works like radiation at all, which I doubt. The
> point about the Centauri telepaths learning of the Emperor's death
> near-instantaneously renders that theory rather unlikely, after all.
Separate issue altogether. That's super light speed transmission.
(Hang on - it's all purely fictional. Why are we speculating? It
can do anything JMS wants it to...)
Mike Hubbard
On 22 Aug 1996 23:13:53 GMT, ma...@chiark.chu.cam.ac.uk (Mark Carroll)
wrote:
(Many, many snippings. Subject - line of sight needed for telepathy.)
>Yes, I'd agree! I would have thought that telepaths might need line of
>sight to focus in on a 'victim' and direct any telepathic skills at them.
>If it worked like an inverse square law or something, you'd think that
>they wouldn't need to be directing their skill because any 'emanations'
>would probably be radiating out in a uniform spherical shell or whatever.
>
>I'd have thought that the whole point of the line of sight thing was so
>that they could direct whatever it is they might be directing as a
>_directional_ beam - if it works like radiation at all, which I doubt. The
>point about the Centauri telepaths learning of the Emperor's death
>near-instantaneously renders that theory rather unlikely, after all.
I think I might have a solution. You need line-of-sight to ESTABLISH a
link, but it continues to exist from then on. This explains the
Emperor's retinue, who keep in contact permanently (in shifts perhaps,
and never do anything else telepathically) and also the business of Lyta
facing the wrong way in the White Star (on another thread). It doesn't
explain how Lyta could scan the Centauri in Passing Through Gethsemene
through the bag on his head, but presumably if you can scan a creature
in a shadow ship, somone in a sack is no problem.
I. T. Manager
In article <321c6bdb...@news.u-net.net>,
mhub...@hulmecc.u-net.com (Mike Hubbard) wrote:
>
>I once read an old SF book (possibly by Heinlein) where starships
>communicate with pairs of telepathic twins BECAUSE telepathy is
>instantaneous and not a speed-of-light phenomenon.
>
R.A. Heinlein "Time for the stars"
--
'ric
Paul Crowley
In article <4vhe4l$n...@bbcnews.rd.bbc.co.uk> ben....@bbc.co.uk (Ben Fell) writes:
> They're only *laws* because *we* say so. Personally, I think a lot of
> Physics is almost pure speculation. I mean, how much do we really
> *know*? Very little, I'm sure. The human race and the planet it
> inhabits are a hell of a lot less significant than we like to make
> ourselves out to be.
>
> Contentious, maybe (especially on a NG that seems to be stuffed to the
> gill implants with scientists) but couldn't Newton and Einstein have
> been wrong? Okay, they drew their conclusions from extensive
> observation, but on a galactic scale, isn't their observation
> incredibly limited?
Well, Newton *was* wrong; you can only see the error when you get to
the sort of scale that Einstein was on about. Einstein could well be
wrong too. However, any new theory will have to account for why
Einstein's theory does such a bloody good job of predicting reality
about so many things; in other words, it will have to say pretty much
the same things as Einstein when we get to the scale of the things
we've measured, which include things on the galactic and even
intergalactic scale.
If you know something about the paradoxes that result from relativity
when you allow FTL communication, you'll see you can't come up with a
theory that allows it without paradox unless you specify absolute
standards of simultaneity and, worse, motion (so there is such a thing
as "not moving" relative to some Universal Standard of Motion rather
than any particular thing). This breaks the Principle of Relativity,
which is a symmetry most people have quite a bit of faith in.
If you want a shorter comment: "you could be wrong, though" doesn't
really advance science much. But if I was writing space opera, I'd
break the P of R like a shot - it's that or a several decade round
trip time for conversations with Earth...
At least B5 uses Newtonian mechanics. Most space battles happen using
Aristotelian mechanics, where you grind to a halt if you turn the
engines off. It's especially sad when Newtonian looks so much
prettier.
Mark Carroll
In article <840760...@glester.demon.co.uk>,
>> Yes, I'd agree! I would have thought that telepaths might need line of
>> sight to focus in on a 'victim' and direct any telepathic skills at them.
>> If it worked like an inverse square law or something, you'd think that
>> they wouldn't need to be directing their skill because any 'emanations'
>> would probably be radiating out in a uniform spherical shell or whatever.
>alone. As Lyta said in MW `the only time a telepath doesn't here the voices
>are when they are making love' (and thus are creating a block)
You mean Talia?
>However it can't be a directional beam thing otherwise Bester (in MW) would
>not have been able to read Garibaldi and Sinclair in C&C talking about
>cabin details while he was in the corridor outside.
Maybe he habitually focussed on rooms he was passing; he was pretty close
by. (-:
To be honest, I think your theory is more credible than the one I was
considering - it's at least closer to what many people believe about how
telepathy works in real life (if they believe in it at all, that is).
-- Mark
Mark Carroll
In article <840774...@courtfld.demon.co.uk>,
>> >> >>
>> (snip)
>>
>> Yes, I'd agree! I would have thought that telepaths might need line of
>> sight to focus in on a 'victim' and direct any telepathic skills at them.
>> If it worked like an inverse square law or something, you'd think that
>> they wouldn't need to be directing their skill because any 'emanations'
>> would probably be radiating out in a uniform spherical shell or whatever.
>
>follows inverse square, because the focuse isn't perfect. There's always
>some divergence. The formula still applies, just that it's the base area
>of a cone rather than a sphere. Beam focussing simply ensures that the
>the enrgy used is efficiently directed.
That's quite true - I did simplify things rather - I just wanted to make
the point that, taking the radio beam analogy, you can make the beam many
times more powerful at some distant point through good focussing than if
you just broadcast it with no direction.
>> I'd have thought that the whole point of the line of sight thing was so
>> that they could direct whatever it is they might be directing as a
>> _directional_ beam - if it works like radiation at all, which I doubt. The
>> point about the Centauri telepaths learning of the Emperor's death
>> near-instantaneously renders that theory rather unlikely, after all.
>
>Separate issue altogether. That's super light speed transmission.
I mention it _because_ it is FTL, by a long way. Unless telepathy somehow
uses hyperspace or something, I wonder if talking about it using an
electromagnetic radiation model might be completely inappropriate,
probably invalidating my 'directing beam' hypothesis..
>(Hang on - it's all purely fictional. Why are we speculating? It
>can do anything JMS wants it to...)
It's nice to think it might be real, though. (-:
-- Mark
Andrew Wright
In article <840746...@courtfld.demon.co.uk>,
Raj Rijhwani <r...@courtfld.demon.co.uk> wrote:
:::snip and clean:::
The uk.media.tv.sf.babylon5 charter and FAQ
Can be obtained from
http://www.ps.ucl.ac.uk/~jmorley/B5-FAQ/B5-FAQ-INDEX.html
READ IT
Or DIE
And some
m
o
r
e
s
p
o
o
a
n
d
t
h
e
n
s
o
m
e
>
>The simple reason that the brain is a physical entity, and itself is
>bound by those laws. It *is* possible to quantify the difference. The
>energy consumption of the brain in in various states of activity has been
>investigated, as has the resultant EM radiation (miniscule though it is).
