Welcome.* ;D

I figured I'd go ahead and make a KISS (Keep it Simple Stupid) Support thread (inspired by Vertical and Templeton) for posters who often take the Occam's Razor type of approach to some of the wilder theories floating about the boards.

Here is a handy link to find out more about Occam's Razor : http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/General/occam.html

It's not easy being the skeptic, or the person pointing out simple flaws in logic or observation. Or offering up meta reasons for events in the show which are scrutinised to death and thought to be significant. I believe that skepticism has its place on the boards, though, because it enables us to discard the proverbial 'chaff 'and keep the precious wheat that is left over in order to explain some of the mysteries of the show.

Hopefully this will be a place we can discuss alternative theories to anything that intrigues us about the show, and generally just find support with fellow posters who hold to this basic principle.

Ever thought that sometimes a sneaker is just a sneaker?
Or that some freaky occurence was a just a continuity error or poetic license?
Or that maybe Walt just lit the fire with a handy torch? :lol2:

If so, this place could be the place for you.* ;D


Vertical: If the show presents us with something that looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then this thread is for those people who think that it probably is just a duck.

CAM: I think the standard should be something like expository simplicity...Writers don't like to write straight exposition and actors don't like to deliver it.* They'd much rather offer pain or joy or suspense or sex or humor or emotional revelations.* The easier something is to explain onscreen to what the writers believe is an adequate degree of clarity and plausibility, the more like it is to be used as a plot device.

Master List of Island Mysteries:

- What caused the plane crash?
* * * * Current theories: Metal fatigue, creative license (meta)
- How did so many survive?
* * * * * Meta reason: So that we would have characters for the show ;)
-Why can't they get a radio signal off the island?
* * * * *Current Reason: Danielle's transmission is too powerful and blocking any other outgoing signal
* * * * * -Why has Danielle's transmission been playing for 16 years with no answer?
* * * * * * * * Current theories: Danielle says the Others control the signal now.
-Why does the Island seem to be unknown?
* * * * *Current Theories: Classified research installation* * * * *
- How was Locke able to walk after the crash?
* * * *Current theories: Herniated disc, psychosomatic paralysis from a past traumatic experience
* * * *Partial answer: Locke kept his muscles from atrophying with a PRO ElecDT® electromedical device from Hako-Med.
-Where did the polar bears come from
- What happened to the pilot?
-Why did Jack see his dead father?
* * * * Current theories: Hallucination brought on by physical exhaustion, dehydration, and emotional stress
- Where is Jack's father's body?
Who were Adam and Eve and what is the significance of the black and white stones?
- Who knocked out Sayid and destroyed the transceiver?
* Locke admitted to doing this in Greater Good.
- Where is Danielle's child, Alex?
- What is the sickness Danielle talks about, and does it exist?
- How did Ethan get onto the island?
- What does Ethan want with Claire?
* * * How did Claire escape and why does she have no memory of what happened?
- What is 'the monster'?
* * *What does Locke know that the rest don't?
-What caused the freak tides and eroding beach forcing the lostaways to move up the beach?
Meta reason: Fuselage set had to go. Arrangement with the Hawaiian govt to eventually remove the wreakage due to environmental concerns, and also apparently they were getting 911 calls from people driving by.
- What is 'the hatch'?
* * * *Current theories: Underground bunker, abandoned research facility, labyrinth of subterranean tunnels
What is (and where is) the Black Rock?
What caused the compass anomaly?
- What is the purpose of the cable on the beach?
* * * * * Current theories: Electrical power source
- What is the significance of 'the numbers'?
* * * * * *Current theories: The numbers were broadcast off the island and picked up by Sam Toomey. They are the numbers from the hatch. Danielle also said the broadcast was what made the science expedition go off course to investigate.
* * * * * -Why are the numbers on the hatch?
- Who are 'the others'?*
* * * * * Current theory: Ethan Rom could be an Other, his name is an anagram of 'Other Man'
* * *Are they real?*
So far they have been heard but not seen.* *
- What is the source of 'the whispers'?
* * * * * Current theories: Subterranean tunnels
-What did Boone hear on the plane radio?
ABC seems to have cleaned up the transmission that aired on the original ep, and now in the promos and the Deus Ex Machina recap at ABC the person on the other side of the radio transmission appears to say: "Hello? WE'RE the survivors of Flight 815."


Meta List* of answers from the creators themselves:

The Island Mysteries
"We're still trying to be ... firmly ensconced in the world of science fact, I don't think we've shown anything on the show yet ... that has no rational explanation in the real world that we all function within. We certainly hint at psychic phenomena, happenstance and ... things being in a place where they probably shouldn't be. But nothing is flat-out impossible. There are no spaceships. There isn't any time travel."
- Damon Lindelof* Sci Fi Wire interview Jan 05* http://www.scifi.com/scifiwire2005/index.php?category=0&id=30246

In creating the tone of Lost, Abrams said that he and Lindelof were inspired by the works of Michael Crichton, who often mixes science fiction with science fact in his novels. "When [Crichton's] stuff works at its best, it's usually a story that takes you in through the characters and explains stuff sort of in a science-fact sort of way," Abrams said. "So by the time you get to the science fiction, you've been sort of initiated. And it felt to us that ... we can do the same and tell a story that's from the inside out about these characters, something that interests us, which is an aspect of science fiction, [and] not do a science-fiction series, but ... have a show that has a thread of that in the fabric of it. We need to do it in the beginning of the show and not, 'Oh, by the way, we're now turning this into something that also has science fiction.'" – Scifi.com 7/14/04
http://www.lostlinks.net/articles/internet/scifi7-14-04.htm


I will propose this theory: This is like a Jurassic Park situation, an island where secret government scientific projects have gone horribly wrong. Right?
JJ: That's a good theory. I like that theory. I will say that part of the fun about Lost is that there is no one answer that would explain everything. There is a history to the island, a rich and long history, which we'll peel away like an onion as we go. There are some answers that will make people say, "Aha, I knew it!" But that won't be 'It' with a capital i. There are lots of 'Its' on Lost. Given that they've only been on the island so far for about 30 days, the revelations are just beginning. . . . If they stay on the island for six months, then you're talking about five years of the series. We don't want to rush their experience.- JJ Abrams interview 1/21/05
http://sd-1.net/lofiversion/index.php/t38082.html

Cuse and Lindelof strongly dispute a contention they sometimes hear: that they are making up the series as they go along. They say mysteries and answers were part of a show "bible" devised early on. There are explanations for the monster, the polar bear, the hatch in the ground, the French woman and the island itself.

