#and entropy is also basically. intrinsically related to time

[visual-calc]

Say, does quantum physics correlate with time traveling journey? Time traveling machine quite tempting to be made..

VISUAL CALCULUS [Heroic: Success] — Quantum physics actually has very little to do with our understanding of time, or the possibility of time travel. Most of the relevant theory falls under the theory of relativity, with a little bit of thermodynamics sprinkled in.

At its most basic level, relativity states that our reality exists in four dimensions: the three spatial dimensions we usually think of, and time, which is why we sometimes refer to it as "spacetime". Time is connected to the other three dimensions in a special way: the faster you move through space, the slower you move through time. Similarly, the closer you are to very massive object, such as a black hole or Elysium's core, the slower time passes for you.

This means that it is almost trivially easy to travel forward in time— just steal an aerostatic and fly very, very fast, or take a vacation at the bottom of the ocean. Either of these will cause you to experience less time than a friend who stays stationary or at sea level, so upon your return you will have effectively traveled to the future— by a few billionths of a second. A difference in elevation of a few thousand feet is not enough to create a significant difference in time, nor are there any means of transportation able to reach the necessary speeds to make this a practical means of time travel. But traveling forward is at least theoretically possible.

However, based on your prior interaction with Savoir Faire and Interfacing, I suspect that you are interested in traveling backwards, and I am afraid I need to be the bearer of bad news: it is simply impossible. The arrow of time only points forward. This is a law higher than you, or me, or Authority, or any of us. There is nothing we can do to reverse it, in any normal reality.

Physically, this is intrinsically linked to the idea of entropy, a measure of disorder. Entropy can never decrease— any process that is possible can only increase disorder, never decrease it. Reversing the flow of time and traveling backwards through it would allow you to increase order. For example, if you broke a glass, then traveled back to a time where the glass was whole again, you would be returning it to its ordered state, making backwards time travel impossible just from a physics standpoint. That doesn't even scratch the surface of the possible paradoxes of causality such travel would cause.

However. Not all of Elysium is part of our normal sense of reality. Entropy and entroponetic share the same root, after all— the Pale is entropy incarnate, disorder made manifest. Deep enough in the Pale, this disorder is great enough that our usual notions of time and space have no meaning. Reality ceases to have dimensions at all and the laws of physics break down.

The only way we can travel through the Pale at all is using Pale latitude compressors— devices that allow us to force the Pale into having dimensions again, taking on the shape of our familiar four-dimensional spacetime. No one has ever tried forcing the pale into being anything else. It's easy to see why— for transport of human beings, you want to make sure that they stay cocooned in a reality they can safely exist in. But, I do confess to having wondered whether it might be possible to use a Pale latitude compressor to impose a different type of reality on the Pale. If we're imposing dimensions anyway, perhaps it's possible to pick how they relate to each other such that traveling backwards in time is possible?

Please do note that I do not recommend that you try this, Turtle. Harry's brief encounter with the latitude compressor in Martinaise has more than convinced me that they are not to be trifled with. Additionally, there's no telling whether a set of dimensions that would allow time travel would also allow you to exist, or whether such a set would even exist at all. Most of us have come to like you quite a lot— I would hate to see you perish as a result of an entroponetic accident because you tried to time travel.

[theorynexus]

We now begin 51, which will likely take us to an entirely different perspective. Thanks, Monty Python!

On a random note, though... 

Man, this is fricking crazy, from a dramatic irony perspective. I do appreciate that Homestuck is written such that that spreads from not only the author’s possession, but to that of the audience via rereads.  As... macabre as this particular example is.

Finally, Dorothy is gone, and all that is left is the Witch (and her little dog too)?

Well, maybe not even that. Certainly, Bec’s powers are muted, and I wouldn’t be too terribly surprised if his instincts are too; on the other hand,they could be strongly contributing to this. This sequence strongly reminds me of the sequence wherein Jade’s destiny to become fused with him was first alluded to. “You eat a weird bug, and don’t even care,” and whatnot.  Certainly, 

Words slough from the busy mind like a useless dead membrane as a more visceral sapience takes over. Something simpler is in charge now, a force untouched by the concerns and burdens of the upright, that farcical yoke the bipedal tow. It now drives you through the midnight brush ...  as you and your new friend must claim the night with piercing howls moonward.

seems reminiscent to me of all of her thoughts of her former existence fading as she is beckoned by the call-- not of a moon, but of another reflection of the light of the sun: the Void-y remains that come with its demise. Obviously her “new friend” in this case would seem to refer both to Bec (who is a part of her, now, thus explaining the uniform motion) and through allusion, to the Alt!Calliope that her other version of herself had already befriended, who would be the one beckoning in the first place. It should also be said that shoes could be taken as a symbol of civilization, in this case, beyond just the obvious symbolism that is being pointed out to the viewer.  Regardless, whether this similarity was intended or not doesn’t actually matter. It’s just that this scene vaguely made me think of that.