I agree with our thinking on this. However, the fact is we still know very
little about how the brain works, other than generalities. If you assume
that the human brain is just some sort of organic computer, then yes, it
should be bound by the 'laws' of physics and biology. However, jms has
shown that he is prepaired to ignore the 'hard' sciences and mess about
with more philosophical concepts like souls, and indeed, telepathy. Hence,
I tend to think, if you try to apply physics too hard on this one, you may
lead yourself down the garden path. Anything goes on this one, lets watch
and see how jms establishes *his* ground rules.
>
>On the other hand wee are talking about a fiction that plausibly allows
>everyday breaching of those laws anyway.
This is of course the other option. Then again, jms seems to stick to his
rules once he has set them out. Hyperspace seems to work the same way, week
in, week out, there are no sudden technological advances (that suddenly
save the story in a Trek like fashion).
Andrew
--
Andrew Wright
A.Wr...@roehampton.ac.uk <*> and...@stardock.u-net.com
"Channel 4 was our last, best hope..."
Barry O'Neill
rpg...@molbiol.ox.ac.uk (Richard P. Grant) wrote:
>In article <4vhfte$m...@morgana.netcom.net.uk>, bon...@netcomuk.co.uk (Barry O'Neill) writes:
>> cjh@ (Chris) wrote:
>>
>>>and...@stardock.u-net.com (Andrew Wright) writes:
>>
>>>>pa...@icihqgis.demon.co.uk (Paul Harper) wrote:
>>
>>>>>># [Spoiler space for people who haven't seen `Walkabout']
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>>># [some more spoiler space]
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> At the time, I'd say she was more dangerous than Bester. In SoT,
>> Bester was in relaxed mode, no line of sight etc, whereas when Lyta
>> stopped the Shadow ship in its tracks, she'd just discovered who was
>> responsible for Kosh's death. Works for me.
>Wow, you can stop Shadow ships?
Sure. But we need you mundanes to punch the fire button...
Barry
---
Barry O'Neill
Raj Rijhwani <r...@courtfld.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>In article <4vhfte$m...@morgana.netcom.net.uk>
> bon...@netcomuk.co.uk "Barry O'Neill" writes:
>> cjh@ (Chris) wrote:
>>
>> >and...@stardock.u-net.com (Andrew Wright) writes:
>>
>> >>pa...@icihqgis.demon.co.uk (Paul Harper) wrote:
>>
>> >>>># [Spoiler space for people who haven't seen `Walkabout']
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >>>># [some more spoiler space]
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >>:::snip:::
>> >>>
>> >>>Didn't a shadow vessel get right-up-close when Bester was onboard the
>> >>>White Star ? One was frozen off at some considerable distance by
>> >>>Lyta. Assuming Psi-ability follows the usual cube of the distance rule,
>> >>>what P number does that give her ?
>>
>> What makes you think telepathy follows physical rules? Think. Now
>> think harder. Can you quantify the difference?
>The simple reason that the brain is a physical entity, and itself is
>bound by those laws. It *is* possible to quantify the difference. The
>energy consumption of the brain in in various states of activity has been
>investigated, as has the resultant EM radiation (miniscule though it is).
>On the other hand wee are talking about a fiction that plausibly allows
>everyday breaching of those laws anyway.
We are? You mean B5 isn't real..?
Oh bugger.
Barry
Michael J. Foy
Hi All
I'll forgo the spoo'er space, cos there are no real spoo'er here
Imagine the situation
VORLON Academy Reunion 2258
Kosh enters
Kosh :Hey anyone seen Kosh?
Kosh : Yer, he's over there with Kosh.
Kosh : No not that Kosh.
Kosh : Oh you mean KOSH!
Kosh : Yer
KOSH : You wanted me?
Kosh : How about that money I left you?
KOSH : It wasn't me, it was Kosh
Kosh : You always say that.
KOSH : No really it wasn't me, just ask Kosh.
Kosh : I just give up
KOSH : whispers to kosh (Works every time....)
Miock
Simon Pleasants
Martin Hardgrave <Mar...@deira.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>In article <AE410031...@stardock.u-net.com>, Andrew Wright
><and...@stardock.u-net.com> writes
>>However, before the group goes into physics overload, can I just suggest
>>something. How do we know telepathy obeys physics? (OK, I know "You can'a
>>break the laws of physics captain") Seriously, this assumes that telepathy
>>propogates through space like light, or any other EM radiation. Do we have
>>any support for this?
>
>No we don't. The Centauri Emperor collapsed on B5, and it didn't take
>years for the Centauri telepaths back on Centauri Prime to realize this.
>This seems to imply "instantaneous" communication (thus a violation of
>the laws of physics).
From what we know of actual telepathy, the only thing we can be
certain of is that there is nothing we can be certain of. For the
most part telepathy is about being able to read people's thought and
brain patterns, presumably do to the alpha and beta activity of the
brain. As such you could even share a person's dreams whilst they are
in REM sleep, the sleep period where dreaming occurs (and where beta
activity is also present). But given the variety of forms in which
such "esp" powers have appeared (telepathy, telekinesis etc) it is
clear that we have a long way to go to understand them better.
Incidently there is evidence (so I read a while back but have never
found the source again) that our species did once have an element of
telepathic powers (and some evidence for it in other animals as well)
that we have lost, largely through lack of need and therefore use.
Currently telepathy and other such powers are complete taboo in the
world of psychology and until this is changed no serious researcher
would go near doing any research into it. If they did, no matter how
credible they were before they began they would be laughed out of town
by the psychological community when they were finished. As a result
there are no researchers, no grants and no progress. A bit strange
when you consider that almost all of us at one time or another have
experienced feelings of varying nature along the lines of esps.
--
Simon Pleasants (pl...@ndirect.co.uk) : Here, There & Everywhere
Homepage is at http://www.ndirect.co.uk/~dreampages/index.htm
"I live amongst the creatures of the night, I haven't got the
will to try and fight against a new tomorrow" - Self Control -
Simon Gray
In article <4vfa9o$q...@lyra.csx.cam.ac.uk>
n...@eng.cam.ac.uk "N. J. Hollinghurst" writes:
~ But considering the Vorlons' native tongue is all <teetle>s and <tootle>s,
~ surely all "names" they provide are either borrowed/descriptive words
~ or are made up (for suitably inscrutable reasons, no doubt).
& human names aren't ?????
--
[]=- Simon Gray, in Birmingham, EU <*>
// _-=__-=
_/|] ) ___ \ Now Netscape 2 Enhanced:
(_) \___/_(___)_| http://www.mahayana.demon.co.uk/
@ @
Simon Gray
In article <321B29...@bilston.ac.uk>
R.Har...@bilston.ac.uk "Rose Harrison" writes:
~ > Lyta HAS to be stronger than a P5 now, I can't honestly believe that
~ > she could have done what she did otherwise...but if she were simply a
~ > P5 think what a P12 could do to a shadow vessel...
~
~ We don't know what the P rating of the Minbari telepaths was - could be
~ that they were more than P5's.