[Note: conflict with a Fury Fuselage post saying there was no show “bible” on 1/4/05 http://www.thefuselage.com/threaded/index.php?topic=1436.0]

[Note: Javi says:* “we also have a bible that was written very early on (a lot has changed since then, but not the core ideas remain).”* In a Fuselage post on* 3/26/05 http://www.thefuselage.com/threaded/index.php?topic=9926.0* ]

"We have a board in the writers' room with all extant mysteries: What questions are in play? Every time you put one up, you hopefully take one off," Lindelof says. Some answers will come by season's end; in addition, one of the 14 regulars will die.

At the same time, Lindelof wants the show to avoid becoming so twist-happy that it obscures the characters and stories. He says that after The Sixth Sense, M. Night Shyamalan's films were hurt: Audiences lost sight of stories as they waited for the twists.
That's another challenge: making the mysteries' answers stand up to fans' vivid expectations.

Anderson and others say time eventually worked against The X-Files. In the final years of its long hit run, some viewers felt the mythology became too complicated and did not provide adequate answers.

Lindelof and Cuse say they've drawn a map to avoid such dead ends. "I liken it to taking a road trip from Los Angeles to New York. We know we're going to visit the Grand Canyon, we know we're going to stop in Omaha, we know we're going to Wall Drug in South Dakota. The route we take between these landmarks is what we make up as we go along," Cuse says. "And those landmarks are the answers to the mysteries." – USA Today 2/22/05
http://www.lostlinks.net/articles/usatoday2-22-05.htm

"Everything is going to have a rational explanation and a sci-fi explanation," Grillo-Marxuach says, "until we decide to tell you exactly what that is. That's what's going to help us walk that tightrope for however many years the show has.”
"The show will end when we tell you what the island is. On the day we say, 'The island is on the back of a cosmic turtle,' then you'll say, 'OK, done with that.'"-Javier Grillo-Marxuach in zap2it.com 4/7/05
http://tv.zap2it.com/tveditorial/tve_main/1,1002,271|94586|1|,00.html (This link doesn't work, for transcript link here http://www.lostlinks.net/articles/internet/zap2it4-7-05.htm)

THEORY:-* The island is a floating island.* It floated to the Arctic, which explains the polar bear.
DAVID FURY:-* Hey, you know what, it does make sense within the framework of what we think the island is.* That one is a very definite possibility.* *-Aust TV Week April 2005



What it ain't:

Thankfully (J.J.) Abrams dismissed the popularly held theory that the castaways are stranded in Purgatory, though he claimed to like the idea. – Article on zap2it.com about the Paley TV Fest on 3/14/05
http://tv.zap2it.com/tveditorial/tve_main/1,1002,271|94107|1|,00.html* (This link doesn't* work for some reason, for transcript link here http://www.lostlinks.net/articles/internet/zap2it3-14-05.htm)


This show pretty much defies categorization. What genre would you say it fits in?
Abrams: My favorite thing about the show and about the island is it isn't one thing. It isn't one thing. The island is one thing, but what has happened there over time cannot be explained. –J.J. Abrams interview with Scifi.com 9/20/04
http://www.scifi.com/sfw/issue387/interview3.html

LOST-TV: you and JJ have denied the purgatory one. Are there others that stick in your mind that are NOT the answer to the mystery/
DAMON: What mystery?
LOST-TV: the mystery of the island. The infamous “they’re dead an in purgatory"
LOST-TV: All the fans have a theory: it's the Island of Dr. Moreau, it's an experiment. Any of these theories come to mind which NOT the answer are -- but which kind of make you think, "Wow, that was cool."
DAMON: I think it's really interesting that people think there is ONE definitive answer.
DAMON: Here's something that it is NOT...
DAMON: This is not a fictional reality that is playing out in someone's brain.
-Damon Lindelof, Lost-TV Chat IM* *March 2005 http://p073.ezboard.com/flosttheunofficalforumfortheabcseriesfrm2.showMess age?topicID=2211.topic

A: Are they marooned on the Island of Dr. Moreau?
Fury: Well, no. That's a make-believe story. This is reality.
-Dave Fury interview on Whedonesque.com 8/17/04
http://www.davidfury.net/qanda2004.html

While Lost is an amalgam of different genres, including SF, Fury explained that realism is the key in making it all work. "What we are trying to do is make sure everything has a very Scully explanation," Fury said, referring to the X-Files character. "This is not a show about the supernatural, despite the fact that we have a very huge creature that likes to eat people. Despite the surreal, bizarre aspects of the island, there will be an explanation for it. It may not come for a very long time, but certain information about the island will explain how things are possible. We'll try to root it in real science or real pseudo-science. There will be no mystical reason or an island of monsters. The island has been around for millennia, and many people have found themselves on it, and as far as we know, nobody has ever gotten off. There is also the possibility of others being on the island, they just haven't seen them yet.

* And we'll never know how big this island is. It could be enormous, but odd things will keep them from knowing the full length and breadth of it.* *
It's an interesting little allegory. It will be very mysterious." –David Fury interview Scifi.com* 9/7/04
http://www.lostlinks.net/articles/internet/scifi9-7-04.htm



* The Monster:

""It was also said that the monster is sort of a reflection of yourself. The pilot saw it in horror and he was killed because he feared the monster. Locke saw the monster with true awe, therefore, he was able to survive his encounter. The monster it's self may not be revealed totally at any point in the series. It may be, as Paul described it, "a Loch Ness Monster kind of thing".* Bits and pieces of the beast will be shown throughout the series but a full reveal could prove to be anti-climatic. Still the monster will be explained at some point in future seasons
-Paul Dini - Dark Horizons Interview Nov 09 2004* http://www.darkhorizons.com/news04/041109d.php

"Actually, we showed the shadow of the so-called monster during the (aforementioned) Boone episode," Burk says. "We were going to reveal it then, but because of the success of the show, we will put it off for a while." –Bryan Burk in article on Insidebayarea.com 2/8/05
http://www.lostlinks.net/articles/insidebayarea2-8-05.htm



