Huh? I think you shook me at that sharp left-hand corner back 200 metres...

The Newcomer schrieb:

> > And on closely inspection both what I wrote and what Brian wrote, I found another

> > mistake which I adopted unchecked. Skuld is the future and Urd is the past, so
Urd
> > should be the childish one and Skuld the sexy one if Brians theory was correct.

> Not nessisarily:
> Following MY (^_^) all purpose theory (ain't it great?),
> and assuming Beldandy to be the primary manifestation of the Norn entity
> in this reality, this reality's Skuld will be Belldandy's  age in the
> future.

Fine. Followed so far. But what Brian wrote was Skuld being the past aspect of the

Norns, and basing his theory on the (deliberate?) mistake of switching Urd's and Skuld's

aspects around.

> Darn tootin. Belldandy will be Beldandy's age in the Present (Gee
> whizz! Didn't spot that one!) and Urudo will be Beldandys Age in the past,
> broadly speaking. Makes perfect sense, really.

Shouldn't that have been "was" instead of "will be"?

> However, If a different Norn-aspect were to manifest, then that
> Norn-aspect would of course be taking over the role of "goddess of the
> present", and all others would have to change status accordingly.
> Makes perfect sense. To me, at least. ^_^

Which really does not change the fact that Brian mistook what goddess represents what

aspect of time.So for some reason I fail to see what your post is applying your theory

to.
            Andreas Dombrowsky