~
~ What about the Shadow vessel firing at the WS and missing when there was
~ only Ivanova on board? Did it miss on purpose or did Susan with her 'not
~ even P1' have something to do with it? I suspect she did since the
~ Shadows come across as the type of who fire first and then ask questions
~ (if they bother to ask questions that is) and then there was her escape
~ back to 'the path' when she was in the machine. So what P rating is
~ Susan, she was even trying to confuse the ship.
What's to say that the ability to confuse a Shadow ship has any relation
to the sliding psi capability scale as measured by the Psi Corps anyway ?
Ian Robert Walker
In article <4vipjh$f...@lyra.csx.cam.ac.uk>, Mark Carroll
<ma...@chiark.chu.cam.ac.uk> writes
>In article <19960821....@hightown.demon.co.uk>,
>Peter Chambers <pe...@hightown.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>In message <32197aa2...@news.easynet.co.uk> Peter wrote:
>>> On Mon, 19 Aug 1996 18:22:12 +0000, and...@stardock.u-net.com (Andrew
>>> Wright) wrote:
>>> >In article <32188428...@news.demon.co.uk>,
>>> >pa...@icihqgis.demon.co.uk (Paul Harper) wrote:
>>> >>sa...@signman.demon.co.uk (Sarah Baker) said :
>>> >>
>>> >>>It was the period known only as Sun, 18 Aug 1996 20:55:02 -0700, and
>>> >>>David Frazer <dfr...@netcomuk.co.uk> knew that the time was right to
>>> >>>stand up and proclaim:
>>> >>>
>>> >>>#
>>> >>>#
>>> >>>#
>>> >>>#
>>> >>>#
>>> >>>#
>>> >>>#
>>> >>>#
>>> >>>#
>>> >>>#
>>> >>>#
>>> >>>#
>>> >>>#
>>> >>>#
>>> >>>#
>>> >>>#
>>> >>>#
>>> >>>#
>>> >>>#
>>> >>>#
>>> >>>#
>>> >>>#
>>> >>>#
>>> >>>#
>>> >>>#
>>> >>>#
>>> >>>#
>>> >>>#
>>> >>>#
>>> >>>#
>>> >>
>>> >>Didn't a shadow vessel get right-up-close when Bester was onboard the
>>> >>White Star ? One was frozen off at some considerable distance by
>>> >>Lyta. Assuming Psi-ability follows the usual cube of the distance rule,
>>> >>what P number does that give her ?
>>> >>
>(snip)
>>1 Lightbulbs,etc. It is an "inverse square" law.
>> Simply put the *area* the light falls on grows with the square
>> of the distance. So intensity is *inverse square*.
>(snip)
>>3 Telepaths need a 'line of sight', supposedly. But Bester seemed
>(snip)
>>Inverse cube and log(P) ratings are most unlikely, I am afraid.
>
>sight to focus in on a 'victim' and direct any telepathic skills at them.
>If it worked like an inverse square law or something, you'd think that
>they wouldn't need to be directing their skill because any 'emanations'
>would probably be radiating out in a uniform spherical shell or whatever.
It does not have to be omnidirectional to fall of with an inverse
square. Yagi antennas are directional with an angle of a few degrees
(depends how many elements they have), but since it is not zero degrees
the fall off within that beam is inv. sq.
>
>I'd have thought that the whole point of the line of sight thing was so
>that they could direct whatever it is they might be directing as a
>_directional_ beam - if it works like radiation at all, which I doubt. The
>point about the Centauri telepaths learning of the Emperor's death
>near-instantaneously renders that theory rather unlikely, after all.
>
>-- Mark
--
Ian G8ILZ
I have an IQ of 6 million, | How will it end? | Mostly
or was it 6? | In fire. | harmless
N. J. Hollinghurst
In article <840977...@star-one.org.uk>,
Simon Gray <si...@star-one.org.uk> wrote:
>In article <4vfa9o$q...@lyra.csx.cam.ac.uk>
> n...@eng.cam.ac.uk "N. J. Hollinghurst" writes:
>
>~ But considering the Vorlons' native tongue is all <teetle>s and <tootle>s,
>~ surely all "names" they provide are either borrowed/descriptive words
>~ or are made up (for suitably inscrutable reasons, no doubt).
>
>& human names aren't ?????
>
Yeah, but the transliteration process makes it a bit more deliberate.
Or to put that another way, if "Kosh" meant anything in Vorlon, it should
have sounded like it meant something in English. Or maybe Kosh II / JMS
is just being deliberately obscure ("He's a Vorlon, all right").
Nick
Peter Chambers
In message <840774...@courtfld.demon.co.uk> Raj Rijhwani wrote:
> (Hang on - it's all purely fictional. Why are we speculating? It
> can do anything JMS wants it to...)
Why rain ? Why sky ? Why trees ?
We speculate because it is fun.
We *can* speculate because the Great Maker believes in consistency
and pre-figuring.
So the fiction that Psi-Corp keep saying "we need a line of sight"
and the fiction that the Centauri Imperial telepaths wander 80 ly
and do not even complain is significant.
Some of the recent posts are interesting on this subject. Like
the one about training and belief. Are human Psis over-trained?
Do they persist in bad practice which older races have long since
discarded?
Are there any Psis with the Rangers? Is their training better?
--
============================================================================
"I can't decide whether they are clever men pretending to be stupid
or stupid men pretending to be clever."
"Try bone idle."
Inspector Hobson and Jill Swinburne, The Beidebecke Connection
David Lythgoe
In article <vkJj5GAv...@deira.demon.co.uk>, Martin Hardgrave <Mar...@deira.demon.co.uk> says:
>
>In article <AE410031...@stardock.u-net.com>, Andrew Wright
><and...@stardock.u-net.com> writes
>>However, before the group goes into physics overload, can I just suggest
>>something. How do we know telepathy obeys physics? (OK, I know "You can'a
>>break the laws of physics captain") Seriously, this assumes that telepathy
>>propogates through space like light, or any other EM radiation. Do we have
>>any support for this?
>
>No we don't. The Centauri Emperor collapsed on B5, and it didn't take
>years for the Centauri telepaths back on Centauri Prime to realize this.
>This seems to imply "instantaneous" communication (thus a violation of
>the laws of physics).
>Martin
>York, UK
>"From hell, Hull, and Halifax, good Lord deliver us!"
Never heard of the Einstein-Rosen paraodx then
David Lythgoe
d.ly...@iop.bpmf.ac.uk
Phil Boswell
In article <AE44C9CB...@194.72.198.57>, Michael J. Foy
Kosh: Oi, Kosh! Is this your hedgehog?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Codd and Date Ltd., 1 Broadway Court, CHESHAM, Bucks HP5 1EG |
Tel: (01494) 791355 Fax: (01494) 791373 |
Email: ph...@codd-date.win-uk.net |
Paul Crowley
In article <1996Aug27.1...@ucl.ac.uk> d.ly...@ucl.ac.uk (David Lythgoe) writes:
> >No we don't. The Centauri Emperor collapsed on B5, and it didn't take
> >years for the Centauri telepaths back on Centauri Prime to realize this.
> >This seems to imply "instantaneous" communication (thus a violation of
> >the laws of physics).
