io9 
Enter your username and password.
San Francisco, 5:13 AM
Sun Nov 22
10 posts in the last 24 hours
Tip your editors: tips@io9.com
Editor-in-Chief:
Annalee Newitz | Email
News Editor:
Charlie Jane Anders | Email
Associate Editor:
Meredith Woerner | Email
Assistant Editor:
Lauren Davis | Email
Weekend Editor:
Graeme McMillan | Email
Contributors:
Joshua Glenn
Stephen Goldmeier | Email
Ed Grabianowski | Email
Austin Grossman
Paul Hogan | Email
Lauren Davis | Email
Chris Hsiang | Email
Lynn Peril | Email
Ann VanderMeer
Alasdair Wilkins | Email
Graphic Designer:
Stephanie Fox | Email
Interns:
Tim Barribeau | Email
Julia Carusillo | Email
Alex Eichler | Email
Cyriaque Lamar | Email
Caitlin Petrakovitz | Email
Mary Ratliff | Email
Josh Snyder | Email
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
11/09/09
Whit - we're not looking at concept art for the Dark Crystal 2? Didn't Jen and Kira get a ride on those giant fleas when they were moving through the forest?
No? Wrong genre entirely?
Dammit. Fooled by superficial resemblances again. #moraeriver
11/09/09
Theres an old saying among Space Truckers! Its not the giant fleas that kill you. Its the giant Rabid space dogs! #moraeriver
11/09/09
Creatures such as that giant flea (and giant spiders, giant ants, and other giant insects or Arthropoda) are not physically possible.
Has anyone noticed how elephants, large dinosaurs, and other large land animals have thick legs? That's not an oddity of evolution but a necessity because, otherwise, the creatures would not be able to support their own weights and would collapse.
It happens because weight is proportional to volume, but strength is proportional to surface area. Thus, the ratio of strength to weight is proportional to the ratio of area to volume. Since area is poportional to size squared and volume proportional to size cubed, it follows that the ratio of strength to weight *decreases* as the size increases.
Ergo, a large land animal that is scaled up without modifications in its physical structure cannot support itself.
Interestingly, this is an old argument, first made explicit by Galileo. It also works in the other direction, which explains why insects such as ants can lift and carry objects many times heavier than themselves, compared to larger animals.
Now, I know some of you will argue that the giant flea is not an Earth flea and that it may be on a planet with lower gravity compared to Earth, but neither argument is actually relevant; Galileo's scaling argument is true anywhere and for anything. Besides, look at the tree - it has a thick trunk, thicker at the bottom, suggesting a planet of surface gravity comparable to Earth's.
Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but no such thing as "Them!"... #moraeriver
11/09/09
11/09/09
11/09/09
Brynn just got served! #moraeriver
11/09/09
Ah, there it is!
Biology if B-movie monsters - [fathom.lib.uchicago.edu] #moraeriver
11/09/09
Here are few other lame impossibilities for everyone:
[www.kollectablekaos.com.au]
[phazing.files.wordpress.com]
[www.exzooberance.com] #moraeriver
11/09/09
@Roklimber: "Has anyone noticed how elephants, large dinosaurs, and other large land animals have thick legs? That's not an oddity of evolution but a necessity because, otherwise, the creatures would not be able to support their own weights and would collapse."
Yup, notice that all the time :-).
11/09/09
11/09/09
11/09/09
And while your observation of the structure of the tree is correct (it is "thicker at the bottom"), your implication is that this is a tree made of cellulose. It might be that the tree is no more made of earthly materials than the flea.
In short, those who live in intellectual houses of cards should not be so quick to blow hard. #moraeriver
11/09/09
A DeLorean going 88 mph is both realistic and fun. But traveling in time by doing so is unlikely. But also fun.
Why suck the fun out of fun by not being fun? #moraeriver
11/09/09
It's all about ratios. The size, mass, and average density of a giraffe are all such that its legs and hooves can be what they are. If you were to scale a giraffe to the mass of an elephant, with a proportional increase in size, keeping everything else about the giraffe the same, it would collapse or die of overheating (elephants have large flat ears to cool themseleves off). #moraeriver
11/09/09
11/09/09
I beg to differ. I explicitly said:
"Now, I know some of you will argue that the giant flea is not an Earth flea and that it may be on a planet with lower gravity compared to Earth, but neither argument is actually relevant; Galileo's scaling argument is true anywhere and for anything."
