I know this is probably kind of trivial, but I want to know what they are. I might even want to know what the myths and legends are. If we know that the constellations and that they're people from myth and legend, we should know what they look like and what the myths and legends are! This seems logical to me.

Please impliment books, things like this lend themselves to people writing books about them. Along with 1000 other things people want to write about. Just ask people like Tresyr and Dyr, there is a need.

Hm, I assumed the constellations were the far-distant Astral spheres. Which lends itself to the coterminous planar theory Auseklis said applied. That's what I've been believing anyway.

What exactly is this coterminous planar theory he described? I always assumed they were coexistant, what with the nexuses existing on every plane.

As for astrospheres being constellations, the only evidence i see for that without knowledge of the theory is the names, which doesn't strike me as quite enough.

Do you mean the planes all exist in a single existance and are merely separate, like planets? For me that sorta defies the nature of plane, though i see why lusternians would think of them as planes for lack of knowledge of 'outer space' as it is.

Yes, that's what I'd have thought, but coterminous is what Auseklis says it is. It's basically like the planets thing, yes. I think it was Archthron described the concept I was looking for fairly well as one big sheet of paper, and then smaller ones piled on top of that, and bolted down through parts by little nails (planes and nexi respectively.) Also, it's the "astral" plane, which sounds very spacey to me, and the names lend themselves towards interpretation as constellations too.

Very true.

Actually I just handed in a report for my geometry course on the fourth linear dimension and I'll admit I borrowed that idea.

Imagine a plane that is prime, then another plane above it (we're talking planes in the geometric sense) then a third plane above that. When we "transverse" the plane it appears to use as a sort of teleportation, but only because we can't perceive of this "up" that exists off our "plane"

Its interesting if you extend the analogy to an infinite number of planes so they're no longer discrete and become a continuum. Its an odd way of thinking about the fourth dimension very applicable to Lusternia.

Obviously if all of the places we think of as planes exist in one three dimensional space, we really are teleporting between them in transversals, but the idea of multiple planets defies the nexus link example.

I believe what I put forward (and what it sounds like Archthron was getting at) about a four dimensional planar idea (with coterminity (sp?)) is more likely.

Similarly, coexistence defies the idea that the planes are layered, and thus the reasoning of being able to go from the Elements to the Cosms, but not the Astral. Coterminosity *makes up that word if it doesn't exist* could potentially be explained (the nexus thing) by saying that each "sphere" type plane touches only at one point, but it's a pretty big point as far as planar influence goes, so it'd be like... *bad drawing*

Cosmic
-----
----- -----
Elements Astral

or something like that.

Um. The drawing isn't coming out properly when I post. Pretend the ----- under cosmic is right in the middle and above the elements and astral things.

Well I was thinking coexistance meant that they existed in the same space, merely in a different "phase" with reality.

Coterminininitosity or whatever, if you look at the word coterminous it means the end at the same place, ie run into each other or share a border.

In a coterminous planar existance the planes have "edges" and its possible to get from one to another through means other than transversing, at least if the exits to go there existed. This would be supported by the "one space" example you've mentioned.

Then you talk about a planar model where the spaces are stacked in a fourth dimension. I at least assume this is what you mean since I don't think you mean above in the three dimensional sense where i could fly up and up and hit the "ground" of other planes from below.

So I'm kind of confused which of these you mean, if either.

EDIT: You're right about coexistance, it does defy layering

In Imperian I wrote up all this stuff about constellations. Nobody liked it or cared, It was a big waste of time.

I feel stupid!

Damn 4th dimension.

You are the little ray of sunshine in my days, Daganev. I don't know how I'd get through them without you.

prozac will help when I'm not around.

umm yeah, well if either shiri or sekreh could write that down in normal people speak it would be nice.

Regardless of the constellation thing, books in general would be very nice.

Okay, I spent way too much time D&D playing, so don't feel stupid, Erion or Eirene, I'm not actually smart, just nerdy about pointless things.