> Never heard of the Einstein-Rosen paraodx then
No. Pardon my ignorance. I've heard of Einstein-Rosen bridges, but I
don't see how you plan to get around the fact that if you have FTL
travel then Special Relativity allows you to build time paradoxes out
of the lack of absolute simultaneity. Perhaps you could explain.
Or is it something to do with the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR)
paradox? (possible sp.) The effect that refers to has been
demonstrated in the Aspect experiment to everyone's satisfaction, but
no-one's been able to make a paradox out of it since it seems you
can't use these "instantaneous" effects for useful communication.
Despite what Brian Josephson has to say on the subject.
Richard P. Grant
In article <20...@codd-date.win-uk.net>, ph...@codd-date.win-uk.net (Phil Boswell) writes:
> In article <AE44C9CB...@194.72.198.57>, Michael J. Foy
> (mi...@mikefoy.enterprise.net) writes:
>>Hi All
>>I'll forgo the spoo'er space, cos there are no real spoo'er here
>>Imagine the situation
>>VORLON Academy Reunion 2258
>>Kosh enters
>>Kosh :Hey anyone seen Kosh?
>>Kosh : Yer, he's over there with Kosh.
>>Kosh : No not that Kosh.
>>Kosh : Oh you mean KOSH!
>>Kosh : Yer
>>KOSH : You wanted me?
>>Kosh : How about that money I left you?
>>KOSH : It wasn't me, it was Kosh
>>Kosh : You always say that.
>>KOSH : No really it wasn't me, just ask Kosh.
>>Kosh : I just give up
>>KOSH : whispers to kosh (Works every time....)
>
> Kosh: Oi, Kosh! Is this your hedgehog?
Kosh : NO! <activates 'Slice'n'Dice' tm>
KOSH : Green!
Kosh : Purple!
So there you go. Who the shadows really are.
The moral of the story is - never go to a reunion.
Raj Rijhwani
In article <AE44C9CB...@194.72.198.57>
mi...@mikefoy.enterprise.net "Michael J. Foy" writes:
> Hi All
>
> I'll forgo the spoo'er space, cos there are no real spoo'er here
>
> Imagine the situation
>
> VORLON Academy Reunion 2258
>
> Kosh enters
Kosh1: Right. I'd just like to introduce the our new Council member:
Michael Baldwin - Kosh. Michael Baldwin - Kosh. Michael
Baldwin - Kosh.
Kosh1: Is your name not "Kosh"?
MB: Err, no. Actually it's "Micahel".
Kosh2: Mind if we call you "Kosh", just to keep it clear?
(with due credit to Monty Python).
Peter Chambers
In message <1996Aug27.1...@ucl.ac.uk> David Lythgoe wrote:
> In article <vkJj5GAv...@deira.demon.co.uk>, Martin Hardgrave <Mar...@deira.demon.co.uk> says:
> >
> >In article <AE410031...@stardock.u-net.com>, Andrew Wright
> ><and...@stardock.u-net.com> writes
> >>However, before the group goes into physics overload, can I just suggest
> >>something. How do we know telepathy obeys physics? (OK, I know "You can'a
> >>break the laws of physics captain") Seriously, this assumes that telepathy
> >>propogates through space like light, or any other EM radiation. Do we have
> >>any support for this?
> >
> >No we don't. The Centauri Emperor collapsed on B5, and it didn't take
> >years for the Centauri telepaths back on Centauri Prime to realize this.
> >This seems to imply "instantaneous" communication (thus a violation of
> >the laws of physics).
>
> Never heard of the Einstein-Rosen paraodx then
Yup. But it's a paradox. Which makes it hard to think about,
let alone spell.
Also you should not be able to send useful information that way.
Likewise using Bell's theorem. Good for balancing the books
in polarization experiments - bad for videoconferencing.
What you do is:
1. Nominate one(1) Great Maker.
2. He says "My universe has the following physics changes/laws."
3. umtsb5 argue forever about what can happen that is consistent
within those laws.
The problem is that some of the posters (you know who you are!)
know much more physics than JMS. So we have to accept tachyons
as he uses them (don't look, another tachyon thread might emerge).
The telepathy argument is more interesting. I think that it might be
important in the story just how telepathy works. This 'line-o-sight'
might be like a 30-limit, can be exceeded in emergency or with proper
authorisation.
Did Susan and the Great Machine use telepathy to find the Walkers?
Can a sufficiently powerful TP reach any mind, "all life", in the cosmos?
If the Shadows are 'off the path' will TP work with them directly?
Is there any physical range limit *at all* to TP?
Phil Pinel
Phil Boswell wrote:
> Kosh: Oi, Kosh! Is this your hedgehog?
Any more scurrilous roumours about the hedgehog and I'll be taking this
up with my solicitors, the well known firm of Kosh, Kosh, Kosh and Kosh.
--
Phil Pinel, Software Designer | How dull it is to pause, to make an end
TeamVISION Video Conferencing | To rust unburnish'd, not to shine in use
Fujitsu ICL, Bracknell, UK | "Ulysses" - Alfred Lord Tennyson
Personal WWW Page: http://www.geocities.com/Vienna/1659
TeamVISION: http://www.iclnpbg.co.uk/tmvision/tmvision.htm
The views expressed above are mine alone and not those of Fujitsu ICL
Chris Hutton
Some Spoiler Space before I comment:
Useful Information about spoilers:
Anything about Episodes not yet seen in the UK is
NOT ALLOWED!
If its only been seen in the past few weeks then..
LOTS of blank lines (~50 or more) to protect those areas
which suffer from a delayed broadcasting itinery.
Try reading the FAQ. available from:
http://www.ps.ucl.ac.uk/~jmorley/B5-FAQ/B5-FAQ-INDEX.html
Or, alternatively send a blank email to the following address,
a complete text version will be emailed to you within a few days.
Chris "I've only seen the broadcast episodes!" Hutton
This has been a spoiler break:
Deep and meaningful discussion may now resume..
cjh@ (Chris) wrote:
> Of course, this doesn't hold. Bester didn't even know the shadow ship
>was there (or at least he didn't say anything to that effect), whereas
>Lyta was solidly concentrating on stunning her one.
It may be however that Bester was pretending not to notice it, to
reinforce the lie that P12's like him are still limited by the
line of sight problem.
Personally I don't believe it.
Chris
from
Christopher M. Hutton Electronics Technician
Aston Business School hutt...@aston.ac.uk
Service Unit
Aston University UK +44 (0)121 359 3611 Ex 4733
Raj Rijhwani
In article <19960828....@hightown.demon.co.uk>
pe...@hightown.demon.co.uk "Peter Chambers" writes:
> The problem is that some of the posters (you know who you are!)
> know much more physics than JMS. So we have to accept tachyons
> as he uses them (don't look, another tachyon thread might emerge).
It probably already did three weeks hence.
Salt
In article <4vbju7$q...@lucy.swin.edu.au>, 083...@bud.swin.edu.au says...
>: > [Spoiler space for people who haven't seen `Walkabout']
>: >
>: >
>: >
>: >
>: >
>: >
>: >
>: >
>: >
>: >
>: > [some more spoiler space]
>: >
>: >
>: >
>: >
>: >
>: >
>: >
>: >
>: >
>: >
>: >
>: >
>: >
>: >
>: >
>: >
<major snip>
>
>: Here's my theory, we know Vorlons have pretty major telepathic powers.
