Page 1 of 1

Anecestral vs shared memory

Posted: 04 Nov 2024 12:19
by georgiedenbro
I've moved a conversation from the CoD reading group there to open up sources I can drawn upon.
Cpt. Aramsham wrote: 29 Aug 2024 06:35 Whether or not you agree with this interpretation, I don't see how it could have anything to do with Ancestral Memories, since Paul (obviously) is not one of Mohiam's ancestors. If he is in her memories, they're not Ancestral Memories.
Getting back to what you said here, which is a good point:
The old woman pointed a finger at Alia. "Get out of my mind!"
"T-P?" the Emperor whispered. He snapped his attention back to Alia. "By the Great Mother!"
"You don't understand. Majesty," the old woman said. "Not telepathy. She's in my mind. She's like the ones before me, the ones who gave me their memories. She stands in my mind! She cannot be there, but she is!"
"What others?" the Emperor demanded. "What's this nonsense?"
I'm going to move this discussion to a new thread, because I need to bring up some stuff in other books.

Taking this quote at face value, it's not T-P, meaning Alia isn't 'entering' Mohiam's subconscious or whatever. If the BG sharing/sympatico was all there is, then Mohiam would no doubt expect Alia to have the same powers and be able to sympatico with Mohiam and share memories. If Alia had the power to access her own male drive or subconscious (the Jungian thing you mention) then it would likewise be no surprise that a 'female-KH' could do that. Even though the existence of a female KH would surprise Mohiam, she'd know that this ability is theoretically expected. But what happenes here is something Mohiam legitimately thinks is impossible, i.e. doesn't even make sense.

So while this passage does refer to shared memories, the ones who gave me their memories, it also states pretty clearly that Alia is in there among them, despite not being Mohiam's ancestor. I take this as a definitive statement from the author that something very weird is going on, for which there's no BG precedent. And we must assume that Paul has this same ability. What's going on has something to do with how memory works, and maybe how time works, but it isn't just sharing or joining or telepathy. Here, Alia seems to actually be able to position herself among Mohiam's ancestors and be one of the voices clamoring for her attention, even able to potentially possess her. And likewise, when Paul tells Jessica he can be staring right back at her from the place she cannot go, I think he's saying that he can, at will, become a male ancestor to Jessica clamoring to be heard. The way to explain what this means or how they can do it isn't to be found in any of the three books, so I don't think there's any point trying. I think CH:D is the first book that begins to explore the meaning behind some weird things, such as this.

As I've mentioned elsewhere, I think FH's premise through this series (and the Pandora series too) is that (a) time is a place, not a when, (b) people can in theory access this place just as they can move about in space, which Ship does because it's fully conscious, and (c) memory is somehow embedded in space, rather than in brains, and can be accessed if the right circumstances line up. The KH in Dune doesn't seem conscious enough to move about through time, or alter it outright, but can peer around through time and affect it to a certain degree. This also explains the BG realization in the last two books that

Re: Anecestral vs shared memory

Posted: 07 Jan 2025 11:37
by Freakzilla
Alia does it with Paul, too...

Paul closed his eyes, forcing grief out of his mind, letting it wait as he
had once waited to mourn his father. Now, he gave his thoughts over to this
day's accumulated discoveries -- the mixed futures and the hidden presence of
Alia within his awareness.
Of all the uses of time-vision, this was the strangest. "I have breasted the
future to place my words where only you can hear them," Alia had said. "Even you
cannot do that, my brother. I find it an interesting play. And . . . oh, yes --
I've killed our grandfather, the demented old Baron. He had very little pain."
Silence. His time sense had seen her withdrawal.

~Dune

Re: Anecestral vs shared memory

Posted: 07 Jan 2025 11:42
by Freakzilla
He thought: Time is a measure of space, just as a range finder is a measure
of space, but measuring locks us into the place we measure.

~Chidren of Dune

Re: Anecestral vs shared memory

Posted: 15 Jan 2025 13:51
by georgiedenbro
Freakzilla wrote: 07 Jan 2025 11:42 He thought: Time is a measure of space, just as a range finder is a measure
of space, but measuring locks us into the place we measure.

~Chidren of Dune
Yes, exactly.

Re: Anecestral vs shared memory

Posted: 18 Jan 2025 02:40
by Serkanner
Freakzilla wrote: 07 Jan 2025 11:42 He thought: Time is a measure of space, just as a range finder is a measure
of space, but measuring locks us into the place we measure.

~Chidren of Dune
This sounds very similar to quantum superposition and its different interpretations. I have been reading a bit about Quantum Physics and so and although much of it goes way above my level of understanding it is fascinating stuff.

Re: Anecestral vs shared memory

Posted: 18 Jan 2025 09:42
by Freakzilla
I try to learn about quantum mechanics but like Feynman said, "If you think you understand quantum mechanics, you don't understand quantum mechanics."

I think this is part of the "block universe" idea. Where every time already exists, like layers where particles are in different places. What we perceive as time is just our passage through the layers. I probably explained that very poorly.

I recall there's one epigraph where FH mentions the wave collapse, I'll try to find it...

Re: Anecestral vs shared memory

Posted: 18 Jan 2025 10:21
by Freakzilla
Only in the realm of mathematics can you understand Muad'Dib's precise view of
the future. Thus: first, we postulate any number of point-dimensions in space.
(This is the classic n-fold extended aggregate of n dimensions.) With this
framework, Time as commonly understood becomes an aggregate of one-dimensional
properties. Applying this to the Muad'Dib phenomenon, we find that we either are
confronted by new properties of Time or (by reduction through the infinity
calculus) we are dealing with separate systems which contain n body properties.
For Muad'Dib, we assume the latter. As demonstrated by the reduction, the point
dimensions of the n-fold can only have separate existence within different
frameworks of Time. Separate dimensions of Time are thus demonstrated to
coexist. This being the inescapable case, Muad'Dib's predictions required that
he perceive the n-fold not as extended aggregate but as an operation within a
single framework. In effect, he froze his universe into that one framework which
was his view of Time.
-Palimbasha: Lectures at Sietch Tabr


I don't think that's the one I was thinking of, but it's interesting.

Re: Anecestral vs shared memory

Posted: 23 Jan 2025 16:07
by georgiedenbro
Serkanner wrote: 18 Jan 2025 02:40
Freakzilla wrote: 07 Jan 2025 11:42 He thought: Time is a measure of space, just as a range finder is a measure
of space, but measuring locks us into the place we measure.

~Chidren of Dune
This sounds very similar to quantum superposition and its different interpretations. I have been reading a bit about Quantum Physics and so and although much of it goes way above my level of understanding it is fascinating stuff.
I think it's FH's way of combining Relativity and Quantum. It's Einstein's theory that says that space and time are the same substance, and that the one is the measure of the other. Usually physicists depict this on an X/Y axis diagram where X is movement and Y is time, and show that the 'movement' through both is constant, but can be larger in degree in the spacial dimension or in the time dimension. This diagram is used to explain time/space diluation, and how if your relative speed through space is rapid then your speed through time is slower, and vice versa, within the limit of C.

The last clause, about it locking you into the place you measure, is an interpretation of quantum, often attributed to the 'Copenhagen interpretation' of QM, which involves superpositions. I generally assume FH accepted this explanation of QM.