ballistics, etc.

[Derek Davis]

>But remember that the common-or-garden-ballistics-101-class-parabola
>traversed by a projectile moving in a downward gravitational field
>ends with a bang back on the ground. Whereas your out-of-the-blue-
>degenerate-ellipse-brand-of-parabola zips off in the direction of that
>focus at infinity (the one little pig that gets away?) and your
>run-of-the-mill-conventional-norm-of-an-ellipse is just the sort of
>yoyo that goes around and then comes around (reminds me of all those
>green returns). A-and don't forget those hyperbolae.

This is close to what I was trying to get at with the orignal question:
*Conceptually,* an ellipse, which forms a closed loop, is quite different
from a figure which tends toward two parallel lines at infinity. In fact,
in the sense of holding something (or holding meaning), they seem
diametrically opposed. So did Pynchon choose a parabola because it suited
his outlook better, knowing that it was a bit off-base? Did he goof? Does
it make any difference? Well, hell, I sure don't know.

Derek Davis                           3311 Baring St., Phila., PA 19104
dsbdavis at omni.voicenet.com                          Voice: 215-222-4956
http://pobox.com/slt/         (home of Silly Little Tomte Publications)