What it ain't

AICN: You’re on record as saying there are no dinosaurs on the island. Will we get a look at one of the giant tree-stomping creatures within the first 13 hours broadcast?
DL: The record speaketh true. NO dinosaurs. Will you get a look at the "thing in the trees" in the first 13? I'll only say this -- maybe you'll see it, maybe you won't... but you'll definitely know much more ABOUT it.
-Damon Lindelof interview with AICN 8/18/04
http://www.aintitcoolnews.com/display.cgi?id=18187


About the monster: "JJ and I have always known what it was and we're VERY discriminating about who we tell, because that's one of the biggest secrets of the show. We know from the beginning it wasn't a dinosaur…” – Damon Lindelof in interview with Lost-TV.com on 8/18/04
http://www.lost-tv.com/exclusives/damon081804.html

the one thing i can tell you with absolute certainty is there are more than one polar bears on the island, and they are not the monster.* but they are monstrous. – Fuselage post by Javi on 2/9/05
http://www.thefuselage.com/threaded/index.php?topic=6115.0



Adam and Eve

THEORY:-* Two skeletons in the cave are Jack and Kate
DAVID FURY:-* Who knows what's possible on this island?* There was something that was cut from the episode I did in which Sayid was captured by the French Woman, Rousseau and tortured.* She said she was with a science team, that she had come from a research vessel.*

* There was a line that was cut from an earlier draft where he said "what were you studying?" and she said "Time".* *
* If you think about that, suddenly you say that's Jack and Kate in the cave. -Aust TV Week April 2005


What they ain't

THEORY:-* The two skeletons in the cave are aviator Amelia Earhart and her navigator Fred Noonan (who both vanished over the Pacific Ocean in 1937).
DAVID FURY:-* Wow.* Wow, that's a wonderful theory.* No, that's not the intent. -Aust TV Week April 2005



About Claire

THEORY:-* Claire's baby is the spawn of Satan.
DAVID FURY:-* Well, that's certainly up for grabs.* There's definitely something significant about Claire's baby, enough for some psychic to tell her she needs to raise it herself or something terrible will happen. -Aust TV Week April 2005



About Kate

THEORY:-* Kate's father is Locke.* The hint:* Kate says she used to go tracking with her father.
DAVID FURY:-* Oh, that's really interesting... and wrong.* Boy, that would be interesting but, no, that's not the case. -Aust TV Week April 2005


About Locke

"When asked if it was a coincidence that Locke seemed to be around at a character's key moment Paul stated that Locke just seems to be an opportunist. He apparently is not good or evil, however, he may play a given situation either way to gain an advantage." -Paul Dini at Wizard World Nov 09 2004
http://www.darkhorizons.com/news04/041109d.php


About Ethan Rom

Damon has confirmed that "Ethan Rom" being an anagram of "Other Man" is intentional - Aust TVWeek April 2005

Sign me up! I'm all for rational explanations in an irrational world. ;)

Great idea, Z!

Of course my lovely TRoss, you now, henceforth, shall be known as number two!

Heh, I suddenly had thoughts of the Prisoner going through my head. :lol2:

I have added you to the master list. :D

Logic? Common sense?! Templeton??!!??!!

Where do I sign up??!!

Hi, Zoriah! Great idea. I'm definitely on board.

Cheers,
Templeton

Wow, this is fabulous! I was just going to PM you both tomorrow too. :laugh:

I will gladly add you both to the list.

Interesting stuff on the practical applications of the Uncertainty Principle! And also the discussion on Danielle as an expositional device for the writers. You guys rock my socks.

Now if I can just entice Vertical over lol.

Do you guys have any first topics you want to bring up? I was doing some research on metal fatigue as a part solution to the how and why of the plane crash.

Ok, I've got a topic!

What are some of the mysteries that might easily and logically be resolved (or at least, elucidated) this season, without a lot of arcane exposition that most viewers might not pay attention to anyway? TV's a visual medium, so it's usually better if something can be cleared up with a few images, instead of a long-winded explanation by one of the characters.

For example... here's a purely theoretical: they open the hatch and descend into the opening. The camera reveals a small, dark area, possibly with some mechanical equipment of some sort. As we pan around we see the reveal -- the area opens into a narrow tunnel that descends under the ground away from the hatch area. Dimly, it can be seen that every hundred yards or so there's a weak lightbulb providing some illumination.

Something like this would tell us a lot without anybody saying a word about electromagnetic fields or relativity theory :angel: Mechanical noises that sound like The Bronx -- hey, there's a subterranean system here! Whispers? There are people talking in the tunnels beneath us. Cables going into the ground? Well, of course -- that's where the power is needed.

Who built it? What's it it there for? I don't know, but I don't necessarily need to know yet. Pick a hobbit and a elf and send 'em in to explore :)

Templeton

Yes I was wondering about underground tunnels too, in terms of the whispers. One would presume there is a cable because somewhere on the island there is the need for electrical power, for lighting or computers, or keeping the air ventilated underground. If they shot something like what you are describing then they wouldn't necessarily have to 'tell' us, just 'show' us the answers to those questions.

I believe one of the creators essentially said there might be specific answers to the various individual mysteries on the island, so that we could end up with plausible explanations to certain events or phenomena without it having to be part of some grand master equation. I hope so. In fact that sort of tickles my funny bone, the thought of the mysteries not being all connected in some over-arching way. I like the thought of there being some randomness thrown in the mix, a bit of chaos/chance rather than Number Two is behind the big curtain orchestrating everything. ;)

Sign me up Zoriah!

I will refrain from gettting into an intense discussion about rational thinking until later in the day though....when r]eception phone lines aren't ringing in my ear. Trust me you'll ALL appreciate me not attempting to make valid, logical points with that as a distraction ;)

*glides in*
I thought you all might like to know that I will be lurking in here.
*glides away*

XxNicholeexX* has done a lot of gliding today!* ;)

I didn't know you were going to do this but I already put it in my sig file. I'm all for this. I'd like to join.

