XPost: alt.usage.english, rec.arts.sf.written, rec.arts.books   
   From: throopw@sheol.org   
      
   :: Believe them when they say what, precisely?  Is it "FTL and time   
   :: travel are not possible under the rules of the universe as we   
   :: currently know and understand them" or "FTL and time travel are not   
   :: possible under the rules of the universe?"   
      
   The former, of course.   
      
   : David Hatunen    
   : You do realize you could give the same arguments about ghosts, the   
   : afterlife, and clairvoyance?   
      
   IMO, the bit is "if the rules describing the universe are lorentz   
   invariant, then either FTL or time travel can be used to construct   
   closed timelike loops, and a) those seem a very unlikely thing for   
   the universe to allow, and also b) by this point, it seems very   
   unlikely that the actually-for-really-true rules that really-for-true   
   describe the real-(no-really-the-real-one)-universe aren't   
   lorentz invariant.  At least locally.   
      
   So... in some ways, seems a bit stronger than the argument against   
   phantasms and farightedness.   
      
   IMO, YMMV, VWP.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)