Re: I'm somewhat surprised objects have threads.
Fanatic-Templar Send a noteboard - 05/01/2010 10:30:42 PM
Then again, they'd have to, since otherwise time wouldn't flow in places where there are no living things... Confusing, a bit.
It seems you equate "time flow" with "threads", which I'm not sure I understand.
Regardless though, when we see the Brown Ajah section of the WT switch places with the Novice section, we see physical objects (wall stones, floor tiles, tapestries, etc.) MOVE with respect to other objects. And it's hard for me to imagine how that could occur (given my admittedly limited understanding of what the Pattern actually is) if those objects didn't have threads.
Well, the progress of time within Creation is dependent on the Pattern, progress of time is due to new patterns being woven in the Age Lace, and as such, fluctuations can only be caused by a modification of the Pattern, otherwise things would be static. If objects did not have a mark or thread of some kind in the Pattern, then relative to other things in the Pattern, it would be impossible for them to change.
Anyway, as to balefire affecting objects, I'm pretty sure it doesn't - we have several examples of balefiring objects and the things on top of them falling to the ground, such as Rand against Rahvin (The Threads Burn) or Jeaine Caide wielding that balefire ter'angreal in the Panarch's Palace (Into the Palace). If objects were balefired back in time, those things would already be on the ground.
By "affecting", I guess you mean that balefire doesn't cause objects to cease to exist backwards in time. I'd have to go back and read the examples you cited to be sure, but I assume you're right about them. Seems a bit odd that object threads would react differently to balefire than living threads, but if that's the way it is, who am I to argue?
Yeah, I prefer to stay away from balefire altogether. It takes very little poking to realise it doesn't make sense (as things that cause temporal paradoxes pretty much inevitably do.)
The first rule of being a ninja is "do no harm". Unless you intend to do harm, then do lots of harm.
~Master Splinter
Victorious in Bergioyn's legendary 'Reverse Mafia'. *MySmiley*
~Master Splinter
Victorious in Bergioyn's legendary 'Reverse Mafia'. *MySmiley*
Graendal's Fate (Alive or Dead?)
- 05/01/2010 05:44:12 PM
2278 Views
Re: Graendal's Fate (Alive or Dead?)
- 05/01/2010 06:46:19 PM
1039 Views
Re: Graendal's Fate (Alive or Dead?)
- 05/01/2010 07:15:41 PM
910 Views
Nynaeve's boat...
- 05/01/2010 07:23:57 PM
872 Views
Good point ...
- 05/01/2010 07:52:04 PM
730 Views
I'm somewhat surprised objects have threads.
- 05/01/2010 08:45:52 PM
4459 Views
Re: I'm somewhat surprised objects have threads.
- 05/01/2010 09:23:06 PM
698 Views
Re: I'm somewhat surprised objects have threads.
- 05/01/2010 10:30:42 PM
726 Views
There is another way...
- 05/01/2010 07:00:31 PM
715 Views
Nope
- 06/01/2010 04:36:56 AM
748 Views
USe Occam's Razor yourself...
- 06/01/2010 05:53:22 AM
864 Views
and why didn't she invert any of the weaves?
- 06/01/2010 05:55:54 AM
690 Views
Maybe you cannot invert compulsion?
- 06/01/2010 06:56:35 PM
729 Views
so it's the one and only thing we've seen that can't be inverted? seems a little
- 06/01/2010 11:31:09 PM
630 Views
Re: so it's the one and only thing we've seen that can't be inverted?
- 07/01/2010 12:02:00 AM
577 Views
She's dead as a bloody doornail. Or whatever that saying is... *NM*
- 05/01/2010 07:20:36 PM
365 Views
I think she's alive.
- 06/01/2010 06:12:50 PM
680 Views
Compulsion is rather useless isn't it?
- 06/01/2010 07:44:42 PM
760 Views
It may take an exceptional Delver/Healer
- 06/01/2010 08:49:37 PM
731 Views
perhaps, but still I have a hard time believing Graendal didn't invert the weaves!
- 06/01/2010 11:06:49 PM
664 Views
Re: perhaps, but still I have a hard time believing Graendal didn't invert the weaves!
- 07/01/2010 03:42:17 PM
702 Views