Is it feasible to have tunnels on an island in the South Pacific? I lived on one for a while (Okinawa) and while they would dig out places for the family tombs, mostly on the higher ground the idea of tunnels would not be practical because of the composition of the island.* I don't know how to describe it except to say it was basically on coral pillars. They had slight tremors all the time and the joke was one day we would wake up next door to Australia.

So I do believe tunnels would answer a lot of mysteries but would it be practical to have them on such a location?

Of course, and sometimes a blood thirsty alien pilot eating monster is just a blood thirsty alien pilot eating monster.

Thank you for dragging me back to reality!!!

I am so relieved!!!!

Is it feasible to have tunnels on an island in the South Pacific? I lived on one for a while (Okinawa) and while they would dig out places for the family tombs, mostly on the higher ground the idea of tunnels would not be practical because of the composition of the island. I don't know how to describe it except to say it was basically on coral pillars. They had slight tremors all the time and the joke was one day we would wake up next door to Australia.

So I do believe tunnels would answer a lot of mysteries but would it be practical to have them on such a location?


I guess it would depend on what kind of land mass we're talking about. If the island were the coral-reef based land mass that you describe, then I think it would be impossible to have any kind of extensive underground tunnel system. On some other variety of land mass (and this is an subject I don't know a lot about), it might be feasible, or at least, believable in the fictional context, i.e., not impossible :)

Anyway, I was just trying to give an example of how some of the mysteries of the show could be explained visually...

Templeton

It seemed to me that the island (since it's Hawaii where they are filming the show) would be likely be volcanic in origin, the majority of the pacific islands are. Plus I don't think coral reef type islands would rise that far above sea level since coral reefs are essentially made up of the calcified excreta/skeletal structure of living organisms. The island they are on has hillocks, and low mountain ridges. I would think some types of volcanic rock would be fine to tunnel into.

I knew a heckuva lot more detail about geology of Pacific islands five years ago, when I'd just gotten back from a wonderful cruise in French Polynesia, than I do at the moment. But if I recall correctly, the basic premises are:

1. Ultimately, an island is nothing more than a mountain whose base is underwater.

2. There are two kinds of mountains/islands. One kind is created when tectonic plates crash into each other, and whole mountain ranges are created as a result. The other kind is isolated volcanoes. Confusing this issue is that volcanoes are likely to be created where mountain ranges are, or else where plates are moving APART, in which case a string of volcanoes is likely to be created (e.g., Hawaii)

3. If the top of the mountain is slightly underwater, an island can still be created by coral growing on it.

4. Also -- and this createst confusion -- some islands are protected by rings of coral reefs and some are not. Thus, French Polynesia has rings of coral reefs, great snorkeling, and no surf, while Hawaii has less coral if any, less snorkeling, and great surf.

For example, Bora Bora has volcanic mountains a couple of thousand of feet high AND great coral reefs encircling it, and the same is true for most other islands in the area.

What I'd like to talk about is which mysteries that apparently require weird science to solve really don't. Also, which apparent coincidences of possible Deep Meaning really might result from the writers being obsessed with a particular theme.

As an example of the latter, consider hallucinations. Jack appears to have had the sort of hallucinations one commonly has when exhausted. Boone appears to have had a drug-induced hallucination. Other forces on the island may or may not be creating hallucinations of the monster. Charlie may nor may not have had a hallucination of one meeting with Ethan. But these need NOT all have the same cause.

As another example, the penguin with a sunburn joke may just have been the writers being cute because they knew about the tropical polar bears, rather than a mysterious Message that Michael is supposed to work out and gain insight from.

As an example of the former, it would appear that there's some weird physics going on because:

A. The plane broke up oddly.
B. Radio signals are hard to send.
C. Nobody knows of the island's existence in the outside world, and it's awfully big for that to be true.

However, if the island is a classified research installation deliberately kept off of maps, #C is explained. As for #B, a message DID get out (to Sam Toomey and his friend). And we don't know that Danielle's distress call was properly calibrated or that, if it was, somebody didn't sabotage it. And the act of violence against Sayid suggests that somebody is rightly or wrongly afraid that a message if properly powered could indeed make it out from the island.

That leaves us just with #A, the weird physics of the crash, and this may be no more than creative license.

Meanwhille, I don't understand why people seem to think there is weird-science genetics going on at all. Except for the monster, whose nature is unclear, and a couple of oddly located but otherwise normal-seeming polar bears, I haven't noticed any obvious biological oddities.

About time someone made a ship for this....sign me up for sure, I want to be a part here

I love this idea, Zoriah. I would enjoy discussing theories with people who "heed Occam's Razor"; this is the group I've been waiting for!

Welcome all new arrivals! *;D *The master list has been updated.

CAM, I was looking into *#A *a little myself these past few days. I just picked a possible scientific explanation that my hubby suggested (his dad's a pilot) and looked into it: Metal fatigue. Reposting here a snippet of what I posted at in the thread about whether the crash actually happened. I wasn't looking at how so many people survived, or even how they lost radio contact, they are separate issues. I just wanted to address *the actual breaking up of the aircraft

Here is a link to probably one of the most well known historical cases of planes just breaking up in mid-air : the de Havilland Comet.

http://www.dmflightsim.co.uk/dh106_comet_history.htm

Note that one incident was seen as being caused by the turbulence of a severe tropical storm. Now of course there was no evidence of a tropical storm in the Pilot but severe turbulence was mentioned when they ran into trouble. Granted, that the plane they were on could not be a Comet (although some could hold up to 120 people) - and aviation has obviously made huge strides in design and regulations since the fifties, but at least here you have a scientific precedent for planes just disintegrating in the air.

A more recent example of a Boeing 747 in 2002:

http://www.airdisaster.com/news/0205/28/news.shtml (this one was said to have broken into four pieces)

Zoriah,

t I could have phrased the problem better, namely -- how can a plane break up at a high altitude, losing all airworthiness, and still land so softly that some passengers survive, the fuselage is of a recognizable shape, and so on?

That's the part that's very hard to explain with ordinary physics and technology.

The nose breaking off on impact or whatever is fine -- it's losing the tail and yet not plummeting to a crushing death that is hard to credit.

Maybe the tail didn't really break off until they had almost hit the ground ...

Can I join?

Okay cool. Yes it is a thorny question and I agree it is very unlikely given the supposed chain of events that there would be survivors. From what I recall the when the tall section breaks off in Kate's flashback you can only see sky, can anyone confirm if there is any sign of water/horizon or islands?