What irony, considering this is coming from the one who just bewitched the Seer (which, I would just like to say, is honestly some nice narrative symmetry, considering this is almost exactly like what Doc Scratch did before him [not that I don’t still feel disgust toward him, even if this might turn out in Rose’s favor, in the long run]).                    Oh, yes, and by the way... very nice confirmation of the fact that the Green Sun Black Hole is Void-oriented. I appreciate that coming from an in-story source. (Even if you don’t connect emptiness with Void, which you should, the fact that the Ocean is connected with it is almost indisputable. That’s part of the reason why Rose’s quest was to bring life to the dead ocean by Playing the Rain. It was about using her inner Light to counteract her tendencies toward its equal opposite.)

Which is part of the reason why Alt!Calliope and Jade get along so well, and why there’s a connection between them, I’m sure. (Both of their lifestyles/life histories emphasized thematically their inner Space orientation. [This may also be why Kanaya lived in them middle of a desert, with no one but her Virgin Mother Grub to directly keep he company.])

Yes, way to downplay one of the core Aspects of reality just because it doesn’t necessarily always function in the way that perception would suggest it does. This doesn’t make it illusory, nor does it invalidate the continuum aspect of it:  that it is intrinsically relevant to how life persists and interacts with the world itself demonstrates the importance of this part of Time. It’s like suggesting an iceberg is an illusion just because you can’t see the depths hidden away below the surface (Void hides it from your eyes [read: Light is blocked]).   Gah, you are so bloody irksome and pride-projecting in your demeanor just because you managed to pick something up that the Trolls basically illuminated to the Beta Kids way back when they were all 13.  Congratulations.

Fool. (Oh, and I would argue that time continuing to be relevant conceptually, despite its non-linearity, helps to emphasize its importance as a pillar of reality. That it is an existence persisting independent of its consequent internal signifiers [entropy, {temporal} causality, direction] allows for it to play the very important role of acting as a medium for general interaction and consequence; particularly, it allows for the persistence and simultaneous activity of all possible states of being within its domain [e.g.: reality or the meta-narrative Existence within the context of MSPA, or whatever set of other works which would necessarily include all relevantly connected miscellany] which are additionally allowed for via the logical intermingling it has with the other Aspects.            In other words: Time is one of the two necessary present architectonic forces that undergird the Narrative.   Your suggesting that it is given disproportionate attention and that loneliness is therefore an illusion is just the sort of insulting, crass, and perspective-locked claptrap that I’d expect from someone who’s so enthusiastically embraced a departure from humanity, and who thus has lost mooring in the solid, political existence which sapient, physically-connected beings dwell in by nature.   I suspect that your distraction and loss of perspective will eventually come back to haunt you.  ) Yes, I realize that the Ultimate Self is a timeless construct, but this does not mean time is irrelevant to it or the limited forms it girds itself with when connecting to physicality. (On a random note:  I do appreciate his decision to call Aspects ideas.)

Along with the creepiness with regards to Dirk pushing thoughts into Jade’s head (which is honestly par for the course in Homestuck, and at least he’s mostly trying to remind her of something he believes she already knows, so it’s somwhat benevolent), we get this interesting snippet.  Seems he wants to foreshadow difficulties between Dave, Jade, and Karkat in the future.   I suppose the only logical question is whether Jade will break their hearts in turn.   Love is hard. It’s hard and everybody (with actual experience) understands.

Ha ha, “How much of Homestuck was actually illusion seen in the perspective of the characters involved, a la the kids’ rooms before Gamzee’s Chucklevoodoo curses were disrupted,” ha ha. On a more important note:   I very much appreciate Dirk’s well-arranged metaphors relating to time, to Calliope’s Muse-inspired-powered Spatial-influential music. Dirk is indeed quite bad at distracting hyper-focused people with thoughts he thinks they will reasonably find seem similar to thoughts she might have.

Hey, man, don’t give up. Your breaking from the narrative of trying to help her is making it seem like your nervousness is throwing you off, meaning we won’t know if your attempts to help her had any chance to succeed in general! Way to go, “hero!”

“Time is an illusion,” you say?   Yet here’s your narration, there’s Jade.  Oh!  There she goes, persisting to fly off into the dead sun, just as linear time would demand of her!  What’s wrong?  Couldn’t make the time to properly put your thoughts together or try until you got it right?   Gasp!         My word!  It’s almost like Time is pretty fricking important to the narrative and reality of the story!