>: Thus they have evolved into a network of minds, all inside each others
>: head and thus become one being. This would explain not only why they are
>: so pissed off when on of them dies (it diminishes all of them) but
>: how the rest of the Vorlon empire knew instantly when Kosh mk1 had died
>: plus also why they are all Kosh. Kosh being the sum of the parts.
>: OK, I know what your thinking, how come the new Vorlon ambasidor didn't
>: know exectly what had happend at the time of death? Well if you consider
>: how your computer works when it's part of a net. The other computers
>: and the server don't know exectly what your PC is doing, all the time.
>
Not having seen Walkabout and not being able to catch the first of this thread
I still have a question. (I haven't seen it addressed elsewhere).
If the Vorlon telepathy capability is so fantastic then there encounter/battle
with the Shadows (that resulted in Kosh's unwellness) should have been as
lopsided as the Shadows encounters with the Narn and B5 non-alligned. They
(Vorlon) appeared to have the advantage but I seem to recall the Vorlon ships
paid for the victory. I seem to be missing something.
Robin Lester
Interesting point, we know that the Vorlons are major teeps anyway through
Dust to Dust, I&E, ect, ect. Thus a theory on the battle, well, a few:
1) There were only one or two vorlons at the battle with the main bulk
of the fleet on remote/telepathic control/auto pilot. One or two ain't
enough to stun all the ships. (this remote control theory is backed up
by the fact that a few vorlon ships get destroyed, while later in the
series the Vorlons say that it has been a long time since a Vorlon
died (in reference to Kosh))
2) Different races have different telepathic strengths. We know that _only_
Minbari teeps can block a Psy Cop. Vorlons just ain't that good at jamming.
3) Vorlons can't fly their own ships + control the other remote ships
+ jam shadows all at the same time.
4) Vorlons have signed a treaty that says they won't jam them, if the
shadows don't do somthing equaly nasty. Vis a kind of Geneva convention?
5) Like the Shadows, Vorlons are using lesser races to control their ships
--
Rob R...@glester.demon.co.uk
`It is bad enough to know the past; it would be intolerable to know the
future' - W.S Maugham
Andy Beales
Phil Pinel <p...@oasis.icl.co.uk> wrote:
>Phil Boswell wrote:
>> Kosh: Oi, Kosh! Is this your hedgehog?
>Any more scurrilous roumours about the hedgehog and I'll be taking this
>up with my solicitors, the well known firm of Kosh, Kosh, Kosh and Kosh.
Ah , so they're all Kosh , are they ? ;-)
Andy Beales
----------------------------------------------------------------------
| And remember , being saved by a vorlon means |
| never having to say your're sorry |
| Andy Beales email to an...@bodman.demon.co.uk |
| Bodman on IRC Wolf 97 no. 67 Spoo number 700 |
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Mark Sinclair
In message <841431...@glester.demon.co.uk> Robin Lester wrote:
> In article <506o9b$f...@hammer.msfc.nasa.gov> mric...@hiwaay.net "Salt" writes:
>
> > In article <4vbju7$q...@lucy.swin.edu.au>, 083...@bud.swin.edu.au says...
> >
> > >: > [Spoiler space for people who haven't seen `Walkabout']
> > >: >
> > >: >
> > >: >
> > >: >
> > >: >
> > >: >
> > >: >
> > >: >
> > >: >
> > >: >
> > >: > [some more spoiler space]
> > >: >
> > >: >
> > >: >
> > >: >
> > >: >
> > >: >
> > >: >
> > >: >
> > >: >
> > >: >
> > >: >
> > >: >
> > >: >
> > >: >
> > >: >
> > >: >
> > <major snip>
> > >
> Interesting point, we know that the Vorlons are major teeps anyway through
> Dust to Dust, I&E, ect, ect. Thus a theory on the battle, well, a few:
>
> 1) There were only one or two vorlons at the battle with the main bulk
> of the fleet on remote/telepathic control/auto pilot. One or two ain't
> enough to stun all the ships. (this remote control theory is backed up
> by the fact that a few vorlon ships get destroyed, while later in the
> series the Vorlons say that it has been a long time since a Vorlon
> died (in reference to Kosh))
>
All the little fighters were probably remote controlled or independant
in some way (much like the shadow fighters), but I do think there were
at least 8 or 9 actual Vorlons present at the battle, one or more in
the big ship, and maybe eight in ships similar to Kosh's (including
the red one). They won without losses simply because they easily
outnumbered the shadows, much the same reason why the Shadows had
always one in battles up to this point.
> 2) Different races have different telepathic strengths. We know that _only_
> Minbari teeps can block a Psy Cop. Vorlons just ain't that good at jamming.
>
That is not true, any telepath could do it, the reason they used
Mimbari was because they were available.
> 3) Vorlons can't fly their own ships + control the other remote ships
> + jam shadows all at the same time.
>
Possible.
> 4) Vorlons have signed a treaty that says they won't jam them, if the
> shadows don't do somthing equaly nasty. Vis a kind of Geneva convention?
>
I very much doubt this.
> 5) Like the Shadows, Vorlons are using lesser races to control their ships
>
I think this is unlikely.
6) The Vorlons just can't do it, why else has the war lasted so long?
But they have been developing the younger races into telepaths to
use in their fight against the Shadows. Bear in mind that Kosh has
only telepathically communicated with one person, Sheridan, who he
has 'always been with', AKAIK no-one else.
It is quite possible that the younger races are more highly evolved
than the older ones, so the Shadows want to wipe them out, and the
Vorlons want to control them.
--
Mark Sinclair
Ian Vincent
Robin Lester (r...@glester.demon.co.uk) wrote:
: In article <506o9b$f...@hammer.msfc.nasa.gov> mric...@hiwaay.net "Salt" writes:
:
: > In article <4vbju7$q...@lucy.swin.edu.au>, 083...@bud.swin.edu.au says...
: >
: > >: > [Spoiler space for people who haven't seen `Walkabout']
: > >: >
: > >: >
: > >: >
: > >: >
: > >: >
: > >: >
: > >: >
: > >: >
: > >: >
: > >: >
: > >: > [some more spoiler space]
: > >: >
: > >: >
: > >: >
: > >: >
: > >: >
: > >: >
: > >: >
: > >: >
: > >: >
: > >: >
: > >: >
: > >: >
: > >: >
: > >: >
: > >: >
: > >: >
: > <major snip>
: 5) Like the Shadows, Vorlons are using lesser races to control their ships
Not bad suggestion IMHO. We know that ships have disappeared in Vorlon space
and the only two human's that have returned have been either VERY old and
been kept "on ice" or now has perfect medical statistics. This could
indicate that all of these "missing" people, no matter how long ago they
went missing, are being kept at roughly the same age in exchange for service
for the Vorlons.