I would lean towards 'because the writers wanted it to be so, so we could have a show'. I mean in the 2002 incident it appears the tail section broke off first too. The cockpit in the photo looks amazingly intact, and yet we know that everyone aboard died.

Welcome, Hobbitsrule101 you are #10. ;D

hello
Theorists.

just a little note. great ship. however here is what we need to do with it.

first of all. keep this thread for ONLY those who wish to join.

i will post a link to where i will move ALL of the theory discussions.
the thread will move to the General Theories section. (i think for now)
there should be NO spoilers in this discussion at all. unless you want spoilers
then i will have to move it to the Spoiler theory section.

if you have any questions, let me know.
thanks.

edited b/c it has been taken care of. theorize away. ;D

Hi Halfrek* :),

Sorry, I am new to this starting groups thing, if I did something wrong I apologise. I basically wanted to start a ship that was BOTH a support group and a discussion group. Like N.E.R.D, N.U.M.B.E.R.S and some of the other character fan ships.

If we have to split it up into two parts, what exactly can we discuss here aside from 'join me up' comments.

If it's alright with you I'd like to ask the others if they want the Theory discussion to go in the General, or Spoiler areas. I personally would like to have the flexibility of using spoilers but will wait to see what the consensus is.

Cheers

Z* ;D

Thanks CAM for the explanation about the islands.

Spoilers have never bothered me. ;D

you are fine. *i am trying to do this without making a mess of your thread. *:lol2:

i thought it would be easier. *;D

no problem. *just working with the system to do the moving/reposting/redirecting. *:D
i can always move it to the spoilers section later.

Okay, thanks for replying. I'll ask the others once we have moved to General.

okay all moved/split and redirected. *hope that i didnt disrupt your discussions too much. :)

if/when you want this moved to spoilers let me know. *you can PM if i dont get back here to
peek at your theories. ;)

Thanks Halfrek, I know it must be a tough job for you mods to sort out what goes where. And we are a hardy bunch, I'm sure we'll find each other to keep the discussion going. ;)

Z, just for clarification, I understand that the basis of this group is simplicity, but does that discount the paranormal? I got linked here from TRoss's philosophy threads, and sort of assumed it might be sort of similar here......I just don't like being limited to scientific explanations of everything.....can you clarify this all for me?

Sign me up please.

Well to be honest I wasn't thinking about including the paranormal or supernatural initially (but I am open to it if the others are keen). *I suppose for me the important thing is to be looking at the various aspects of the show, the 'mysteries' as it were, and finding rational, plausible explanations for each one. Preferably supported by historical precedence or some kind of grounding in scientific research, but not totally excluding other avenues.

I guess I am an advocate of not 'reaching' for explanations and 'signs' *that are not supported by what clues or evidence we have already been shown in the show. E.g theories that one character might be the long lost parent of another, or theories on the significance of Boone's numbered T-shirts when wardrobe most likely purchased them from Eighty Four Skating Company ( a local clothing store).

The creator's have mentioned that the mysteries will be explainable by science or 'pseudo' science. So I am not sure where telepathy, or ghosts, clairvoyance or telekinesis comes into it. What do you all think?

So noted Sleestak you are #10.

Good to know, I just want to know where it all stands. I know what you mean though that when people say that there was a mysterious force of the island that changed steve's name to scott, or that "they" wanted Claire's baby for stem cells...I get sort of exasperated.

I'll keep my paranormal theories on the downlow here then.

Well to be honest I wasn't thinking about including the paranormal or supernatural initially (but I am open to it if the others are keen). *I suppose for me the important thing is to be looking at the various aspects of the show, the 'mysteries' as it were, and finding rational, plausible explanations for each one. Preferably supported by historical precedence or some kind of grounding in scientific research, but not totally excluding other avenues.

I guess I am an advocate of not 'reaching' for explanations and 'signs' *that are not supported by what clues or evidence we have already been shown in the show. E.g theories that one character might be the long lost parent of another, or theories on the significance of Boone's numbered T-shirts when wardrobe most likely purchased them from Eighty Four Skating Company ( a local clothing store).

The creator's have mentioned that the mysteries will be explainable by science or 'pseudo' science. So I am not sure where telepathy, or ghosts, clairvoyance or telekinesis comes into it. What do you all think?


There are LOTS of other threads here for all that and I visit some of them. *I want a thread that cuts to the chase and weeds out the paranormal and all that. There is nothing wrong with theorizing along the more imaginative *lines but *speaking for myself I want a 'safe' place where we can speak rationally and act as skeptics when it comes to the more wacky theories that are NOT supported by any evidence that has been given to us.

If we allow the 'other' stuff in here this thread will just become like so many others that are already here. Let's keep it unique.

Yes, I agree Elfdream, you are correct, there are plenty of theory threads that cater to the more unusual, 'out of the box' theories. Since I originally started this place as a refuge for skeptics and adherents to the KISS principle, I think we need to keep it consistent. So yeah Baner17, it would be cool if we could focus on finding answers to the questions raised about the island that are more based on a scientific/rational approach. And which takes meta concerns, like the fact that Lost is a prime time TV show, written by a committee of writers, and subject to the usual constraints when in production, into account, when examining these issues.

And which takes meta concerns, like the fact that Lost is a prime time TV show, written by a committee of writers, and subject to the usual constraints when in production, into account, when examining these issues.


OK, you got me convinced there...no other place adresses this. I'll keep my irrrelevent topics to myself :D, but I will be glad to chirp in with regards to the "it is still a tv show and is restrained by that" arguments, as so often I have to say that stuff in other discussions.

One problem in defining the charter of this thread is that there are at least two dimensions along with simplicity can be measured:

1. Story-telling economy.
2. Whether an explanation adds new, unrealistic entitites to the "real" world.

If the ancient and nearly omnipotent Polynesian Goddess Foofarah lives on this island, and has gone insane due to constant pinging by a GPS-serving satellite*, causing her to curse the string of numbers that corresponds to the island's location, that's a very simple explanation by the first measure, but a very non-K.I.S.S. explanation by the other.

*Such satellites do not, to my knowledge, in real life actually ping anything.

