• Replies 12 replies
  • Subscribers 85 subscribers
  • Views 501 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
Related
Hints and tips
  • To quote someone's message, first select/highlight the relevant text, and then use the Quote button that appears
  • To "mention" someone, type @ followed by the start of the forum name, and choose from the list; that person will get a notification of being mentioned

Thoughts on: space travel, life and religions on other planets, and what if AI was banned (prompted by the "Dune" movie)

Lotus

This weekend I've watched the 2021 movie "Dune", which covers the first half of the first "Dune" novel by Frank Herbert. I enjoyed it as it brought back memories of reading the books many years ago, and it prompted me to think about the universe that Frank Herbert created.

Dune is the alternative name for a planet called Arrakis - a desert planet populated by enormous sand worms who produce a spice called melange, and an indigenous human tribe called the Fremen, but is run by a powerful noble family who harvest the spice, which is extremely valuable. At the start of the story the planet and the spice harvesting have been controlled for 80 years by the Harkonnen family but the Emperor decrees that the Atriedes family should take over, but I won't go into the politics of the story.

Sand worms are a fascinating fictional life form, with a circular mouth full of sharp teeth, and water is poisonous to them. I was wondering if it would actually be possible to have a life form that doesn't require water and is actually weakened and killed by it?

The way that space travel over long distances is dealt with in sci-fi is always interesting to me. In this case, the spice produced by the sand worms is ingested by Guild Navigators and it gives them the ability to "fold" space, enabling quicker travel over long distances. I wonder if we'll ever be able to do this space folding thing without some sort of weird drug?

In this story, AI has been banned and replaced by human "Mentats" who are trained as sort of human computers, with vast memories, the ability to organise huge amounts of data and devise concise analyses. I wonder if humans could ever achieve this, and f so whether it would take an autistic bloodline to produce it?

Religion also plays a large part in the story. There is a female order called the Bene Geserit who take the spice in a ceremony that allows them to access the memories of their female ancestors, and they have gifts such as "The Voice" which when used allows them to control others. There is a prophesy that one day a male Bene Gesserit will be born, who will also be able to access the memories of their male ancestors. Also the Fremen on Arrakis treat the sand worms as Gods, calling them "Shai Halud" (from the Arabic Shay Khulud, meaning thing of immortality) - they believe that the sand worms are a physical embodiment of the God that created and governed the universe. I wonder, if there was intelligent life on other planets would they have a religion and /or a creator story?

This post is in place of my film club thread, as I wanted to get people who haven't seen the film involved in thinking about this stuff.

However if you have read the book or watched the film, feel free to post a review of them too. The film is currently available on ITVX.

Parents
  • Lotus said:
    I was wondering if it would actually be possible to have a life form that doesn't require water and is actually weakened and killed by it?

    Imagine we have an object in our hand: How do we know whether it is a living thing?

    One way, is to look at what life does. But there is a lot of diversity. We can focus on what is shared. Maybe at a cellular level? I guess nothing we call alive has no cells.

    To an overly simplistic extent, a cell is a boundary, I think we may expect that.

    But it is possible that "a cell" -which I use as the minimal living unit here or elsewhere- may be quite large in other planets or places.

    If we take a cell as we know them, just to look at what life does (here), then what does an earthly-cell do?

    - It reproduces (most), it passes on information to descendants (is it necessary?), it moves (most?), it maintains homeostasis. And does so while it can, using energy from external sources. A cell is also autopoietic (a property of how cellular components relate to each other.) Eventually, it dies.

    Definitions are hard, the world was not created so simple. But they are useful as well. However, we need to agree on one.

    Unless, for a living organism, "know it when we see it". Maybe. So, is the item in the palm of your hand alive? The more similar to us, the easier we can guess.

    If we get lucky and find something like a cell (small or large, though), that repairs itself, maintains homeostasis, reproduces, then it may as well not use water. If they evolved without it the likelihood it is poisonous is somewhat high.

    The role of water in cells is quite limited. Well...if we discount it as a medium for ions and molecules to move around. It is produced at the end of the Kreb's cycle, and as an intermediary during glycolysis.

    Some bacteria even use Iron or Ammonia (I think) for obtaining energy. Either way, this seems possible in my view.

    I think Nick Lane has some nice ideas about this.

Reply
  • Lotus said:
    I was wondering if it would actually be possible to have a life form that doesn't require water and is actually weakened and killed by it?

    Imagine we have an object in our hand: How do we know whether it is a living thing?

    One way, is to look at what life does. But there is a lot of diversity. We can focus on what is shared. Maybe at a cellular level? I guess nothing we call alive has no cells.

    To an overly simplistic extent, a cell is a boundary, I think we may expect that.

    But it is possible that "a cell" -which I use as the minimal living unit here or elsewhere- may be quite large in other planets or places.

    If we take a cell as we know them, just to look at what life does (here), then what does an earthly-cell do?

    - It reproduces (most), it passes on information to descendants (is it necessary?), it moves (most?), it maintains homeostasis. And does so while it can, using energy from external sources. A cell is also autopoietic (a property of how cellular components relate to each other.) Eventually, it dies.

    Definitions are hard, the world was not created so simple. But they are useful as well. However, we need to agree on one.

    Unless, for a living organism, "know it when we see it". Maybe. So, is the item in the palm of your hand alive? The more similar to us, the easier we can guess.

    If we get lucky and find something like a cell (small or large, though), that repairs itself, maintains homeostasis, reproduces, then it may as well not use water. If they evolved without it the likelihood it is poisonous is somewhat high.

    The role of water in cells is quite limited. Well...if we discount it as a medium for ions and molecules to move around. It is produced at the end of the Kreb's cycle, and as an intermediary during glycolysis.

    Some bacteria even use Iron or Ammonia (I think) for obtaining energy. Either way, this seems possible in my view.

    I think Nick Lane has some nice ideas about this.

Children
No Data