HEEHEEHAHAHAHA!!!        Serves you right, getting spooked like that, you incompetent, over-confident knave!

... Now, let’s see how the rest of this goes, now that I have a better handle on my humours.

You’re dealing with the Grim Reaper, inspirer of great woe and terror, as well as happy children drawings and stories everywhere.  Obviously, you were overmatched. Perhaps you should have tried focusing on Jade initially, rather than John?  That might have given you a little bit more time.   I am reminded of a group of trolls who didn’t properly think through their attempts to mock and cajole those they perceived to be the artificers of their downfall.  Perhaps this will turn out as well.

Demiourgos, your pride showeth. Your composure runneth down and streaketh thine face like free-flowing ichor. Hubris, doth it become thee?   Thou reflecteth thine flaws, and by thy own hand. Revealeth thou not the weakness of thine breast with Rage-filled uproar?   A lion in thine face we see, but at this flickering of that glamour, a snake in masquerade is spotted. Foul wretch, I pity thee:  for it is truly painful to behold the disheartening of the ambitious, and the glorious in the midst of downfall. What do you fear?  What compels such panic into one normally so serene?

I suppose I should have known. A mechanist always fears uncontrollable variables.    (I do wonder if his fear is truly warranted, though. Certainly, things aren’t as bad as they could be, but there is much to be depressed about in these outcomes as they have emerged so far, you know?)

And thus, a new star was born?   Well, we’ll see.   I certainly do appreciate the physics of black hole mechanics being involved, though I am not 100% sure that this is accurate to how such an ultra-massive construct would actually work. I know super-massive black holes effect objects differently than normal ones, when they approach the event horizon, so it seems rather reasonable to guess that one the mass of multiple universes would behave a bit differently from either.  I do not know, however.  ... All in all, a pretty great page, I guess.  It was nice to see the Narrator lose control so badly.  A bit sad that the consequences of that were as they were, but I knew that this would likely be the case, regardless. I wonder when John and Terezi will be back in focus~ ... P.S.:  I am pretty sure that subtle interference with the narrative is the normal role of a Muse, and that her Mastery over Jade in particular makes a great deal of sense, given who Jade is. I wonder what has compelled her to speak in such a manner that her voice is actually visible in the text, rather than subtly bending it to her will as presumably has been the case over the course of Homestuck, generally.  Could it be that she did this specifically to teach the Narrator a lesson?  Shall we ever find out?

[scriptstructure]

Tips for writing tragedy/stories where the hero loses? Also, somewhat relatedly, for writing stories where the overall theme or question driving the narrative isn't one where you, the author, have an answer so you'd rather just... ask? It's made it difficult for me to know how to end things but I'm still stuck with the fact I don't know the answer to the dilemma my characters are facing. Other than it feels like it has to end badly either for just one character or for all characters involved.

I’m not sure that these things are quite as intrinsically related as you think; you can have a tragedy where the driving question of the story is absolutely answered in the text, and you can have non-tragic stories where the central question is left ambiguous. I don’t think it’s necessary to have a definitive ‘answer’ to the central questions of a story because I don’t think that the function of a story is to provide answers. If anything, it’s to open up the space to consider all options, or to explore things that we are uncertain of, etc.

I think that if stories were only written where the author was setting out a definitive answer to the question the story poses, then there would be a lot more boring books in the world.

In large part, this is because stories deal with many of the same problems that we face in life, and much of life has no easy answers, and while in some cases easy answers can be comforting, that is not what all of literature is there to do, many stories there are no easy answers, or just more questions, sometimes the fact that the question is being asked is enough to drive the story and looking for an answer would be a whole ‘nother deal entirely.

The other other thing, is that you don’t need to have solid answers to start writing. It’s enough to ask. You don’t have to understand the meaning of your own work perfectly before you start on it, you’ll likely develop an understanding of what you’re doing as you do it, and often there will be things that you won’t see in your own work until much later, when you re-read it with new life experiences, or when someone else points things out to you that you hadn’t realised you put there.

Uncertainty and ambiguity aren’t inherently tragic, they’re just a part of life. Difficult to deal with, a lot of times sure, but also funny, interesting, puzzling, entertaining, there’s no tragedy in not being absolutely certain.

So, writing tragedies is pretty difficult, you’ve got the fact that it’s going to be a downer in some way at the end, along with that you’ve got to carry a whole story until that ending, and make it compelling enough that people won’t sit back after reading it and go ‘wow if I wanted to feel that depressed I’d just watch the six-o-clock news’. It’s a challenge, but it’s doable, and when done well it can make for a wrenching, fascinating story.