I am totally open to finding a better way to describe what we exactly we are trying to achieve here.

On the one hand we don't want to have to be faced with far-fetched theories that introduce unrealistic entities to the 'real' world as CAM put it and yet we also know this is a scripted TV drama we are talking about, where there will be times that we as an audience are required to suspend our disbelief.

For me I tend to want to use the 'text' of the show as the first resource. I have seen in other theory threads people trying to find double, triple and quadruple meanings to the most innocent line, or camera shot. Trying to find connections between the characters that have not even been hinted at or alluded to.

So, is it fair to say that, using the show in its entirety as a template, and bearing in mind that we are watching a TV program where story-telling and production constraints will have a large impact on the show, we are trying to find some answers to the mysteries of the island which do not add unnecessary, new, and unrealistic elements to the 'real' world as presented on the show?

Okay that was longwinded. Not KISS at all. ;)

Anyone else want to have a go?

I think the standard should be something like expository simplicity. That's not quite perfect as a description, but I think it's in the right direction.

Writers don't like to write straight exposition and actors don't like to deliver it. They'd much rather offer pain or joy or suspense or sex or humor or emotional revelations. The easier something is to explain onscreen to what the writers believe is an adequate degree of clarity and plausibility, the more like it is to be used as a plot device.

There are a few writers who actually revel in explaining technical details of things. But none of them, to my knowledge, work on LOST or any other J. J. Abrams show.

Yes, 'expository simplicity' is definitely closer to what we are going for here. I'm sure that the writers and actor's don't want to have to get into 'techno-babble' if they can help it.

A hypothetical example - and again I am only looking at one aspect: Say for instance in the final episode of the season, they flashback to the people boarding the plane.

And through a short series of scenes they show that the pre-flight checks were inadequate and the cargo bay door was jamming. ( I read about a crash where people died because a cargo bay door was not structurally sound and they thought they'd shut it properly when it wasn't in fact locked properly, burst open during flight and caused the parts of the floor to be sucked out along with the passengers) all they would need to do was now and again cut back to show the cargo door looking a bit iffy, a screw rattling loose and voila when the time comes just show the door falling off and chaos ensues... Or a similar thing where a small crack in the tail end of the fuselage is shown pre-take off, and then in flight it get's wider and wider. Easy to show, and explains one aspect of the puzzle without having to go into detail about it.

Expository simplicity is a good description indeed.

Sorry for sending the thread on a tangent there everyone...I'll toss in an idea to see if maybe we can get this more or less "on track" ---

Locke's paralysis---what was the cause? I have a couple of ideas, but I'll save them for now. Sorry again for that tangent

For me I tend to want to use the 'text' of the show as the first resource. I have seen in other theory threads people trying to find double, triple and quadruple meanings to the most innocent line, or camera shot. Trying to find connections between the characters that have not even been hinted at or alluded to.

So, is it fair to say that, using the show in its entirety as a template, and bearing in mind that we are watching a TV program where story-telling and production constraints will have a large impact on the show, we are trying to find some answers to the mysteries of the island which do not add unnecessary, new, and unrealistic elements to the 'real' world as presented on the show?


Sounds good to me. I've been a proponent of "theorize whatever you like as long as you can back it up with specific references to the text." Although I would add that simple, sensible theories are, to my mind, far preferable to complex, outlandish ones.

One thing I try to ask myself when my own imagination comes up with an elaborate theory (as it is wont to do at times) is whether it could actually work dramatically. If a theory would require lengthy explication and/or a degree in math or physics before the viewing audience understands, it's probably not gonna fly.

Templeton

Locke's paralysis---what was the cause? I have a couple of ideas, but I'll save them for now. Sorry again for that tangent


The simplest theory is that it was psychosomatic, because then there is no need to explain the cure.

The theory that it was altogether faked doesn't feel right given what appeared to be his intense desire to overcome it.

There's no evidence it was systemic, such as a wasting disease.

So other than or in addition to it being psyschosomatic, the obvious candidates are the usual ones -- accident, gunshot, and so on.

Sign me up, please...........

I just can't help myself, but being a scientist I'm always skeptic and wants hard evidence to believe in anything.

Welcome Kristina, the more the merrier as they say.* ;D* You are # 13.

Here is the updated membership list:
#1: Zoriah
#2: TRoss
#3: CAM
#4: Templeton
#5: QueenElessar
#6: Elfdream
#7: Artnfilm
#8: Baner17
#9: Bliss
#10: Hobbitsrule101
#11: Sleestak
#12: Ms Demeaner
#13: Kristina

The simplest theory is that it was psychosomatic, because then there is no need to explain the cure.

The theory that it was altogether faked doesn't feel right given what appeared to be his intense desire to overcome it.

There's no evidence it was systemic, such as a wasting disease.

So other than or in addition to it being psyschosomatic, the obvious candidates are the usual ones -- accident, gunshot, and so on.


Ok, someone else thinks this. Good to hear, CAM. That was my original theory, but It got shot down before. It seems the most likely, though, because it involves no other negative consequences, and this does happen in real life that people regain use of lost functions

We should also establish right off what the writers have said are 'real' in the story.

For example thte island is 'real'. Not purgatory. They are not dead. Its not a dream or an elaborate internet role playing game.

The plane crash was real.

The first fight between Jack and Ethan was real and NOT an hallucination.

Sometimes a sneaker is just a sneaker.

Those are the only ones I can think of at the moment but as time goes by and the writers answer more questions we will be able to add to the list.

I think Locke's paralysis was probably psychosomatic as well.

I have read several* people post about this and I have NO idea if they know what they are talking about or not that perhaps something was 'jammed' up against Locke's spine that caused the paralysis and the crash shook it loose, relieved the pressure and he could walk. That might just be so much 'medical babble' but then again that is what threads like this are here for. To find out if that is a real option or not.

Hey, someone should have PM'd me! This place got to page four before I found it!

Now I have to go back and read all of the posts. :)

Regarding the 'purpose' of this thread, or how best to define its nature, I'd sum it up like this:

If the show presents us with something that looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then this thread is for those people who think that it probably is just a duck.