So, unless that flea and the tree are made of diamond (a possibility, given that diamond is carbon, though it would be the wrong crystalline structure for the kind of chemistry that life requires) or silicon-based life (also a possibility, though unlikely, given the preponderance of carbon-based life over silicon-based life in the one place we know life to exist for sure), my "intellectual house of cards" has a large strength-to-volume ratio. :) #moraeriver
11/09/09
...
Why suck the fun out of fun by not being fun?"
You didn't say it before, but you said it now. :)
11/09/09
11/09/09
Me, along with the rest of science, right? Don't confuse the message with the messenger. My post was not merely my person opinion, but a scientific fact.
"the giant flea isn't possible for a different reason"
It's not possible for a variety of reasons. One is good enough, though.
11/09/09
11/09/09
11/09/09
11/09/09
11/09/09
11/09/09
Oh, and hearted for reminding me of my dad's "THIS IS WHY WE DON'T HAVE SUPER ANTS" lectures back when I was eight.
11/09/09
11/09/09
11/09/09
11/09/09
"Oh, and hearted for reminding me of my dad's "THIS IS WHY WE DON'T HAVE SUPER ANTS" lectures back when I was eight."
You're welcome, son. :))
Search your feelings, Luke. You'll know it to be true.
11/09/09
11/09/09
Though I have to say that I feel a bit insulted by your calling me an anal nerd. I am not a nerd! :))
Here's the thing, though. There is a line between acceptable fiction and stupid fiction.
If someone makes a movie where a normal human being flies to the sun, and survives, how many people here would *not* be complaining about a) the fact that a normal human cannot fly on his own, b) a normal human cannot survive in the vacuum of space, and c) a normal human cannot survive the sun's coronal temperature?
I'm all for imaginative and original fiction, but I enjoy it much more when it's based on what really can happen, rather than some completely off-the-wall breaking of rules.
Just because something is solidly rooted on science it doesn't mean that it is not, or cannot, be entertaining. Since no one really has tried, we don't know, but it could actually be even more entertaining than the stuff we have that violates basic scientific knowledge.
11/09/09
11/09/09
Dragonflies have wings, which provide lift, thereby decreasing the pressure on their legs when they touch land.
As for giant scorpions, the fossil you might be thinking about is that of a *sea* scorpion. Water creatures benefit from buoyancy forces.
I'm not saying that your oxygen argument is wrong. In fact, it's correct. I'm only arguing that there are other, more general reasons, why abnormally large creatures *identical* in shape and constitution to their modern versions cannot exist. Even ancient giant arthropoda, which apparently did exist, aren't the same as their modern counterparts.
Giant Fossil Sea Scorpion Bigger Than Man
[www.sciencedaily.com]
"Plus, you have to factor in the planet's gravity"
Yes, but for a given planet, that's a fixed constant. So, an ant on Earth cannot be scaled up to the size of a human being on Earth and still support its own weight. The same is true on any other planet.
Of course, if the surface gravity on planet X is much smaller than that of Earth, it could be that a creature on planet X could be much larger than a human being, but now you're comparing creatures of different planets.
Edit: Recall, though, that a planet with very low surface gravity cannot hold an atmosphere. Case in point, the Moon, with a surface gravity one-sixth that of the Earth. Thus, huge creatures (which would depend on oxygen and would have to consume lots of it) could not exist because there wouldn't be an atmosphere to begin with.
11/09/09
"Its the deseased an infected body of BABORA STREISAAAAAND thats scary"
Isn't that her current state, already? #moraeriver
11/09/09
11/09/09
"is there any way that such an organism could exist? Let's just ponder for the fun of it, as a sort of mind expanding exercise."
I wish I knew enough about biology to answer that question. See, the thing is that there are structural as well as metabolic reasons why that giant flea could not exist as depicted.
I already mentioned the most basic structural reason, but there are others.
I recommend, to anyone interested, the reading of the article pointed to by Pijus. It goes through some of those more biologically related reasons.
The Biology of B-Movie Monsters
[fathom.lib.uchicago.edu] #moraeriver
11/09/09
11/09/09
11/09/09
See, the problem with arguments in favor of such a creature is that they're pretty vague. Give me a realistic model for an alien creature, based on sensible structural and metabolic requirements for the planet it lives on, and I'll be happy to concede.
Personally, I think *that* is the part that is most fun, to come up with a realistic creature, particularly for extreme conditions.
