Talk:Earth

Parallel Earths?

Is there any in game material that supports the idea that Eodon and the events of Martian Dreams should be referred to as parallel Earths? Ultima II with all its weirdness seems to be its own kettle of fish, which might need to be hashed out in greater detail, but if I recall, Eodon's metaphysical relationship to the rest of Earth is explained in canon and there's nothing to indicate that the events of Martian Dreams ever involve a separate timeline from anything else that happens in the series. I'm all for detailed personal theories, but a lot of this seems to be fannish conjecture rather than material supported by the original games.--Blu3vib3 (talk) 02:34, 26 July 2017 (MDT)

Yeah, I'm not entirely comfortable with the direction this article went in. I'd be open to discussion, but at this point I think classifying them each as parallel worlds might be going a bit far. --Terilem (talk) 03:39, 26 July 2017 (MDT)

I thought that "parallel worlds" or "alternate worlds" were widespread expressions that are easy to understand and fit the subject. Maybe we should just look for more satisfactory expressions?

1. There is clear evidence about Eodon, from the Savage Empire Transcript. The wisp says: "Modification of the energies of said 'moonstone' have resulted in the geographical superset 'here-now' 'Eodon' 'Valley' being placed outside the normal space-time continuum". Indeed, wisps enjoy speaking in a complicated way. The meaning of the underlined words is that Eodon Valley became a separate (or parallel/alternate) dimension (or earth/world).
2. About the Ultima 2 continuity, the fact is that all events did happen, but later they were officially declared "ahistorical". This means that there is a "historical continuity" and an "ahistorical continuity". These are two parallel dimensions (see also my user page, just for fun).
3. I humbly admit that I still have to play Martian Dreams (what would be the point of playing Ultima 4, if you forget the Virtues in the real world?).

One could still object about the specific words employed in the different instances (it happened in other websites), therefore I pre-emptively remind the concept of synonym. ---Abacos (talk) 01:09, 28 July 2017 (MDT)

Pardon my confusion and/or ignorance, but the term "parallel world" isn't one that registers as a self-evident synonym for what I originally characterized as an "alternate timeline" in the case of Ultima II or as a region "mystically out of phase with the rest of the reality" in the case of Eodon. When I read a world characterized as "parallel," I think of two separate worlds co-existing simultaneously, as the term "parallel" sort of evokes a spatial relationship involving two things being present at the same time. As far as I can tell, Ultima II involves one world/timeline existing (the one where things are mostly the same as our Earth), then one other world/timeline existing (the one where Orcs work at drive throughs and the Soviets rule the apocalypse), and then the original world/timeline reasserting itself. I suppose that one can technically describe that intermediate world/timeline as a parallel world, but upon reading the term, I envision a situation in which our Earth and bizarro-Earth are both occurring at once. With regard to Eodon, my understanding of the valley is that it is spatially a part of the rest of Earth (i.e. a part of the same "world") but is mystically separated from the normal metaphysical reality of the rest of Earth. Using the term "parallel" here makes me think that the valley is on a separate world and that somebody floating about in the Void would not be able to spot the valley as existing on the planet. In both cases, reading the phrase "parallel world" brings to mind a very different situation than the terms initially employed.

If I'm out of line here and the consensus is that the terms are synonymous and that "parallel world" is the more precise and accurate descriptor, I'm willing to cede the point, but at present I'm at a bit of a loss as to what the change in terminology accomplishes, and I find that there's a marked difference in the metaphysical situation that the article brings to mind. --Blu3vib3 (talk) 05:23, 28 July 2017 (MDT)

Long answer

Let me consider one portion at a time. General considerations first, and later I will consider the individual games.

The term "parallel world" isn't one that registers as a self-evident synonym for what I originally characterized as an "alternate timeline" [...]. When I read a world characterized as "parallel," I think of two separate worlds co-existing simultaneously, as the term "parallel" sort of evokes a spatial relationship involving two things being present at the same time.

And here I am to my old job of professor of mathematics and physics... I hope I will less boring than entertaining.

Let us consider a random timeline from Google: World War 1. Time is represented as a line, where facts happened in succession, as time flows.

If you create a fictional world where World War 1 developed in a different way or did not happen at all, you make a new timeline. This new timeline is represented by a new straight line that is parallel to the first one. The fact that they are parallel means that they never touch each other, in other words that reality and fiction do not interact.

You may say: "But this is just a geometrical representation!", and my answer is: "That is exactly the way we physicists (and our colleagues, the mathematicians) ideated it"!

So, the fictional timeline is an alternate timeline, and it is also a timeline parallel to the real one. Therefore, "alternate timeline" and "parallel timeline" are two ways to say the same thing. Subsequently, a world referring to the alternate/parallel timeline can be called "alternate world" and "parallel world".

More complicated considerations, actually optional. A world is made of four dimensions: X-Y-Z (length-width-height) plus time. In common language, such set of four dimensions is referred to as "a dimension". Do you have the same XYZ space (the Earth) but an alternate/parallel timeline? Strictly speaking, you have one parallel dimension (time), that is parallel to the original one, in a 7-dimensions hyperspace (3 space dimensions independent from 3 other space dimension, and two timelines that are parallel, so that time "flows in the same direction", thus time counts as one).

End of the mathematics lecture. Thanks for your patience (is it a Virtue of the Avatar?).