--
############################################################################
I I I
I Ian "Vinny" Vincent <i...@binny.demon.co.uk> I Say NO to the ID card!!! I
I Accessing the Internet on an AMIGA I I
I http://www.binny.demon.co.uk/homepage.html I I
I I I
############################################################################
Robin Lester
In article <19960831....@rovanion.demon.co.uk>
ma...@rovanion.demon.co.uk "Mark Sinclair" writes:
> In message <841431...@glester.demon.co.uk> Robin Lester wrote:
>
> > In article <506o9b$f...@hammer.msfc.nasa.gov> mric...@hiwaay.net "Salt"
> writes:
> >
> > > In article <4vbju7$q...@lucy.swin.edu.au>, 083...@bud.swin.edu.au says...
> > >
> > > >: > [Spoiler space for people who haven't seen `Walkabout']
[Clean up]
[some more spoiler space]
> > > >: >
> > > <major snip>
> > > >
> > Interesting point, we know that the Vorlons are major teeps anyway through
> > Dust to Dust, I&E, ect, ect. Thus a theory on the battle, well, a few:
> >
> > 1) There were only one or two vorlons at the battle with the main bulk
> > of the fleet on remote/telepathic control/auto pilot. One or two ain't
> > enough to stun all the ships. (this remote control theory is backed up
> > by the fact that a few vorlon ships get destroyed, while later in the
> > series the Vorlons say that it has been a long time since a Vorlon
> > died (in reference to Kosh))
> >
> All the little fighters were probably remote controlled or independant
> in some way (much like the shadow fighters), but I do think there were
> at least 8 or 9 actual Vorlons present at the battle, one or more in
> the big ship, and maybe eight in ships similar to Kosh's (including
> the red one). They won without losses simply because they easily
Did they win without losses? I remember reading in a different thread
that a few of the vorlon ships dissapeard on that radar thing. Can anyone
confirm this?
> outnumbered the shadows, much the same reason why the Shadows had
> always one in battles up to this point.
>
> > 2) Different races have different telepathic strengths. We know that _only_
> > Minbari teeps can block a Psy Cop. Vorlons just ain't that good at jamming.
> >
> That is not true, any telepath could do it, the reason they used
> Mimbari was because they were available.
Sorry, I thought Ivannova or somone said that only Minbari had the blocking
power, but then I may have dreamt it, in which case your probably correct.
> > 3) Vorlons can't fly their own ships + control the other remote ships
> > + jam shadows all at the same time.
> >
> Possible.
>
> > 4) Vorlons have signed a treaty that says they won't jam them, if the
> > shadows don't do somthing equaly nasty. Vis a kind of Geneve convention?
> >
> I very much doubt this.
>
> > 5) Like the Shadows, Vorlons are using lesser races to control their ships
> >
> I think this is unlikely.
>
> 6) The Vorlons just can't do it, why else has the war lasted so long?
But the Minbari can do it and they were in the war.
> But they have been developing the younger races into telepaths to
> use in their fight against the Shadows.
Possibly, but I can't see any evidence of this. As far as we've seen
Vorlons ain't too keen on getting into contact with other races.
Besides, why didn't Kosh tell them about the power of teeps at the
start of the war, then teep anti-Shadow training camps could be set up.
> Bear in mind that Kosh has
> only telepathically communicated with one person, Sheridan, who he
> has 'always been with', AKAIK no-one else.
What about G'Kar in Dust to Dust or Lyta Alexander? Why did'n Londo
see anything when Kosh rescued Sheriden?
> It is quite possible that the younger races are more highly evolved
> than the older ones, so the Shadows want to wipe them out, and the
> Vorlons want to control them.
--
John M Ward
First, Phil Boswell wrote:
Kosh: Oi, Kosh! Is this your hedgehog?
Then Phil Pinel replied:
Any more scurrilous roumours about the hedgehog and I'll be taking
this up with my solicitors, the well known firm of Kosh, Kosh, Kosh
and Kosh.
Finally Andy Beales responded:
Ah , so they're all Kosh , are they ? ;-)
My turn now:
Well, Vorlons would be ideal for legal work, as they'd be able to
create the most cryptic documents. They'd also be the only ones able
to understand them.
Take the case of my neighbour's complaint about my admittedly somewhat
noisy outdoor home improvements (Lanch vs. Ward). The case for the
defence might have gone something like:
"The pebble-dashing has already started. It is too late for the
Lanches to vote."
--
John Michael Ward (a.k.a. J. Michael Ward)
--------------------------- <*> ------------------------------
"Only one human captain has survived battle with the Minbari
fleet. He stands behind me. You are in front of me. If you
value your lives, be somewhere else." (Delenn, Severed Dreams)
Mark Sinclair
In message <841534...@glester.demon.co.uk> Robin Lester wrote:
> In article <19960831....@rovanion.demon.co.uk>
> ma...@rovanion.demon.co.uk "Mark Sinclair" writes:
>
> > In message <841431...@glester.demon.co.uk> Robin Lester wrote:
> >
> > > In article <506o9b$f...@hammer.msfc.nasa.gov> mric...@hiwaay.net "Salt"
> > writes:
> > >
> > > > In article <4vbju7$q...@lucy.swin.edu.au>, 083...@bud.swin.edu.au says...
> > > >
> > > > >: > [Spoiler space for people who haven't seen `Walkabout']
>
> [Clean up]
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [some more spoiler space]
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > All the little fighters were probably remote controlled or independant
> > in some way (much like the shadow fighters), but I do think there were
> > at least 8 or 9 actual Vorlons present at the battle, one or more in
> > the big ship, and maybe eight in ships similar to Kosh's (including
> > the red one). They won without losses simply because they easily
>
> Did they win without losses? I remember reading in a different thread
> that a few of the vorlon ships dissapeard on that radar thing. Can anyone
> confirm this?
>
They probably lost a number of fighters, but none of the big ships,
but I can't check at the moment because I've loaned out my tape
with I&E on it.
> > outnumbered the shadows, much the same reason why the Shadows had
> > always one in battles up to this point.
> >
> > 6) The Vorlons just can't do it, why else has the war lasted so long?
>
> But the Minbari can do it and they were in the war.
But they didn't know they could, or the records didn't survive
telling them what to do. And they only fought in the last war.
The war between the Shadows and the Vorlons has been going on
for much longer.
>
> > But they have been developing the younger races into telepaths to
> > use in their fight against the Shadows.
>
> Possibly, but I can't see any evidence of this. As far as we've seen
> Vorlons ain't too keen on getting into contact with other races.
Besides from the fact that virtually every race recognises them as
Angels you mean. The Vorlons have been interfering big time in the
early developement of most of the younger races.
> Besides, why didn't Kosh tell them about the power of teeps at the
> start of the war, then teep anti-Shadow training camps could be set up.
>
That's a fair point. Either the Vorlons are being far too
secretive, or they didn't know that it could be done.
> > Bear in mind that Kosh has
> > only telepathically communicated with one person, Sheridan, who he
> > has 'always been with', AKAIK no-one else.
>
> What about G'Kar in Dust to Dust or Lyta Alexander? Why did'n Londo
> see anything when Kosh rescued Sheriden?
>
Oops, selective memory strikes again! He only communicates to G'Kar
whilst he is dreaming, possibly important, and I don't think he
does telepathically communicate with Lyta, to me it looked like
he 'possessed' her. The special effect of Kosh coming out of Lyta
was identical to the one used when the creature picked up from
where B4 disappeared came out of Sheridan in the 2nd season.
