Deflating Hyperspace

[Joseph T]

On Apr 1, 2007, at 11:37 AM, Daniel Harper wrote:

> On Sunday 01 April 2007 02:18, you wrote:
>> From this link:
>>
>> http://www.waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon- 
>> l&month=0702&msg=115688&sort=author
>>
>
> ===BEGIN EXCERPT=====
>
> Another possible explanation for Einstein's absence can be that  
> Pynchon in
> AtD tries to write from within the paradigm of the years he's  
> describing. In
> 2007 it is abundantly clear how important a figure Einstein was,  
> but in the
> years before WWI it was not so clear. In M&D Pynchon also wrote  
> more or less
> from within the paradigm of the 18th century, representing all the  
> crackpot
> theories of the era as just as valid as the ones that eventually  
> held up.
> Pynchon of course knows how things turned out, and by sly  
> anachronistic
> references he points to later scientific developments (including chaos
> theory in M&D), but those references are for his readers, not his
> characters, who blunder happily along inside the horizon of knowledge
> defined by their age. In AtD Pynchon includes a couple-three offhand
> references to the theory of special relativity, and we 21st century  
> readers
> immediately recognize their importance, but his characters don't.
> Pynchon doesn't render the past *as* past, but as the present that  
> it once
> was, and in that present Einstein wasn't the towering figure he is  
> today,
> which may be another way of explaining his notable absence from AtD.
>
> ===END EXCERPT====
>
> This gets very close to my own feelings on the matter, but I would  
> also add
> that it's possible that in Pynchon's novel, Einstein's ideas were  
> simply
> wrong, that relativity and time dilation and gravitational lenses  
> and the
> like do not accurately describe the universe, but that other,  
> slightly more
> "orthodox" (in a manner of speaking) theories do.
>
> I'll make this quick because I'm leaving the apartment in a few  
> minutes, but
> the science portions of ATD read to me very much like a science  
> fiction novel
> written from the perspective of someone living in the time periods  
> described.
> In other words, scientific speculation written by someone living at  
> the time,
> who didn't understand or didn't appreciate the value of Einstein's  
> work.
> Which may tie back in to what you were saying above (in a section I  
> didn't
> quote) regarding things "too terrible to contemplate".
>
>> .....maybe a small fraction of the beginning of a possible  
>> explanation, but
>> other inputs are surely needed. I look very much forward to your
>> science-literate take on these matters (a-and if you like the science
>> aspect of Pynchon, you'll love GR).
>>
>
> While I am generally comfortable with generalities of physics and  
> mathematics,
> and even briefly was a physics major, I am currently studying  
> biology and
> chemistry chiefly. So the nitty-gritty details of the science of  
> ATD may be a
> bit beyond me. Since Pynchon relies so heavily on SF conventions,  
> though, it
> may be enough.
>
> -- 
> No reference to the present day is intended or should be inferred.
> --Daniel Harper
> countermonkey.blogspot.com

   I agree to some degree , though is seems like P bounces around  
between sci-fi hints, the Tom Swift approach  of the chums and the  
Mary Shelly, King Kong , Shackleton approach of  Vormance expedition,  
and the more complex world of the earnest students of Gottingen to  
show the many ways science is interpreted and used as  actively as  a  
mythic  and political force as it is as a  technological force.

I agree with Tore about Einstein . The way P has handled this also  
has the dual effect of making him more present through his future  
importance at resolving some of the questions being asked,  and of  
giving a richer sense of the context out of which Einstein  emerged  
and the importance of the groundwork for his thought experiments and  
theories.