Ultima II involves one world/timeline existing, then one other world/timeline existing, and then the original world/timeline reasserting itself. I suppose that one can technically describe that intermediate world/timeline as a parallel world, but upon reading the term, I envision a situation in which our Earth and bizarro-Earth are both occurring at once.

In other words, you say that (for example) during 1423 B.C. Europe was in pre-history, then during the same time age 1423 B.C. Towne Linda existed, and later during the same time age 1423 B.C. Europe was again in pre-history. Just from the point of view of English language, "then" and "later" contradict "during the same time".

I say: we do have a fact that did and did not happen at the same time: during 1423 B.C. Towne Linda did and did not exist. This only makes sense if it did not exist along one timeline and it did exist along a... parallel timeline, therefore in the parallel world/universe/dimension attached to that parallel timeline. It is the same time (1423 B.C.) along two parallel timelines, and your term "at once" appropriately refers to time, but not space. The XYZ space attached to the timeline of "our" Earth is separate from the XYZ space attached to the timeline of Minax's Earth.

New, natural question: we know the definition of "parallel" from school, but what about the point in time-space when the timeline forked?

It is similar to when a highway changes from two-lanes to three-lanes: for a short while along your road the new "lane" is separating from the rest, then it continues parallel to the previous ones.

I see Minax splitting up Earth's timeline during Pangea age, and the Stranger traveling from Sosaria to this Earth that is different from her own (I always play a female Stranger in Ultima 2: she is more powerful than a male). In the end, the Stranger manages to close down the Time Doors for good, and the wise guys of Britannia decide to forget about the "parallel Earth" by declaring it "ahistorical", and pretending that (metaphorically) if you remove an arrow from a wound, the wound ceases to exist. Cheap healing, guys! Time Doors are not vacuum cleaners that suck back everything Minax did.

About Savage Empire: Using the term "parallel" here makes me think that the valley is on a separate world and that somebody floating about in the Void would not be able to spot the valley as existing on the planet.

Well, that is exactly how I saw it (without involving the Void) every time I played the game, and when I analyzed the text transcript. The wisps said: "the valley is outside the normal space-time continuum". So, it is along an alternate space-time continuum. And following what I wrote earlier, this is exactly a parallel world. I see it as a small universe that encompasses just the valley, an anomaly (another term from the game).

Tell me if I am wrong, if I abused terminology, etcetera. I will support my opinions with Honesty and Justice, but if you show me wrong, I will Humbly admit it. Please reply following Principles and Virtues (that is: let us continue this nice debate politely). ---Abacos (talk) 07:18, 28 July 2017 (MDT)

I'm definitely one to admire detailed personal analyses of fictional worlds, and I don't doubt that I'd come up with similarly detailed ideas about the realities of time travel in media I enjoy were I a specialist in the same fields you specialize in. However, Ultima takes place in a fictional universe not bound by the hard sciences of reality, and I think its best to write about the world in the fashion most congruent with how the majority of laypeople will understand it as functioning. My reading of the article as it is currently written (and from my reading of their comment, Terilem's as well) don't match with my experience of the games' narrative, and I get the impression that most readers not intimately familiar with the same particulars of physics and mathematics will be similarly confused.

I think the perspective you bring to the games is certainly interesting, but I don't think it has a place in a wiki about a fictional universe outside of the trivia section unless the average reader will have the same understanding of these ideas as you do. To offer an example in a similar vein, I don't think it would be appropriate for me as somebody with some substantial training in literary scholarship to describe the story of each installment of Ultima in detailed subcategories concerning its author(s) (Richard Garriott or other designers responsible for writing plots), its implied author (the creator of the narrative we can infer from the narrative alone without bringing real world sources to bear upon it), its narrator (the in-universe "voice" describing events), and its audience reception (the general ways in which players interpret the story). While such a breakdown would be absolutely accurate and even informative to the right audience, I understand that the average wiki reader probably does not have a working understanding of narratology and that the general way most people are going to approach Ultima narratives is to assume there's one objective "story" in which the narrator is reliable and whatever the real world authors say is probably right so long as it doesn't directly contradict something in game.

As it stands, I feel that even if your assertions make sense to you, they seem to be out of sync with how most people experience the games and that they probably don't reflect the intentions of the authors (From what we know of Richard Garriott's understanding of Ultima II, it was heavily based on Time Bandits, which features time travel in a universe in which a Christian-ish deity left some holes in reality such that people can hop around with a magic map.) As I said, if I'm wrong and the majority of editors/readers feel that your descriptions reflect their understanding of the games, I think its fine to let it stand. I get the impression, however, that this is not the case, and I'm presently in favor of reverting the article to an earlier state regarding the language concerning time travel (with necessary adjustments and refs based on editor consensus -- I realize that back in the day I often added stuff that was sort of speculative and wonky, and I've generally been happy when people shunt that sort of thing to trivia), and adding your personal interpretations based on specialist knowledge to trivia. --Blu3vib3 (talk) 09:03, 28 July 2017 (MDT)

I agree with you. Indeed, mixing real-world science and fictional magic is seldom a good idea (I highlight it because this sentence should be copied & pasted against me every time I forget it). I managed to avoid putting any mathematical consideration in the main page, I kept them for the talk page. For a start, I could change back the section titles to something more canon; how about "Ahistorical Earth" and "Eodon Valley anomalous space-time contunuum"? ---Abacos (talk) 10:39, 28 July 2017 (MDT)

By the way, may I ask to give a quick look to the Category:Worlds? Thanks. ---Abacos (talk) 01:37, 29 July 2017 (MDT)