Where do elves get metal?

[Marwhini]

Originally Posted by Nerwen

Uh-huh. So it is what I thought. You are trying to create a working model of Middle-earth, with modified physics to account for the spiritual element.

Like many people, I was under the impression that this was simply to be "on paper", but now it seems that it involves computer simulation and *possibly* the ultimate creation of a Matrix-like virtual Middle-earth. Very well. The fault lies not with us but with you for your failure to make this remotely clear (whilst constantly berating us for our supposed stupidity in not "getting it").

It is both "on Paper" AND with a Computer.

Do you not know what a Turning Machine is (The Earliest Conception by Turing)?

A strip of paper, with encoded rules that describe various operations?

Turing proved that this simple model was capable of solving any problem possible that could be computed.

At that point, you are then left with the philosophical issue of: P = NP || P ≠ NP.

Originally Posted by Nerwen

While making the project far more grandiose than I had realised, it still doesn't change the fact that it is, as I said originally, just a form of fan-fiction. You may produce something that will satisfy you as a "canonical" model of Middle-earth, but be rejected by countless other fans as being as much a travesty to them as Jackson's films are to you. Are you prepared for that? I have seen you make many a sweeping pronouncement on what is or isn't "Canon", as though you consider yourself some final authority, but it is not so. There are too many contradictions, too many blank spaces to fill in.

Science is JUST "Fan-Fiction" in that case, because it contains the same problems that exist in Tolkien's world:

We have gaps in history.

We have a lack of a Foundational Philosophical and Metaphysical account of the universe.

And we have multiple competing Theologies, most of which appear to be categorically contradictory.

It's pretty easy to accept/reject other's accounts of Middle-earth based upon a singular criteria:

Do they alter the Canon?

Peter Jackson didn't just alter the canon, he vomited all over it. And that doesn't even get into the metaphysical or theological minutia. All one needs to look at is the pure Historical record of Middle-earth (what Tolkien said happened, and where).

Originally Posted by Nerwen

I have said "you may produce something..." There's the rub. Who in your group has the ability to do all this? I mean, yes, you claim expert knowledge in a vast number of fields- so vast that I have to tell you that you are frankly starting to come across as more of a fantasist than anything else. But okay, I'll assume you're qualified in one or more areas relevant to the project, and that there are people in your group with expertise in complementary areas. Well. Do you *listen* to them? Do you treat them with respect? How did you recruit them in the first place? Doesn't that mean you were at some point willing to entertain the idea that someone, somewhere, might know more than you about something? Because from what I've seen of you so far, Marhwini, that's really quite hard to believe.

EDIT: By the way, I did not at any point describe your idea as "insane". I said you had too much emotional investment in it.[/QUOTE]

How we treat each other seems to be exactly the same as how everyone in academic gets treated. Some have more experience than others.

And I didn't recruit them.

We got the idea after the original Jackson movies were produced, but it really didn't go very far until the second Trilogy of movies was produced, when we all pretty much reacted with revulsion to Jackson's treatment of The Hobbit, and began wondering a bit more deeply about a simple question (which also sums up the goal):

"What would need to be true given what is true in Tolkien's works?"

Another way to put that is:

"What is necessarily True in Middle-earth given the Observation of Middle-earth?" (not necessarily referring to the books by the same name there).

This is the essence of the Sciences (What is Necessarily True given what we Observe of the Universe?).

MB

[Nerwen]

Me yet again. Look, I've just been thinking a bit more about this- there is another basic problem with your approach, already mentioned by Morthoron, which at present makes it hard to take seriously.

Originally Posted by Marwhini

It's pretty easy to accept/reject other's accounts of Middle-earth based upon a singular criteria:

Do they alter the Canon?

Peter Jackson didn't just alter the canon, he vomited all over it. And that doesn't even get into the metaphysical or theological minutia. All one needs to look at is the pure Historical record of Middle-earth (what Tolkien said happened, and where).

...and then reject anything that doesn't fit your model as in-world fiction, as demonstrated by your "explanation" of the talking purse. In other words, you are ignoring that "singular criterion" in practice.

It seems that what you are doing is

• arbitrarily designating various elements of Tolkien's writing as true or false.
• creating a Grand Unified Theory of Middle-earth to account for the "true" elements only.
• using the theory to determine whether elements of Tolkien's writing are true or false.

How we treat each other seems to be exactly the same as how everyone in academic gets treated. Some have more experience than others.

And I didn't recruit them.

We got the idea after the original Jackson movies were produced, but it really didn't go very far until the second Trilogy of movies was produced, when we all pretty much reacted with revulsion to Jackson's treatment of The Hobbit, and began wondering a bit more deeply about a simple question (which also sums up the goal):

"What would need to be true given what is true in Tolkien's works?"

Another way to put that is:

"What is necessarily True in Middle-earth given the Observation of Middle-earth?" (not necessarily referring to the books by the same name there).

This is the essence of the Sciences (What is Necessarily True given what we Observe of the Universe?).

And not one of your scientific experts can recognise circular reasoning (see above)? Really?

Now, if you were just content to come up with a partial model, rather than a Middle-earth Theory of Everything, the problem would largely disappear- but you have said many times that isn't the case.