Talk:Pak Protector

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The article says that the Pak built the Ringworld—is that really the case, or did they just populate it? The article Ringworld is no help, and I don't recall when the identity of the builders was conclusively revealed. Also, I don't remember the Pak having either the technology or the teamwork skills necessary to create the Ringworld. —No-One Jones ^(m) 01:06, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I agree a Pak would be unlikely to cooperate in such a huge project. However, if you read the Ringworld Throne (or maybe the Ringworld Engineers) you'd notice that their intelligence is feared even by the Puppeteers.

I am inclined to agree, but Ringworld's Children seems to clarify this, although you have to take a Protector's word for it. Larry is reknowned for having characters tell enormous porkies in his books, and only revealing the lie in a later story. — PhilHibbs | talk 14:33, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

However, the Pak in "Children" is pretty detailed about the history of the ringworld, and the maps of the planets in the "other" great ocean do seem to be the Pak homeworld; I'd say that the protector told at least in most parts the truth. Since Niven resolves the entire Ringworld story arc quite thoroughly with "Children", there seems to be no way for the people of known space (and hence the readers) to ever find out whether it was a lie or not. Personally, I think Niven got tired of Ringworld and wanted to end the series. He doesn't have a reason to lie. -- Nils Jeppe 13:49, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Protectors and Tnuctipun

The introduction contains a statement that I find hard to accept:

"The most accepted hypothesis with regard to their origin is that they are a dichotomy brought about by the Tnuctipun's breeding policies and the plant known as Tree-of-Life."

There is no trace of a hint in anything that Niven wrote that suggests that the protectors are a anything to do with Tnuctipun policy. They're just descended from food yeast like the rest of us. My brother came up with a theory that expands on the evolution of life from food yeast, but even this does not go so far as to imply that protectors are a deliberate result. I'm removing this sentence as there is no reference or justification for it. — PhilHibbs | talk 09:29, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Evolution

"Another part of this protection is to prevent mutations from surviving (thus rendering Darwinian evolution impossible). A mutant breeder will smell "wrong" and soon die without a protector to look after it." I disagree with this; if a protector weeds out those that are unlike him, he is in fact speeding up the selection process. This is close to artificial selection, even, but I think that since it's based on whether or not the subject in question smells like a certain protector, it's natural selection, like a bird that would kill young that are not like it. I'm going to remove this line. 68.55.232.197 21:43, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Addendum

Does anyone else have a problem with the Addendum section where it talks about how life can't exist on Mars and that is why Niven had to kill off the Martians? Though it is a nice look into Niven's writing process, it has little to do with the actual article and hurts the suspension of disbelief of the internal consistancy of his writings. ZPS102 01:07, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

I agree with your assessment. Although an interesting sidenote, that addendum section simply doesn't fit. It would perhaps be better placed in the entry on Larry Niven. --Timholman 16:31, 3 July 2006 (UTC)