Nanotechnology and Lost

[Annie]

This isn't really my theory, but I thought I would put it out there for discussion. Someone thought the "Monster" was maybe nano-bots or equivalent as discussed on the podcast.

Well, does anyone know anything about nanotechnology and how it might fit in?

Discover Magazine talks about nanotubes. They are 9 times as strong as steel and can transmit 1000 times as much electrical current as copper wire. They can endure temps up to 840 degrees F without losing strength or conductivity. Since they are carbon, they can be absorbed into the human body. They are currently being developed for fighting cancer and speeding healing of broken bones. The Department of Defense is interested in them of course.

Anybody else know anything?

[akamauu]

The basis of nanotechnology is the ability to manipulate atoms and small molecules that in turn make up other objects. The idea is that an object, lets say a pencil, is made up of wood, carbon, some metal (to hold the eraser) and eraser components ... well, instead of making each component separately and putting them together to make the pencil, can we manipulate the actual atoms and molecules to arrange themselves correctly to become all the correct parts of the pencil.

The futuristic idea is that we have containers of the different atomic elements and we type in to a computer to make a tent ... and the correct amounts of the appropriate elements are released in to a small pool where they are organized to make the tent.

The reason why these items, like the nanotubes, are so strong and resistant and effective is because they are purely made from only the elements needed with out being diluted with other unnecessary elements.

I read a couple of books about it back in the early 90s and some articles about its use in medicine about 3 years ago ... I'll look up more about it and post whatever I find.

[Annie]

Cool.

[evilgus]

It's an interesting theory which could explain the black swarm clouds we keep seeing.

If you go to www.channel4.com/entertainment/tv/microsites/L/lost/ and into the 'Untold' part, click Locke's name on the list then the black bead. Click through all the crap and enter 6 when Boone appears, and you will see Locke crouching over the hatch. click the hatch and type in the Lost numbers until you get the right ones. 23, 42, 16 i think into the boxes.
There you get to see 3 examples of the black swarm things.

I hope that made some sense.

[Annie]

Thanks, evilgus. I looked at the smoke photos. There are 3 video clips. In one, the smoke looks like billowing clouds. In the second you see a moving black smudge and then the airplane engine blows up! I'm going to have to go back and look at that on the DVD. In the third, it is a swarm of blackness going through the jungle. Reminds me of a school of tiny fish. Very interesting.

[fudja]

prey Michal criton


big swarm of nanites. eat things take over people,
are controlled by electro magnets, can be killed by electro magnets

[Annie]

Tell us more, fudja!

Ooooh! I looked on Amazon and what do you suppose is on the cover of that book?! A black swarm cloud!

[Brian S]

That was what made me think of the Nanobots when I emailed that little theory to Jay and Jack.

[Laura]

I did s0mething wrong. And what was that pic of Jack??? freaked me out. And then there was just his mom. shivers. creepy stuff. Love it But it won't take my numbers.

[jacksloststepkid]

I thought that the writers had definitely said that the monster is not related to nanotechnology....

(don't ask me where, I've just heard it from at least 4-5 different sources).

Personally, I think it is the best explanation for the moving smoke I've heard yet...

JLSK

[rasalghul]

If we want to stick to plausible, physically possible explanation for everything happening in Lost, as the creative teams say all the time that there are realistic explanations for everything on Lost, we cannot think that the black smoke is a swarm of Nano-bots.

It's simply not possible in physics. Those machines would have a propulsion system smaller than themselves but incredibly powerful so that they can control their movement. As these machines are very small, so very light, they are also easy to be blown away by winds or just continuous movement of the air. So they need to have a very powerful engine.

Moreover, if they are robots, they must have some kind of brain to control themselves, but we haven't reach the technology to create computers small enough to be put in grains of black dust.

Maybe, the black smoke is a cover. It's surrounding a flying machine, a flying camera sent by someone to check out when there are problems on the island.

Finally, nanotechnology is in fact a technology, still in theoretical phase in most areas, to make simple machines to self-replicate, not create nano-computers, nano-everything-else. We're still at least hundreds of years away from creating complex systems in nanoscale. Because it's really hard to manipulate things, to create things at that scale, believe me, I've been in a lab with people working on nanothings, I know. I've even tried myself to do some basic nanothing, it's really hard.

[Annie]

Hard for mere mortals, not for Dharma!

[Brian S]

The entire premise put forth in the book by Michael Crichton pretty much addressed all of those points. As far as wind goes, they would be forced to be dormant during periods of heavy wind, but if they are small enough, they would not require a powerful propulsion system at all. If they are small enough, they can walk on air if you will.

The final part is about intelligence, and once again, the idea put forth in the book was not that they were intelligent on their own, but as a whole, they formed a hive that were able to think for themselves and solve problems.

Of course they would have to self replicate, and that combined with the A.I. would give them the ability to evolve so to speak. They could make changes each generation to tweak their performance.

All of this is pretty moot, because it is a very unlikely theory. I just thought it was an interesting idea more than anything else, and figured that with the information we have right now, it fits as well as anything else.

[evilgus]

I read Prey as well, and know that it isn't actually possible right now, but the theoretical avenues have been explored quite deeply, for example; computer simulations running on swarming wasp or ant colony patterns do seem to become utterly random very quickly. The possible outcomes multiply exponentially until it is actually feasible that they would develop intelligence.

It really is a possibility in Lost because similar projects by Abrams and others take theoretical concepts from science. Some rogue nanobots, who knows.

[Annie]

I think it sounds brilliant, cool, and new. I like it. They expect us to believe people survived that horrific plane crash without so much as a broken bone. That is not a physically possible thing in my book. Why not nanobots?? I don't think it is the ultimate wrap-up theory that explains everything, but it's darn good. Go, Brian!