Delling's Thread

[B'rrr]

One can avoid a need to move freely within the 4th dimension by considering only possibilities from the present: for instance, you can choose to remain sitting or stand up or stand up and immediately sit back down again, etc. Each such option represents a different path in their 5th dimension of probability.

That part I got still. all posibilities are still in the future.

but then they followed the video with i'agining a ti'eline where you did that a'azing invention when you were young and you would not be able to get to that point fro' your current ti'eline. and there were 2 options, go back in ti'e and change the past so that you get the desired ti'eline or just take a shortcut and ju'p fro' your current ti'eline tot he desired one (result is the sa'e)

As I see ti'e as linear, one straight line, I can't see that step happen. I can i'agine it ofcourse, have a wild i'agination as it is, but doesn't see' realistic.

[Yonkey]

For their 6th dimension, for instance, IF I can travel freely in the 5th dimension, then it doesn't matter that the timeline I'm currently on didn't lead to my inventing something as a child: all that matters is that such a timeline exists for some probability.

Thanks.   That's actually the same reasoning I came to, but I just wanted to confirm with someone more qualified in the subject matter.

[Delling]

For their 6th dimension, for instance, IF I can travel freely in the 5th dimension, then it doesn't matter that the timeline I'm currently on didn't lead to my inventing something as a child: all that matters is that such a timeline exists for some probability.

Thanks.   That's actually the same reasoning I came to, but I just wanted to confirm with someone more qualified in the subject matter.

De nada. The higher dimensions in formal string theory are actually different. ...but then there are so many breeds of formal string theory...

[Yonkey]

De nada. The higher dimensions in formal string theory are actually different. ...but then there are so many breeds of formal string theory...

Sweet! I can't wait to do further research in these areas, once this whole Activision situation is resolved.

[Deloria]

I have only one thing to say:

The locative is less awesome than the instrumental, even if you did a very nice job with the alliteration, just as Gaelic is less awesome than Lithuanian.

[Delling]

It appears, though I haven't completed a very thorough survey of the languages yet, that the Slavic languages have done fairly well at preserving both the locative and the instrumental.


But... I still love Gaelic more than Lithuanian... one word: phonotactics! (the broad-slender contrast is awesome and full of WIN )


I will concede that Lithuanian has an impressive noun system. However: "...the loss of synthetic passive (which is hypothesized based on the more archaic though long-extinct Indo-European languages), synthetic perfect (formed via the means of reduplication) and aorist; forming subjunctive and imperative with the use of suffixes plus flexions as opposed to solely flections in , e. g., Ancient Greek; loss of the optative mood;..." ...clearly, Classical Greek has a more impressive verb system. (...though the use of infixes for the subjunctive is somewhat intriguing...)

(Posted on: May 03, 2010, 09:22:04 PM)

...also, also, as an aside, IIRC, "Let the locative live..." was more a response to the crazy ( no offense to any Finns: we're all crazy here ) Finnish practice of breaking the locative up into what seems like roughly a case per possible preposition. Something the instrumental hasn't had to bear (it instead has a tendency to die and fuse with some other oblique case... still, so does the locative ).


((...and, yes, rest of the forum, we are total language nerds...))