View Single Post
Old 05-23-2002, 10:18 PM   #13
Naaramare
Wight
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Fort St John
Posts: 196
Naaramare has just left Hobbiton.
Send a message via AIM to Naaramare
Tolkien

Evenstar1--For the numerical set, I must give credit to my father. He's a physics and quantum mechanics nut with a strong side interest in Tolkien and he often drags me along for the ride.

Dad also wishes to impart that the rings+istari add to 25 and they are the numbers of the representations of a fiveXfive group and that five is the demensionality of the Kaluza-Klein equation. If anyone's interested in thinking about the theory. As well, the fewer rings/powers in the set, the more powerful the individual ring/power.

The Istari are thus *living* rings. Which makes Gandalf a double-ring.

As to Bombadil, what I meant was that, unless he happens to be Illuvatar Himself out for a bit of fun (another theory I like), his entire world and thought is focussed on his little strip of land. Within that place, within his boundaries, the ring is useless. Thus, he has no use for it and no reason to want it.

The same can be applied to Sam. Sam is a very elemental creature. He wants more than anything to go home to a well-ordered Shire where he can make a gorgeous garden and go on making sure Mr Frodo doesn't go wander off a cliff somewhere. The Ring has no use in the scenario he desires most; thus his desire for the Ring is not really overwhelming.

Hence the reason a hobbit, and not a dwarf, man/woman, elf or Istari could "safely" carry the Ring. They all had desires which the Ring could satisfy. Sam didn't. And from what I read of Bombadil, neither does he. That's not to say Sam/Bombadil is incorruptable, but the Ring just has nothing (really) to offer them.

But I digress. . . .I do that a lot.
__________________
"I once spent two weeks in a tree trying to talk to a bird."
--Puck, Brother Mine

si man i yulma nin equantuva? [my blog]
Naaramare is offline   Reply With Quote