Amhuxh.355 net.space utcsrgv!utzoo!decvax!ucbvax!mhtsa!ihnss!eagle!mhuxt!mhuxa!mhuxh!lute Tue Mar 23 12:15:58 1982 Reply to USTN critic Your remark that my H.G. Wells analogy is incorrect, and that my theory of USTN (Universal Space-Time Nexus) belongs on sf-lovers only shows that you missed the point of the analogy. Granted, that the time machine moved spatially due to celestial motion relative to its originating point in space, but relative to all other points on earth it was NOT capable of moving spatially. The time-machine itself had no means of moving itself except temporally! (remember, near the end of the story, the hero had to drag the machine a few yards away from its original position so that when taken to a particular year in the future it would not materialize in the chambers of an enemy?) Also, please keep in mind that just because someone uses a popular science-fiction story for an analogy to make a theoretical point, DOES NOT mean that the theoretical point is also science fiction! I would enjoy hearing from anyone else who has thoughts on the existence or properties of USTN. --Jim Collymore ----------------------------------------------------------------- gopher://quux.org/ conversion by John Goerzen of http://communication.ucsd.edu/A-News/ This Usenet Oldnews Archive article may be copied and distributed freely, provided: 1. There is no money collected for the text(s) of the articles. 2. The following notice remains appended to each copy: The Usenet Oldnews Archive: Compilation Copyright (C) 1981, 1996 Bruce Jones, Henry Spencer, David Wiseman.