116 réponses à ce sujet

[sUiCiDeKiNgS13]

tl,dr

[MyChemicalBromance]

eddieoctane wrote...

-snip-

It is an extension of the already established nature of mass effect fields. These fields allow you to change the mass of an object (without paying your conservation dues) within them. Why, dare I ask, should this have no effect at the subatomic level?

Particle physics is simply an area that they've left largely unexplained throughout the series. It's potrayed as something that the denizens of the galaxy don't understand about their technology. For example:

Mass Relay transits are not explained by mass effect fields or eezo. Both the travel time and the mechanism by which a ship stops is left untouched. Something else is happenning there, and the largest tidbit we've ever gotten is that the Relays are flux pinned.

Leaving a Mass Effect field at FTL speeds should destroy the known universe, yet it only produces cherenkov radiation. The Reaper's "safety features" are the only explanation I can think of. 

If cherenkov radiation can be generated by that, then you can make a case that biotics should irradiate themselves by walking forward.

Sending information through quantum entanglement is equivalent to time travel, yet it is somehow managed by both the Reapers and our cycle.

When mass-energy conservation is considered, you can make a strong argument that destroying the Alpha Relay should have destroyed the known universe, not just a solar system.


Mass Effect has always had things completely beyond our grasp, and they always had to do with the Reapers, and their explanations were usually left to the unexplored domain of particle physics. That sounds like narrative consistency to me.

Modifié par MyChemicalBromance, 14 septembre 2012 - 08:54 .

[MyChemicalBromance]

Jade8aby88 wrote...

ld1449 wrote...

Jesus H. Christ OP. not to use the irritating statement myself but...its a game. I think you put more thought into this than Mac and Casey put into the whole making of said game.

More like the whole trilogy.

Eh I don't know. Most of the time the science is pretty good. I think they strike a good balance between what they explain and what they don't, though I'd always like more. I've never seen them get the terminology wrong (Though there is something in the back of my head telling me a problem about a planet or two) outside of typos, and they pull information from a ton of different fields (it was/is fun going through school while the trilogy took place).

And while I know that his name isn't held in high esteem around here, I'd like to point out that Mr. Hudson does have a degree in mechanical engineering, so it's not like he's never seen this stuff.

[MyChemicalBromance]

Jade8aby88 wrote...

Norrax wrote...

as a biologist i know, synthesis on the DNA level is..........................BULLS**T!!

This, I have a friend who is a bio-chemist. He feels the same way.

It's out there, but, much like other fringe topics in the games, it's too ambiguous to call wrong. They can't really be wrong if they didn't say anything.

Though I will admit some of the Catalyst's lines push it.

[JamieCOTC]

"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." - Arthur C. Clarke, "Profiles of The Future", 1961 (Clarke's third law)

[Jadebaby]

JamieCOTC wrote...

"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." - Arthur C. Clarke, "Profiles of The Future", 1961 (Clarke's third law)

lol applying that to a work of fiction?

[geceka]

Great post, OP. Well, maybe apart from the calculation, which is more ordinal than cardinal, as the formula you've used does not take relativistic effects into account, and even more so, we don't even know (as you say) anything about physics involving mass-effect altered frames of reference.

Anyway, I've also always thought of synthesis involving nanomachines, which I find congruent with the ME universe's lore. However, I don't think the "new DNA" line by the catalyst even needs to be taken all too literally: The catalyst makes a small pause before the word "DNA" when he says that, and in the subtitles, this is even written out as an ellipsis ("a new... DNA"). The catalyst does this a few times during his conversation, and it'd read as the catalyst resorting to an easily and quickly graspable metaphor, so that Shepard can understand what it means conceptually. Sci-Fi does this frequently, and they it is done in, as an example, Star Trek has even become somewhat of a meme ("wait, we could flood the warp field this transfluxial tachyons" – "Ah, you mean like blowing up a balloon.").

Therefore, I don't think the catalyst actually meant a literal fusion of DNA with technological parts in their explanation of synthesis, but rather the creation of a new framework that involves both the original organic traits and augmentation through nanomachinery, like a symbiosis between the two. The nanomachines could just replicate and infuse the offspring as well, making them pretty much inseparable from the organic part. This way, you don't even need to postulate nano-tech at a scale that it could affect the actual DNA. The statement is just a metaphor.

[Reorte]

Too small. I am completely and utterly unconvinced that it's physically possible with any level of technology to put the required complexity to achieve this in something small enough to achieve this.

[o Ventus]

So instead of "stupid BS", it's "marginally less stupid BS".

