Comments on: The wrong ‘brand’ of science http://www.theoriesonlost.com/2009/12/the-wrong-brand-of-science/ A place to write and read Lost Theories Thu, 17 May 2012 19:43:17 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: Tas http://www.theoriesonlost.com/2009/12/the-wrong-brand-of-science/#comment-20922 Tas Thu, 10 Dec 2009 16:09:50 +0000 http://www.theoriesonlost.com/?p=7271#comment-20922 Quantum physics and relativistic physics are related, especially where Hawking and his theories are involved so Im not saying that there is no quantum physics at all. What I'm talking about is the more obscure, interpretations of quantum mechanics where the scientists themselves can't even agree on how to view and understand the mathematics involved such as schrodingers cat and quantum suicide... There hasn't been references to many worlds or infinite possiblities or the same events repeating over and over, the evidence in the show leads towards the more accepted, understood and scientifically agreed upon sciences. I think that line by Faraday is there to tell us that whatever is going on is a bit crazy, a bit outside the norm and not what most scientists would expect to happen (FDW and time skipping flashes isn't what you get on trip to most tropic islands). It's a way of telling us that the processes at work here are a bit out of the ordinary not that there are infinate worlds, that everyone is dead and alive at the same time. Quantum physics and relativistic physics are related, especially where Hawking and his theories are involved so Im not saying that there is no quantum physics at all. What I’m talking about is the more obscure, interpretations of quantum mechanics where the scientists themselves can’t even agree on how to view and understand the mathematics involved such as schrodingers cat and quantum suicide… There hasn’t been references to many worlds or infinite possiblities or the same events repeating over and over, the evidence in the show leads towards the more accepted, understood and scientifically agreed upon sciences. I think that line by Faraday is there to tell us that whatever is going on is a bit crazy, a bit outside the norm and not what most scientists would expect to happen (FDW and time skipping flashes isn’t what you get on trip to most tropic islands). It’s a way of telling us that the processes at work here are a bit out of the ordinary not that there are infinate worlds, that everyone is dead and alive at the same time.

]]> By: Roland http://www.theoriesonlost.com/2009/12/the-wrong-brand-of-science/#comment-20915 Roland Thu, 10 Dec 2009 13:19:25 +0000 http://www.theoriesonlost.com/?p=7271#comment-20915 I just started rewatching season 5. When the Losties start flashing on the island Sawyer demands an explanation from Faraday. Dan says he would have trouble telling a quantum physicist what's going on. I guess we could take this statement two ways. Either quantum physics is involved and it's just a hard concept to grasp or that that type of scientist wouldn't understand because the answer is in relativistic not quantum terms. But Faraday DID bring up the subject of quantum physics. I just started rewatching season 5. When the Losties start flashing on the island Sawyer demands an explanation from Faraday. Dan says he would have trouble telling a quantum physicist what’s going on. I guess we could take this statement two ways. Either quantum physics is involved and it’s just a hard concept to grasp or that that type of scientist wouldn’t understand because the answer is in relativistic not quantum terms.
But Faraday DID bring up the subject of quantum physics.

]]> By: Tas http://www.theoriesonlost.com/2009/12/the-wrong-brand-of-science/#comment-20887 Tas Wed, 09 Dec 2009 06:27:37 +0000 http://www.theoriesonlost.com/?p=7271#comment-20887 Also, I haven't based this on my opinion, it's all in the show. They've used real science and have told us about it - in what Daniel says, what his doctorate is on, in his journal. The science is well researched and strongly founded in relatitistic physics. Why would they do all of that, spend the time filling Daniel's journal with stuff that we can see and research and then go 'Hey, I know we've said and shown other stuff but the science is all obscure quantum mechanics' that makes absolutely no sense from a narrative perspective. Yes they've been a bit sneaky with how they've shown parts of the story to us but that would be like lying and they haven't done that. Also, I haven’t based this on my opinion, it’s all in the show. They’ve used real science and have told us about it – in what Daniel says, what his doctorate is on, in his journal. The science is well researched and strongly founded in relatitistic physics. Why would they do all of that, spend the time filling Daniel’s journal with stuff that we can see and research and then go ‘Hey, I know we’ve said and shown other stuff but the science is all obscure quantum mechanics’ that makes absolutely no sense from a narrative perspective. Yes they’ve been a bit sneaky with how they’ve shown parts of the story to us but that would be like lying and they haven’t done that.