> > It is quite possible that the younger races are more highly evolved
> > than the older ones, so the Shadows want to wipe them out, and the
> > Vorlons want to control them.
>
--
Mark Sinclair
Andrew Clover
Robin Lester <r...@glester.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> 2) Different races have different telepathic strengths. We know that
> _only_ Minbari teeps can block a Psy Cop. Vorlons just ain't that good
> at jamming.
Nah, the underground railroad teeps did too, in series two.
I think it's more a case of strength and the number of beings there.
The Vorlons do seem to have *different* mind-related abilities to other
races, though.
> 4) Vorlons have signed a treaty that says they won't jam them, if the
> shadows don't do somthing equaly nasty. Vis a kind of Geneva convention?
I'm convinced that the Vorlons and the Shadows have, or had, some sort of
arrangement. Kosh was killed only when the Vorlons attacked the Shadows, and
he *knew* it was going to happen.
BCNU, AjC
Morgan
In article <322569...@oasis.icl.co.uk>
p...@oasis.icl.co.uk "Phil Pinel" writes:
> Phil Boswell wrote:
> > Kosh: Oi, Kosh! Is this your hedgehog?
>
> Any more scurrilous roumours about the hedgehog and I'll be taking this
> up with my solicitors, the well known firm of Kosh, Kosh, Kosh and Kosh.
>
Shouldn't that be Kosh, Kosh, Kosh, Kosh & Son?
--
Morgan
"Nunc demum intellego," dixit Winnie ille Pu. "Stultus et
delusus fui," dixit "et ursus sine ullo cerebro sum."
Stephie
> > 2) Different races have different telepathic strengths. We know that
> > _only_ Minbari teeps can block a Psy Cop. Vorlons just ain't that good
> > at jamming.
>
> Nah, the underground railroad teeps did too, in series two.
>
> I think it's more a case of strength and the number of beings there.
<snip>
Also one suspects it might be difficult to find a human telepath willing
to help block a Psi Cop? If they're Psi Corps they would probably get in
big trouble with the Corps; if they're *not* Psi Corps the last thing they
want is to be in a Psi Cop's line of sight, as they are presumably on the
run!
Stephie
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sing tirraloo, sing tirralay,
The Wuggly Ump lives far away.
Raj Rijhwani
In article <841623...@sidhen.demon.co.uk>
Mor...@sidhen.demon.co.uk "Morgan" writes:
> In article <322569...@oasis.icl.co.uk>
> p...@oasis.icl.co.uk "Phil Pinel" writes:
>
> > Phil Boswell wrote:
> > > Kosh: Oi, Kosh! Is this your hedgehog?
> >
> > Any more scurrilous roumours about the hedgehog and I'll be taking this
> > up with my solicitors, the well known firm of Kosh, Kosh, Kosh and Kosh.
> >
>
>
> Shouldn't that be Kosh, Kosh, Kosh, Kosh & Son?
Kosh, Kosh, Kosh, Kosh in sun.
Morgan
In article <841631...@courtfld.demon.co.uk>
r...@courtfld.demon.co.uk "Raj Rijhwani" writes:
> In article <841623...@sidhen.demon.co.uk>
> Mor...@sidhen.demon.co.uk "Morgan" writes:
>
> > In article <322569...@oasis.icl.co.uk>
> > p...@oasis.icl.co.uk "Phil Pinel" writes:
> >
> > > Phil Boswell wrote:
> > > > Kosh: Oi, Kosh! Is this your hedgehog?
> > >
> > > Any more scurrilous roumours about the hedgehog and I'll be taking this
> > > up with my solicitors, the well known firm of Kosh, Kosh, Kosh and Kosh.
> > >
> >
> >
> > Shouldn't that be Kosh, Kosh, Kosh, Kosh & Son?
>
> Kosh, Kosh, Kosh, Kosh in sun.
urggghhhhhh......that will take *days* to recover from!
Phil Pinel
Morgan wrote:
>
> In article <322569...@oasis.icl.co.uk>
> p...@oasis.icl.co.uk "Phil Pinel" writes:
>
> > Phil Boswell wrote:
> > > Kosh: Oi, Kosh! Is this your hedgehog?
> >
> > Any more scurrilous roumours about the hedgehog and I'll be taking this
> > up with my solicitors, the well known firm of Kosh, Kosh, Kosh and Kosh.
> >
>
> Shouldn't that be Kosh, Kosh, Kosh, Kosh & Son?
Son???
If the Vorlons have "always been here", this must make father/son
relationships (and hence their genealogy) a real b*gg*r! Why do we
never see Mrs Kosh? Is she always kept out of sight? Perhaps the
shadows are in fact suffragettes fighting the male chavanism of the
Vorlons?
Perhaps I need another drink?
Mike Hubbard
On Mon, 02 Sep 96 00:11:04 GMT, Morgan <Mor...@sidhen.demon.co.uk>
wrote:
>In article <322569...@oasis.icl.co.uk>
> p...@oasis.icl.co.uk "Phil Pinel" writes:
>
>> Phil Boswell wrote:
>> > Kosh: Oi, Kosh! Is this your hedgehog?
>>
>> Any more scurrilous roumours about the hedgehog and I'll be taking this
>> up with my solicitors, the well known firm of Kosh, Kosh, Kosh and Kosh.
>>
>
>
>Shouldn't that be Kosh, Kosh, Kosh, Kosh & Son?
Vorlon version of old joke:
Client: Can I speak to Mr Kosh, please?
Vorlon: Death. Completion. Becoming.
Client: Well can I speak to Mr Kosh, please?
Vorlon: Age. Gardening. Retirement.
Client: Well in that case can I speak to Mr Kosh, please?
Vorlon: Sustenance. The fulcrum of the day. Return is at the hour of
gargling.
Client: Well can I speak to Mr Kosh, please?
Vorlon: The request has already been granted. The time of speaking is
ended.
--
<*> Mike Hubbard. Hulme Community Computing. 0161-226 5088
"Sans arm. Sans chin. Sans jelly. Sans everything."
Mark Lawson
Mike Hubbard wrote:
>
> On Mon, 02 Sep 96 00:11:04 GMT, Morgan <Mor...@sidhen.demon.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
> >In article <322569...@oasis.icl.co.uk>
> > p...@oasis.icl.co.uk "Phil Pinel" writes:
> >
> >> Phil Boswell wrote:
> >> > Kosh: Oi, Kosh! Is this your hedgehog?
> >>
> >> Any more scurrilous roumours about the hedgehog and I'll be taking this
> >> up with my solicitors, the well known firm of Kosh, Kosh, Kosh and Kosh.
> >>
> >
> >
> >Shouldn't that be Kosh, Kosh, Kosh, Kosh & Son?
>
> Vorlon version of old joke:
>
> Client: Can I speak to Mr Kosh, please?
> Vorlon: Death. Completion. Becoming.
> Client: Well can I speak to Mr Kosh, please?
> Vorlon: Age. Gardening. Retirement.
> Client: Well in that case can I speak to Mr Kosh, please?
> Vorlon: Sustenance. The fulcrum of the day. Return is at the hour of
> gargling.