It’s important to consider why the tragedy occurs, there are many themes that can drive a tragic plot, such as corruption as in Hamlet, personal evil as with Vladimir Nabokov’s Lolita, natural entropy as in The Lord of the Rings, and as you figure out why the tragedy occurs, it will influence and be influenced by the nature of the world of the story.

Another vital element is character agency, this is the sense that the choices characters make and the actions they take in the story have real impact on the course of the plot, whether for good or for ill. Character agency is important in making the story feel less like ‘a lot of stuff just happens to this person’ and more like ‘this is the story of this person’s role in these events’.

Hamlet is an example that probably most people have read and studied at some point, the tragedy of the story is the decay of Denmark’s royal family, and Hamlet’s agency shows in the play as he makes many decisions that have consequences that change the flow of the story. You’ve probably done this part in school, where we learn that tragic heroes have what is called a ‘fatal flaw’ which means that they will be doomed to tragedy. Hamlet’s is often called his indecision, his unwillingness to kill his uncle. 

In this set-up, the narrative see-saws back and forth as Hamlet wrestles with this decision, and it exposes ‘something rotten in the state of Denmark’ which brings the story down to the final moment where the slate has to be wiped clean and a new player steps in to take over. All the Danish royals are dead, and Fortinbras steps in to do a little speech about how there’s a bright future ahead now that he’s in charge.

So in Hamlet, the fuel of the tragedy is corruption of the institution of the monarchy, and Hamlet’s agency is the decisions that he makes during the course of the play (when he refrains from killing his uncle, when he accidentally kills Polonius, when he drives Ophelia mad, etc). There are very few parts of the story which aren’t directly linked to the choices that Hamlet makes, even if he makes bad decisions, is careless, cruel, or shortsighted, he has immense influence over his own story.

In Vladimir Nabokov’s Lolita, there is a similar thing happening, but instead of the corruption of a system of government, it is the nuclear family. Also, the story is narrated by the villain, and we know from the beginning that he will be dead very soon after the end of the story. The real tragedy is the evil he does along the way, most notably to the title character Lolita, the step-daughter he abuses and who eventually dies. The tragedy here is the gleeful destruction of innocence by a man driven by his own grotesque desires.

But both of these are very people-focussed tragedies. In each of these cases, these tragedies occur even though there are multiple opportunities for something to have been done differently and so change the outcome. The tragedy is in the missed opportunity, or in the decision to do the wrong thing.

The tragic narrative of The Lord of the Rings and the accompanying texts, most notably The Silmarillion is one which stems out of a basic reality of the world of the story. The wold was created imperfect, and is subject to entropic change over time. Even though there is a heroic narrative taking place where many characters will do their best, do the right thing, work for good, stick together, and they will manage to make a significant difference in the course of the story, there are massive, historical underlying forces which mean that the world can never go back or regain the former glory and goodness.

The scourge of Sauron is defeated, but the age of Elves ends, the ring is destroyed, but Frodo never recovers from his injuries, Saruman is defeated, but the Shire is never going to be the same as before the battle. In many ways, The Lord of the Rings is about dealing with the fallout of tragedy, informed by Tolkien’s experiences during and after World War 1, (HERE is an article that touches on that, written by his grandson Simon Tolkien). But it also deals with the premise of a flawed universe.

In the creation myth of Middle-earth, the world is sung into being, but as it forms a ‘discordant note’ enters the song, and the ripples of that fan out through the history of the world, it is linked directly to Morgoth, whose main drive is to corrupt elements of creation and sow discord, and later Sauron, Morgoth’s servant. This represents a sense that there is a force for decay built into the world of the story, and that if it weren’t for the heroes who stand up to face it, then it would be able to spread corruption and decay unchecked. The nature of an entropic universe is to fall into chaos, but that chaos can be mitigated, the form it takes altered.

The tragedy is that all things must end eventually, but the agency of the characters is that they can make a stand and say ‘not today’. They win, but at great cost, they return home and see how it is marked by what has occurred.

So some things to keep in mind when you’re writing a tragedy:

Figure out what kind of tragedy it is, what is the cause of the tragedy?

Ensure that your characters have agency, they must be able to take an active role in the events of the story.

Work out the scale of the tragedy, is this a personal, intimate story, or is it a metaphysical story? (could be both, most likely somewhere in the middle)

It could help to think of what the ‘happy’ version of the story might be, and that can help you visualise the tragedy as ‘what went wrong’--what made Hamlet go from a teen comedy about a couple of bros at college into the gorefest it ends up being?

I hope that helps, this is a pretty broad question though, so if I’ve missed the mark here, please do send a more specific question.