]]> By: Tas http://www.theoriesonlost.com/2009/12/the-wrong-brand-of-science/#comment-20886 Tas Wed, 09 Dec 2009 06:12:02 +0000 http://www.theoriesonlost.com/?p=7271#comment-20886 I'm mostly talking about the branch of quantum mechanics that has been mentioned here a bit of late where even the physicists can't agree on how to interpret it because many or the concepts are so purely mathmatical and theoretical. Ideas like Schrodinger's cat and quantum suicide are one interpretation of a whole pile of interpretations on mathematic 'stuff' for want of a better word. What I'm talking about does merge with aspects of quantum theory and I think can be easily explained with a quick chat between characters. People are familiar with Einstein and Hawking and can hang their hats on those theories because they can be simple enough for a lay person to understand. I don't think the more pseudo science and complicated mathematical quantum mechanics is easily decipherable or explainable to all. I’m mostly talking about the branch of quantum mechanics that has been mentioned here a bit of late where even the physicists can’t agree on how to interpret it because many or the concepts are so purely mathmatical and theoretical. Ideas like Schrodinger’s cat and quantum suicide are one interpretation of a whole pile of interpretations on mathematic ‘stuff’ for want of a better word. What I’m talking about does merge with aspects of quantum theory and I think can be easily explained with a quick chat between characters. People are familiar with Einstein and Hawking and can hang their hats on those theories because they can be simple enough for a lay person to understand. I don’t think the more pseudo science and complicated mathematical quantum mechanics is easily decipherable or explainable to all.

]]> By: Andre7 http://www.theoriesonlost.com/2009/12/the-wrong-brand-of-science/#comment-20882 Andre7 Wed, 09 Dec 2009 03:49:17 +0000 http://www.theoriesonlost.com/?p=7271#comment-20882 Doesn't quantum theory originate from Einsteinian physics? I thought Einstein started the whole ball rolling and other physicists just continued along the path he opened up. Reality is not what it seems. Time and space are more complex than the Greeks allowed for. New instruments can measure the stuff of the universe on a whole new level and all bets about the physical universe are off because matter just doesn't operate the way you (or Einstein) would have thought. I see no contradiction or complication introduced in the show that cannot be explained for the average viewer with a few lines of dialogue. Doesn’t quantum theory originate from Einsteinian physics? I thought Einstein started the whole ball rolling and other physicists just continued along the path he opened up.

Reality is not what it seems. Time and space are more complex than the Greeks allowed for. New instruments can measure the stuff of the universe on a whole new level and all bets about the physical universe are off because matter just doesn’t operate the way you (or Einstein) would have thought.

I see no contradiction or complication introduced in the show that cannot be explained for the average viewer with a few lines of dialogue.

]]> By: Tas http://www.theoriesonlost.com/2009/12/the-wrong-brand-of-science/#comment-20862 Tas Tue, 08 Dec 2009 20:34:24 +0000 http://www.theoriesonlost.com/?p=7271#comment-20862 I kind of want a bit of both, I'd like some of the big picture stuff answered, if only to say what theories it was based on, but yes, I'd also like some things to be left unknown. I really don't think the 'science' of Lost has been made up. Their mythic, religious, scientific and philosophical references have been spot on and really well researched, I can't see them not having a solid scientific foundation which they bounced off. On The Force - yes I agree, totally dodgy, mostly because it was just made up. If it's not based on science, don't tell us about it. I kind of want a bit of both, I’d like some of the big picture stuff answered, if only to say what theories it was based on, but yes, I’d also like some things to be left unknown. I really don’t think the ‘science’ of Lost has been made up. Their mythic, religious, scientific and philosophical references have been spot on and really well researched, I can’t see them not having a solid scientific foundation which they bounced off.
On The Force – yes I agree, totally dodgy, mostly because it was just made up. If it’s not based on science, don’t tell us about it.