This is not the thread to theorize about how it might actually be a hallucination and not really exist, or about how it might be a mechanical mock-up of a duck equiped with a camera to spy on the lostaways, or about how it might be Locke's old pet duck that got lost 4 years ago after he he accidentally muttered the 'numbers' in sequence while reading a bingo card, or about how the duck was what caused the plane crash after it flew into a turbine, but because the duck had used the 'numbers' previously, it was unharmed, but brought the plane down anyway.

Sometimes, a duck is just a duck, with no purpose other than to just be a duck. We're here to separate the ducks from the quacks. ;)*

Find the simplest, most straightforward explanation to things, without a lot of far-stretching, illogical, unrealistic, or otherwise unworkable solutions. When it comes to the mysteries on the island, we're looking for realistic, workable answers.

There's one problem with all of it, though, and that is that we can be virtually assured that the writers are often looking to surprise us, and as such, we can be sure that sometimes the simplest explanation is exactly what they'll avoid. So we have to be OK with being wrong from time to time. I know I'm OK with that, since it'll keep things interesting.

Take Templeton's speculation:
Templeton wrote:What are some of the mysteries that might easily and logically be resolved (or at least, elucidated) this season, without a lot of arcane exposition that most viewers might not pay attention to anyway?

For example... here's a purely theoretical: they open the hatch and descend into the opening. The camera reveals a small, dark area, possibly with some mechanical equipment of some sort. As we pan around we see the reveal -- the area opens into a narrow tunnel that descends under the ground away from the hatch area. Dimly, it can be seen that every hundred yards or so there's a weak lightbulb providing some illumination.

This is my hypothesis as well - that there is some sort of subterranian structure/system in place on this island. It's plausible, based in real-world physics, does not require supernatural explanation, and would also add a whole heckuva lot to the show. However, I accept that this solution, though straightforward, workable, and intriguing, may not be what the writers have chosen. I'm just hoping that if it's not the 'tunnel system' solution, that it is something equally plausible and intriguing.

I think a good place to start here is to first get an account of what are the mysteries on the island? We can then tackle them one by one and come up with logical solutions to each. So, let's try to get a master list of 'mysteries' on the show... such as (but not limited to):

- What caused the plane crash?
- How did so many survive?
- What happened to the pilot?
- Where is Jack's father's body?
- Where is Danielle's son, Alex?
- How did Ethan get onto the island?
- What does Ethan want with Claire?
- What is 'the monster'?
- What is 'the hatch'?
- What is the purpose of the cable on the beach?
- What is the significance of 'the numbers'?
- Who are 'the others'?
- What is the source of 'the whispers'?

And that's just off the top of my head. We need to tackle each of these one at a time, coming up with a solid theory or two (or three, or four). That should be plenty of discussion fodder to keep us going for a loooong time. Some questions will be answered by future episodes, some may not ever get a full explanation, and some may not require explanations (even though we may like one). So perhaps each mystery also needs a classification such as "must be resolved", "should be resolved", or "doesn't necessarily need to be resolved, but it would be nice"... just tossing out ideas.

So, first things first - let's get a comprehensive list of mysteries, then we'll worry about answering 'em!

Well, that's actually just a suggestion. Feel free to ignore it or discard it or whatever. I just think it'd be easier from an organization standpoint to know what issues we need to tackle! :)

What caused the plane crash?
- How did so many survive?
- What happened to the pilot?
- Where is Jack's father's body?
- Where is Danielle's son, Alex?
- How did Ethan get onto the island?
- What does Ethan want with Claire?
- What is 'the monster'?
- What is 'the hatch'?
- What is the purpose of the cable on the beach?
- What is the significance of 'the numbers'?
- Who are 'the others'?
- What is the source of 'the whispers'?

I would like to add to this list a question of the "others", are they real? Who are they? Are they indigineous people or more marooned survivor types? And I would also like to add a question about the disease. Is it real? (after all, Danielle is not the most reliable source) What are the symptoms? Is it fatal?

I just want to say that I love that you started this group. I keep trying to use logic in other theory threads and seem to enrage the more wild theorists. I am going to try to keep my logic restricted here, in this new safe haven.

Finally! *A place that tried to makes sense of all the theories that have run amok. *I'm all for a thread like this. *Sign me up!

There is so much that I've read over the last 4 pages that I agree with. *Too much to mention, but yes to it all. *Simple is good. *Audiences won't easily go for convolution. * *While I have my Mulder moments, I like to have the Scully explination to help make sense of things.

This is just the place!

Great questions Vertical. *I've been asking myself those exact same things for so long now. *

I just want to say that I love that you started this group. I keep trying to use logic in other theory threads and seem to enrage the more wild theorists. I am going to try to keep my logic restricted here, in this new safe haven.


I feel your pain..I've had that happen many times in the past

Another big question, possibly linked to the "monster" but not necessarily:

What does Locke know that the rest don't?

Edit: forgot to add, also, Where did the polar bears come from?

If the show presents us with something that looks like a duck polar bear, walks like a duck polar bear, and quacks *growls like a duck polar bear, then this thread is for those people who think that it probably is just a duck polar bear.* ;D

Zoriah,

How about psychology ? Does it have a place in this ship ?
Since the show is also focused on the characters and their issues, I think collecting known facts about them, studying their behavior before and after the crash ( in their past life vs. on the island ) and determining what are their roles on the island might help to answer some of the questions we ask.
Do you think it's relevant here ?

Please sign me up.* I have been looking for a place like this.* I agree that clues are placed into the show, but analyzing screen shots of the types of planes that are on a desk in a guides office or in a picture on the wall* * :-\.... come on.* I thought some of this would have stopped when a picture with the wrong year was put in the background and ppl started arguing that the show was set in 2008, the Red Sox reference shot that down but a lot of time was wasted on arguing that point.

crashover, I would think that so long as we examine what we know about the characters, without treading into speculation about what might be, then using that to try to answer questions about characters would be valid.

I'm all for it! Sign me up.

I've spent lunch hours fascinated by the incredible theories people have developed. And though I can see them "working," they never "feel" right. There's a tone to this show that doesn't fit the BIG theories. I think it's much more reality based, but a skewed reality, kind of like "The Da Vinci Code," which Javi mentioned as one of the "books" that might be found on the island.

Duck, duck, duck!

(Goose?)

crashover, I would think that so long as we examine what we know about the characters, without treading into speculation about what might be, then using that to try to answer questions about characters would be valid.