> Client: Well can I speak to Mr Kosh, please?
> Vorlon: The request has already been granted. The time of speaking is
> ended.
Client: No it hasn't.
Vorlon: You mean you wanted arguments? Oh. Along the corridor, last on
the left.
Misterel...
Ian Vincent
Andrew Wright (and...@stardock.u-net.com) wrote:
: In article <n068...@mail.zynet.co.uk>,
: john...@mail.zynet.co.uk (John M Ward) wrote:
:
: :::snip to:::
: >
: >Well, Vorlons would be ideal for legal work,
:
: No they wouldn't, to prone to saying
:
: <whosh, tinkle, burb> YES <boom, rumble, hiss>
:
: And no lawer would give such a straight answer. Still, you wouldn't know
: what the question was, and he would probably charge for the <whosh, tinkle>
: bit.
<burble, plink> OBJECTION <whistle, tweet>
--
############################################################################
I I I
I Ian "Vinny" Vincent <i...@binny.demon.co.uk> I Meaningful .sig comment I
I Accessing the Internet on an AMIGA I currently out of order. I
I http://www.binny.demon.co.uk/homepage.html I Please try again later! I
I I I
############################################################################
Andy Beales
Phil Pinel <p...@oasis.icl.co.uk> wrote:
>Morgan wrote:
>>
>> In article <322569...@oasis.icl.co.uk>
>> p...@oasis.icl.co.uk "Phil Pinel" writes:
>>
>> > Phil Boswell wrote:
>> > > Kosh: Oi, Kosh! Is this your hedgehog?
>> >
>> > Any more scurrilous roumours about the hedgehog and I'll be taking this
>> > up with my solicitors, the well known firm of Kosh, Kosh, Kosh and Kosh.
>> >
>>
>> Shouldn't that be Kosh, Kosh, Kosh, Kosh & Son?
>Son???
>If the Vorlons have "always been here", this must make father/son
>relationships (and hence their genealogy) a real b*gg*r! Why do we
>never see Mrs Kosh? Is she always kept out of sight? Perhaps the
>shadows are in fact suffragettes fighting the male chavanism of the
>Vorlons?
>Perhaps I need another drink?
*whirr pop tinkle* We are all Mrs Kosh *fizz*
And mine's an orange Hooch.
Phil Pinel
Andy Beales wrote:
> And mine's an orange Hooch.
1st age of mankind: orange hooch
2nd age of mankind: something actually drinkable
3rd age of mankind: real ale
*duh*
Andrew Wright wrote:
Its witnesses that you have to worry about!
:Judge: The defendant states he was not at the scene of the crime.
Call the first witness.
(Vorlon enters)
:Judge The defendant says he wasnt at the scene of the crime
Is that true?
:Vorlon: He's always been there.
aaaaaaaa!!!!
rob...@babblings.org.uk
While talking to Mr Garibaldi, Londo overheard Phil Pinel
<p...@oasis.icl.co.uk> saying the following:
> Andy Beales wrote:
> > And mine's an orange Hooch.
>
> 1st age of mankind: orange hooch
> 2nd age of mankind: something actually drinkable
> 3rd age of mankind: real ale
1st age - lemon hooch
2nd age - orange hooch
3rd stage guild navigator - oops thats dune
3rd age - blackcurrent hooch :-)
robbie
--
rob...@babblings.org.uk
want the umtsb5 FAQ by mail
send mail to
f...@babblings.org.uk with 'send FAQ' in the subject
John M Ward
and...@stardock.u-net.com (Andrew Wright) wrote:
> In article <n068...@mail.zynet.co.uk>, john...@mail.zynet.co.uk
> (John M Ward) wrote:
>>> :snip to:::
>> Well, Vorlons would be ideal for legal work,
> No they wouldn't, to prone to saying
> <whosh, tinkle, burb> YES <boom, rumble, hiss>
I prefer Kosh's occasional "Perhaps.." for legal work :)
> And no lawer would give such a straight answer. Still, you wouldn't know
> what the question was, and he would probably charge for the <whosh,
> tinkle> bit.
Of course, making them /very/ expensive, so that only rich celebrities
could afford to hire them. That'd do wonders for their image in the
legal profession.
>> as they'd be able to create the most cryptic documents. They'd also be
>> the only ones able to understand them.
> Ah, now you are getting close to the truth...
But not too near, otherwise there would be little contention left for
the lawyers to argue over (and charge for so doing).
--
John Michael Ward
------------------------------ <*> --------------------------------
"Only one human captain has survived battle with the Minbari fleet.
He stands behind me. You are in front of me. If you value your
lives, be somewhere else!" (Babylon 5: Delenn, "Severed Dreams")
Ian Vincent
rob...@babblings.org.uk wrote:
: While talking to Mr Garibaldi, Londo overheard Phil Pinel
: <p...@oasis.icl.co.uk> saying the following:
: > Andy Beales wrote:
: > > And mine's an orange Hooch.
: >
: > 1st age of mankind: orange hooch
: > 2nd age of mankind: something actually drinkable
: > 3rd age of mankind: real ale
: nah
:
: 1st age - lemon hooch
: 2nd age - orange hooch
: 3rd stage guild navigator - oops thats dune
: 3rd age - blackcurrent hooch :-)
1st age - lemon hooch
2nd age - blackcurrent hooch
3rd age - Thickhead
eek!
--
****************************************************************************
* * *
* Ian Vincent <i...@binny.demon.co.uk> * No pleasures in life are *
* Accessing the Internet on an AMIGA * worth exchanging for a few *
* http://www.binny.demon.co.uk/homepage.html * more years in a nursing *
* 'batlh Daqawlu'taH and space that bear * home in Weston Super Mare. *
* * *
****************************************************************************
Mark Evans
Paul Crowley (pcro...@csl.co.uk) wrote:
: In article <vkJj5GAv...@deira.demon.co.uk> Martin Hardgrave <Mar...@deira.demon.co.uk> writes:
: > In article <AE410031...@stardock.u-net.com>, Andrew Wright
: > <and...@stardock.u-net.com> writes
: > >However, before the group goes into physics overload, can I just suggest
: > >something. How do we know telepathy obeys physics? (OK, I know "You can'a
: > >break the laws of physics captain") Seriously, this assumes that telepathy
: > >propogates through space like light, or any other EM radiation. Do we have
: > >any support for this?
: >
: > No we don't. The Centauri Emperor collapsed on B5, and it didn't take
: > years for the Centauri telepaths back on Centauri Prime to realize this.
: > This seems to imply "instantaneous" communication (thus a violation of
: > the laws of physics).
:
: This sort of SF has to have FTL communication, so you've just got to
: ignore what you know about relativity and treat the Universe as a sort
: of Newtonian thing, with absolute standards of simultaneity and
: motion.
:
: Mind you, they've still got a few mistakes in their physics. If
: Sector 14 is three hours away in normal space, it's got to be right
: next door, and it's hard to see how it could stay right next door if
: Epsilon 3 is orbiting a star. Was B4 built orbiting Epsilon 3 too?
Orbit around Epsilon, at the L4/L5 point with Epsilon 3 maybe.
: Was building B5 in the same place such a good idea?