]]> By: I_Am_Jacob http://www.theoriesonlost.com/2009/12/the-wrong-brand-of-science/#comment-20861 I_Am_Jacob Tue, 08 Dec 2009 19:17:36 +0000 http://www.theoriesonlost.com/?p=7271#comment-20861 i'm sure that it was another member on his site who made reference to The Force from the Star Wars films - it was better when the Force was just some mystical power that you could harness and you didn't know what it was. but then in episode 1, the force was kind of explained through things called midechlorians (excuse my spelling) which sort of spoilt the effect. It may be better if some of the mysteries of the island such as its healing power and the smoke monster remain a mystery. this way the show remains a proper sci-fi and the writers don't have to explain the science behind the mysteries. personally, i would like a bit of an explaination on these things, even if the explaination is not based on any real scientific facts. i’m sure that it was another member on his site who made reference to The Force from the Star Wars films – it was better when the Force was just some mystical power that you could harness and you didn’t know what it was. but then in episode 1, the force was kind of explained through things called midechlorians (excuse my spelling) which sort of spoilt the effect.

It may be better if some of the mysteries of the island such as its healing power and the smoke monster remain a mystery. this way the show remains a proper sci-fi and the writers don’t have to explain the science behind the mysteries.

personally, i would like a bit of an explaination on these things, even if the explaination is not based on any real scientific facts.

]]> By: BanLinus http://www.theoriesonlost.com/2009/12/the-wrong-brand-of-science/#comment-20857 BanLinus Tue, 08 Dec 2009 14:33:42 +0000 http://www.theoriesonlost.com/?p=7271#comment-20857 I was paraphrasing Mrs. Hawking. Some things will be explained in a slight way. But this is fiction and like many sci fi shows the science will be whatever the writers make the science to be. It may not be based on quantum physics or relativity physics or whatever. And these things will only be mentioned in passing. I was paraphrasing Mrs. Hawking. Some things will be explained in a slight way. But this is fiction and like many sci fi shows the science will be whatever the writers make the science to be. It may not be based on quantum physics or relativity physics or whatever. And these things will only be mentioned in passing.

]]> By: Tas http://www.theoriesonlost.com/2009/12/the-wrong-brand-of-science/#comment-20850 Tas Tue, 08 Dec 2009 03:40:00 +0000 http://www.theoriesonlost.com/?p=7271#comment-20850 Believe in what? It's a sci-fi show, so there has to be a scientific base or else it is a fantasy. I don't think we'll have any complete exposition of exactly how everything works but I do think that there will be a quick 'here's what's going on, fill in the blanks for yourselves' (which will make sense scientifically for those who want to delve deeper). That's why I think most of the island's properties can be explained with relativity quickly and easily so that they can get on with the character drama, which is the main crux of the show. Believe in what? It’s a sci-fi show, so there has to be a scientific base or else it is a fantasy. I don’t think we’ll have any complete exposition of exactly how everything works but I do think that there will be a quick ‘here’s what’s going on, fill in the blanks for yourselves’ (which will make sense scientifically for those who want to delve deeper). That’s why I think most of the island’s properties can be explained with relativity quickly and easily so that they can get on with the character drama, which is the main crux of the show.

]]> By: BanLinus http://www.theoriesonlost.com/2009/12/the-wrong-brand-of-science/#comment-20849 BanLinus Tue, 08 Dec 2009 03:13:50 +0000 http://www.theoriesonlost.com/?p=7271#comment-20849 I think you have to stop asking "How is this possible" and start asking the important question, "Do you believe?" I think you have to stop asking “How is this possible” and start asking the important question, “Do you believe?”

]]>