Talk:tesseract
Add topicLatest comment: 11 years ago by Metaknowledge
Why superluminal rather than faster-than-light? The later is much more common in English. Personally, I prefer Anglophone vocabulary to more Latinate, but that's a personal preference.--Prosfilaes (talk) 20:57, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, but you end up sounding like an idiot. I call this Up Goer Five syndrome. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 05:59, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
- In the words of Mg to a different contributor earlier today, do try to avoid inflammatory words like 'idiot'. (Maybe you need a brief wikibreak... I know I've been feisty/grouchy lately and need one, lol.) The flipside to "up goer five" is that words like "superluminal" are often jargon terms relatively few people understand. I remember having to persuade fellow editors to use "elliptical[ly] for" rather than "subaudi"...given that the editors themselves couldn't work out what "subaudi" meant till I made an entry for it(!). In this case, even though google books:"superluminal travel" vs google books:"faster-than-light travel" suggests the former is only about 3% as common as the latter, "superluminal" is still attested enough (and wikilinked) that it's probably intelligible... though I think the definition should either be "superluminal or temporal travel" or "faster-than-light or time travel"; the current mix of registers is odd. - -sche (discuss) 07:23, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
- Sorry, the intertubes and/or blagoblag make things confusing... I meant this comment jocularly. I'm always grouchy to some degree, but I've simply stopped responding to Ll. out of annoyance. The truth is, I can't let myself get to the point where I need a wikibreak, because I have a very addictive personality and I wouldn't be able to function well. But I think I usually respond to personal attacks fairly well, although of course I'm a biased observer to say the least. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 07:31, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
- Try it again, this time with feeling. I mean, "sound"? "idiot"? You need to find some fanciful foreign language, not good old Middle English words if you want to make that claim. (I suggest "imbecile" for the latter.) The Up Goer Five has nothing to do with being Anglophone; space, ship, Saturn and fuel are all from Middle English; exhaust at the least goes back to Shakespeare; oxygen and hydrogen are thoroughly naturalized scientific vocabulary that is the only English word for their role. All superluminal is is "faster-than-light" translated into Latin and thus made more opaque to the English speaker.--Prosfilaes (talk) 07:33, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
- Scilicet: Accompanying Anglophonic verbiage, an orator gradatim exudes effluent particles reminiscent of an ignoramus' hyperspace adventure. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 07:40, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
- Oh, and "faster than light" in Latin is celerius luce, so this is not quite intelligible to the average Roman. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 07:42, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
- In the words of Mg to a different contributor earlier today, do try to avoid inflammatory words like 'idiot'. (Maybe you need a brief wikibreak... I know I've been feisty/grouchy lately and need one, lol.) The flipside to "up goer five" is that words like "superluminal" are often jargon terms relatively few people understand. I remember having to persuade fellow editors to use "elliptical[ly] for" rather than "subaudi"...given that the editors themselves couldn't work out what "subaudi" meant till I made an entry for it(!). In this case, even though google books:"superluminal travel" vs google books:"faster-than-light travel" suggests the former is only about 3% as common as the latter, "superluminal" is still attested enough (and wikilinked) that it's probably intelligible... though I think the definition should either be "superluminal or temporal travel" or "faster-than-light or time travel"; the current mix of registers is odd. - -sche (discuss) 07:23, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
This entry has survived Wiktionary's verification process (permalink).
Please do not re-nominate for verification without comprehensive reasons for doing so.
(figuratively) A wrinkle in time that makes time travel possible. (Used by Madeleine L'Engle in her science-fiction novel, A Wrinkle in Time.)
I suspect it might be a universe-only term. — Ungoliant (Falai) 18:06, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
- Does anyone have the The Oxford Dictionary of Science Fiction? (I get credit, but no copy. Boo, hiss.) It has science fictional uses, though the definition will probably have to be broadened. Doctor Who 2: Tessaract uses tessaract, an alternate spelling, in some science-fictional way, if anyone has access to that work. The Avengers had a tesseract. I'll toss a couple more things on citations page, though I'm having trouble finding solid hits; it comes off as technobable most of the time.--Prosfilaes (talk) 13:06, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
- I'll submit that there's enough citations on the citation page, but the definition is going to have to be generalized to fit them.--Prosfilaes (talk) 14:05, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
RFV passed as reworded, feel free to edit. DAVilla 17:05, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
Thanks Prosfilaes and DAVilla. — Ungoliant (Falai) 02:20, 24 November 2012 (UTC)