Okay, so the two (main) possible planar ideas are coexistence, and cotermi...nosity...or something.
Coexistence is when planes are basically sitting in the same place, but...existing differently. So like a 5th (or whatever, Hazar will tell you) dimension. So each Nexus would exist in the same place on three different dimensions. However, that makes the whole planar layering thing slightly screwy, and sort of defies how the planes are of all different sizes too.
Coterminosity, or whatever the Nil the word for that is, is where planes are like little spheres in space (or whatever) that end in places. So like little globes that JUST touch each other, those are the nexuses. And I'm not entirely sure what the third (there are probably more, those are the only three I know) is called, but it's basically a cross between the two, as with my poorly drawn line diagram a few posts up that didn't format properly.

Right, I've actually changed my mind about this, you can have coexistant layering, which I believe is what Shiri is refering to with his third option.

Imagine a grid on paper, it has an x and y axis. The z axis, or third dimension, extends upwards from the paper. To someone in a two dimensional existance, anything with the same x and y co-ordinates is in the same place, as they cannot conceive of this third dimension. So imagine that there are other planes parallel to that plane, so they have a different z value. I could be at (0,0) on one plane and someone else could be at (0,0) on a plane that was above it and parallel. Their x and y co-ordinates are different but their z co-ordinate is different. Since the denizens of this flat existance aren't aware of z, they believe these two people exist in the same place, but in differen't "realities". We as three dimensional observers see that these people occupy different space with respect to the third dimension.

Apply that to the planes. Let's say the megalith sits at the co-ordinates (12,5,7) with respect to our three dimensional existance. The megalith on Nil also occupies (12,5,7), it coexists with the megalith on prime. You don't fly up in the air or burrow (increase or decrease your z value) move forward or backwards (increase or decrease your y value) or move right or left (increase or decrease your x value) when transversing. You merely "switch realities". What's actually happening, in my arrogant oppinion, is you are changing your position with respect to the fourth dimension, call it a. Your a value has changed as you move not forwards, backwards, left, right, up, or down but rather "Planar North" or "Planar South" away from this space into another without changing your three dimensional position. If you don't understand this, read my other paragraph about two to three. This is the same, three to four. Just as there are other, parallel, two dimensional planes in my first example, there are other, parallel, three dimensional spaces in lusternia. That's how I think it works.

I liked Daganev's stuff about the stars

Actually, sitting here re-reading things, it does make sense. Foggy memories of physics class and the 4th, 5th, 6th dimensions are coming back.

Yea, those lectures were only like a month and a half ago. Sue me.

That the skill Tesseract is named "tesseract" gives a thumbs-up to the "four dimensional" model. (A teleport is a movement in three dimensions; thus, its vector describes a cube or box. A tesseract is a movement in four dimensions; thus, its vector describes a hypercube or tesseract.)

At first I thought the description of where the Aetherways was went against that model, though. But then I realized it isn't. It's easier to explain why if we subtract one dimension and visit Edwin Abbott's Flatland.

Now Prime is a two-dimension universe, a sheet of paper at the bottom of a stack. Ethereal is laying on top of it, and then the Elementals on top of that (four little pieces of paper), and then Cosmic, and then Astral. We're a bunch of two-dimensional flatpeople walking around. Some of the things we look at are actually three-dimensional (the nexii, for instance) but we only see one slice of them at a time; imagine a pencil shoved down through all the pieces of paper, that's the Megalith of Doom, for instance.

So where is the Aetherways? If it was "the spaces between the planes" it wouldn't be adjacent to all of them. It'd be between one layer and the next, or something. But what if it was another piece of paper standing on end, at right angles to all the others, touching all of them at one end? Imagine that the sheets of paper are in a box; the box touches all the sheets of paper on their edges. The box itself is the Aetherways.

So I'm sticking with my four-dimensional model.

Exactly, in fact it was that book that gave me the idea for all of this, hence my 2d plane analogies

Yeah, I like Gwyl's/Archthron's one best. (They both used the same analogy, one in another topic.)

that big blue one in the middle is Sapience