Could life thrive on Mercury? Or Venus? Or Titan? What can we expect, based on what we know of the physical conditions of those places and based on the requirements of life as we know it?
Sorry, but a mere drawing isn't imaginative enough for me.
Edit: Unfortunately, I'm not as well versed in biology as I am in physics, so I can't tackle that challenge myself.
11/09/09
11/09/09
11/09/09
11/09/09
11/09/09
Have you read his "Expedition"? That's what immediately sprung to mind when browsing the gallery. #moraeriver
11/09/09
11/09/09
11/09/09
11/13/09
11/09/09
11/05/09
For vocal cadences, word play, and just neat turns of phrase, there are always Shakespeare and W.S. Gilbert.
11/05/09
11/05/09
11/05/09
11/05/09
I've always thought of English as a true frankenlanguage. Most English words are little amalgams and abberations of so many different words in other languages...it really fascinates me, especially when I can decipher and translate the general meaning of a word or a whole sentence from a foreign language into "english".
Technically, I speak the languages of all the nations of the world, it's just that all the words have been dialectically screwed up. I'm sure in just this comment, I've spoken German, Italian, Arabic, Gaelic, Russian, Portugese, Spanish, Olde English, etc, Latin, and any number of dead languages. It's interesting that no novel (that I know of) has been written that capitalises off the idea of a world that has bastardized language into one spoken mish-mash of everything. The closest probably comes to the Dune novels, but it was a mostly Middle Eastern/Middle Age inspired world, and they ripped so much out of the Holy Qur'an that what they were speaking or how they named things wasn't really anything "new" they just distorted the meaning of a lot of Qur'anic verses. But it was cool to see the idea of language integration.
It's partly why I'm always so disheartened when I see those Tea Bagger signs with misspelled words in them. Typeo has become our new written language. Wilst no one step forthe to save verbiage? #writing
11/08/09
The characters speak what seems to be remnants of a few remembered languages including english, spanish, french creole and a few others perhaps. #writing
11/05/09
and while we are on the subject of Hell, let's not forget that religioun-based verbal tics can, by God, be helpful, too. amen to that, brotha.
in my novel, i have a former President of the US, a DC cop, and a secret service agent as main characters from the 21st century, as well as a number of individuals from the 24th centuries, and while i haven't addressed the differences in language too much yet, i do plan to go back and develop a few new terms and catch-phrases. i mean, frak it all -- some things had to have changed over 400 years, no? #writing
11/05/09
For instance, I once wrote a short story where the main protagonist was a young Bill Murray channeling Sidney Poitier. It makes for some interesting combinations. :) #writing
11/05/09
11/05/09
11/05/09
I taught her both the proper pronunciation as two words, and the way everyone says it as one "salad'ressing". #writing
11/04/09
11/04/09
Here is a concrete example: Buffy. In the show, Buffy is referred to by the different characters in a number of ways.
The villains calls her "The Slayer". You know you have a villain on your hand when he address Buffy in such vague terms.
Willow and Xander calls her Buffy or sometimes Buff. Buff is used ONLY by Xander or Willow. You won't see Oz using that name for example.
Faith, and only Faith calls Buffy "B."
While Angel always calls her Buffy, Spike is much more creative, calling her "pet" or "love", until he gets his soul back.
Giles is also a character that people refers to in different way (Giles, Rupert, Ripper, Mr. Giles) and you associate each epiteth with a different character. #writing
11/04/09
Well, part of this effect is what the actors bring to each role. They are part of the individuality of each incarnation of a Whedon-esque character. But I know what you mean. #writing
11/05/09
Actually I'd take this a step further and say that it's ONLY the actors that give much of Whedon's stuff much distinction. His dialogue, just written out, is so obviously in the same voice. #writing
11/05/09
11/04/09
But of course, this is just a jumping off point. After writing a few scenes of dialogue with these thoughts in mind, I am able to get a handle on the character and how they talk, and then I don't have to think about this anymore.
In fact, in one story, I started out with Fat Tony, which then morphed into the bastard child of Joe Montegna and Bob Dylan, a man who spoke in lurid metaphor, with a growling rasp that seemed to silently erupt from the core of his heart. #writing
11/04/09
By being completely schizophrenic. By being an actor, having played different characters in different roles, and be able to "go into" each character as you write for them. Not many people can do this. Again, schizophrenic. Or by being an actor.
Acting lessons or workshops might help this if you don't have this kind of experience. #writing