I don't mean to be harsh, but godbots are hardly a better narrative resolution than unadulterated space magic.

[lmxar]

I went on the tread expecting something else entirely. When I saw the DNA structure I just had to read more. Then I started to laugh. Especially when the OP called the atoms in the model "inner spheres." I love it when people that don't know anything about science try to do stuff like this.

Edit:

BringBackNihlus wrote...

You say space magic, I say rushed plot device.

 

And this.

Modifié par lmxar, 15 septembre 2012 - 05:02 .

[MyChemicalBromance]

lmxar wrote...

Especially when the OP called the atoms in the model "inner spheres."

I was referring to the inner spheres in the synthesis picture. It's what the line is pointing to on the picture.

[MegaSovereign]

OP, you're working too hard.

*Renegade interrupt*

Modifié par MegaSovereign, 15 septembre 2012 - 06:41 .

[GreyLycanTrope]

^
Cold

[MyChemicalBromance]

geceka wrote...

Great post, OP. Well, maybe apart from the calculation, which is more ordinal than cardinal, as the formula you've used does not take relativistic effects into account, and even more so, we don't even know (as you say) anything about physics involving mass-effect altered frames of reference.

I debated over whether to take relativity into account. The thing is, I don't think the games account for it within Mass Effect fields. Even if I did, I'd wind up with negative energy, which would be just as meaningless as the number I got. Since objects can leave mass effect fields "while" traveling at FTL (the cherenkov radiation entry) without destroying the universe, I figured either equally outlandish concept would suffice.

[omegamantis113]

Jade8aby88 wrote...

JamieCOTC wrote...

"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." - Arthur C. Clarke, "Profiles of The Future", 1961 (Clarke's third law)

lol applying that to a work of fiction?

I suggest that you google Arthur C Clarke.

[atheelogos]

inversevideo wrote...

MyChemicalBromance wrote...

inversevideo wrote...

In any event, if Starkid has the power of creation, then why enact cycles of reaping?

If a being had ultimate power why would they do anything? A being with all knowledge or power over everything would be above concepts like reason or logic.

Just because you can control a substantial portion of the universe doesn't mean you are all powerful either. We are Gods to ants, but that doesn't make us all powerful. Your scales don't define godhood; you just infer it.

The Catalyst clearly follows a form of logic and reason, and thus isn't the god you're making him out to be.

That it choses to enact the cycles given the power of creation and an arse-load of processing power is baffling.  

It chooses not to. It said that it tried it once and it failed because it was forced. We had to choose it for it to work in the long run

Modifié par atheelogos, 16 septembre 2012 - 03:28 .

[atheelogos]

Norrax wrote...

as a biologist i know, synthesis on the DNA level is..........................BULLS**T!!

well yeah, but so are the relays and the mass effect. That's why it's science fiction

[Ticonderoga117]

JamieCOTC wrote...

"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." - Arthur C. Clarke, "Profiles of The Future", 1961 (Clarke's third law)

"Any technology not somewhat explained, with regards to its universe, is still considered magic and has no right to be in something called "Science Fiction". Or, it must be within the realm of believeability with regards to the universe."
-Myself on Clarke's third law.

[Ticonderoga117]

atheelogos wrote...

Norrax wrote...

as a biologist i know, synthesis on the DNA level is..........................BULLS**T!!

well yeah, but so are the relays and the mass effect. That's why it's science fiction

But they used science (Hey, if we make something have no mass, it can go FTL!) to do that stuff. Synthesis goes full on fiction.

[Slayer299]

atheelogos wrote...

Norrax wrote...

as a biologist i know, synthesis on the DNA level is..........................BULLS**T!!

well yeah, but so are the relays and the mass effect. That's why it's science fiction

Yes, and Synthesis changes it to "Science -wha???"

[dreman9999]

inversevideo wrote...

MyChemicalBromance wrote...

Dessalines wrote...

Basically, your theory is base on how nanites were used to make living or dead organisms into servants of the renegade Daleks in Season 7 of Dr. Who.

Well, that's actually the explanation given for husks. (I've never seen Dr. Who, so I'm not sure if you're joking or not)

Why Synthesis breaks the plot

It doesn't because it's optional and basicly a comparision to how the races felt about the tech they found in ME.

[dreman9999]

Slayer299 wrote...

atheelogos wrote...

Norrax wrote...

as a biologist i know, synthesis on the DNA level is..........................BULLS**T!!

well yeah, but so are the relays and the mass effect. That's why it's science fiction

Yes, and Synthesis changes it to "Science -wha???"

Can you explaint to me how the prothean becon works?