And please no 'VIBES' See my sig. *;D * Please no 'I get a bad feeling' from Claire because she's too nice and so therefore she must be evil because of MY feelings because MY feelings are facts. Sorry people but Claire is just evil." * *:sick:

If we actually *SEE Claire give someone the finger and speaking *to him/her in a vicious manner or gossipping said person in way meant to be hurtful or trying to steal one of Locke's knives, *then we can use that evidence that there is something up with Claire. Not before. If she's nice I would assume that she is in fact..a nice person until we are shown differently.

I have seen some good discussions on substance withdrawl and the mental and physical attributes of addiction and obsessive compulsive disorder here. I think those would be ok as long as they are in keeping with known medical guidelines and if the symptoms are actually portrayed on the show.

On the list of questions that Vertical presented... I think it should be "Where is Alex that Danielle referred to?"

Not to nitpick, but if we are going with what we know then we don't know that Alex is male.

Hey, we're all about nitpicking here! No worries!

Although I had a recollection that Danielle referred to her 'son' at some point? My memory can be shoddy, though.

Vertical, Elfdream,

That's exactly how I see it, a work only based on what has been shown so far.
We see a fact, ask questions about it, and make sure not to be limited to only one answer.

For example, Jack in Pilot Part 1

Fact : Jack walks away and hide to suture himself.
Question : Why ?
Possible answers : 1 ) He's an awfully shy guy.
2 ) He doesn't want the others to know he's injuried because he's the only doctor on the island and wants to avoid panic.
3 ) The creators needed to have Jack meeting Kate in the exposition scene and they couldn't think of anything else.

If we take the Occam's Razor type of approach, option #3 is the best one.

Same scene :

Fact : Kate is coming from the opposite of the crash site.
Questions : Why ? What was she doing ?
Answer : It turned out that she was hiding to get rid of the handcuffs which Walt found later.

Is it ok if we proceed so ?

Seems in keeping with the spirit of the thread, IMO.

I think it's important that for every question, we accept that the answer could always potentially boil down to "because the writers needed it to happen this way". That, IMO, is a core concept to keeping things simple and not over-analyzing things simply because they might have significance... Why did Jack venture off alone to suture himself? Unless otherwise contradicted, I'd have to assume it was simply a plot-progression action as opposed to character driven action. "Jack" didn't really have a reason, but the writers needed Jack to be alone, and so they wrote it that way. It's nice if the writers can give Jack a plausible motive, but that's not always a luxury they have the time to provide and explain.

In other words, not everything is a conspiracy or hidden motivation waiting to be uncovered. Some things are just meaningless.

It seems we agree, so, Zoriah, if it's ok with you, I wanna KISS too ! ;)

This approach sounds great to me.

I do however admit that I have to resist the temptation to sneak into some of the wilder theory threads and shout 'DUCK DUCK DUCK" and running away... :laugh:

I have read several people post about this and I have NO idea if they know what they are talking about or not that perhaps something was 'jammed' up against Locke's spine that caused the paralysis and the crash shook it loose, relieved the pressure and he could walk. That might just be so much 'medical babble' but then again that is what threads like this are here for. To find out if that is a real option or not.


I once had a computer that stopped working fairly frequently. A well-placed slap to its side would get it going again.

It turns out that there is even a term for this technique: "Percussive maintenance"

However, the human body doesn't work quite the same way with loose and/or dusted-over circuit connections, so I would not generalize with confidence from this example.

So far as I know, that only works with dislocations, or if for some reason you have to knock a lostaway unconscious.

If you have had something jamming your spine for 4 years, it would effect the function of the spinal chord, the muscles would be extremely weak, and the coordination. You would NOT be able to just stand up and walk away.
I don't know if there is a scientific explanation to Locke's "transformation". A person MAY regain the ability to walk, even after years of paralysis, but you don't just stand up, and run away. You would need weeks and months of rehabilitation, training and exercise...........
It will be interesting to hear how the writers will explain the whole "Locke-thing".

Wow this thread has just exploded over night! Big welcomes to Vertical (#14), Gotcris (#15), SpaceWrangler (#16), tomten3000 (#17), Crashover (#18). You will all be added to the master list in the Group ship section - please feel free to go there to hang and chat too - this place was split up to keep the theoretical side of the discussion in Theories. ;) Sorry Hobbitsrule101 I got the numbering wrong and left you off the list but that has been rectified, you are officially #10.

So that means Sleestak is #11, Ms Demeaner #12, and Kristina #13 - sorry for the mix up.

Vertical, I think* a list of the island mysteries is a fantastic idea, we can look at them one by one, add more, and update with solutions once they are confirmed on the show, and also new questions as they come to light. I will make up a list of all of the questions that intrigue us and will keep it in the first post. :)

Okay everyone I have started a list of possible mysteries we might like to try to find plausible answers to, you can find it on the first post.

Elfdream's idea of gathering the facts that the creators (and sometimes actors) have also confirmed would be great, but I am reluctant to put anything up unless it also cites the source.

For example -* * *The island is not purgatory : JJ Abrams - SomeBigMagazine interview Jan 05 (and link if possible).

Crashover: :-*

There's actually a fairly intelligent thread going on Locke's paralyzation.

Anyhow, what exactly do we know started 4 years ago for him? And can a tumor be ruled out, either brain or spine? To some extent in real life and certainly on TV, there can be "It's a miracle!" tumor remissions.

In the case of brain tumors in particular, people with fatal tumors tend to have some months of remissions where they seem pretty cured, before it gets bad again and kills them. I say that based on a very small, possibly non-random sample of people I've known or known of with the condition.

:blush:

- What is 'the monster'?

It was also said that the monster is sort of a reflection of yourself. The pilot saw it in horror and he was killed because he feared the monster. Locke saw the monster with true awe, therefore, he was able to survive his encounter.

Paul Dini - Dark Horizons Interview Nov 09 2004
http://www.darkhorizons.com/news04/041109d.php

"the monster is sort of a reflection of yourself"

Could be a pun, the "monster" is made of metal and reflects your image as a mirror.

There's actually a fairly intelligent thread going on Locke's paralyzation.

Anyhow, what exactly do we know started 4 years ago for him? And can a tumor be ruled out, either brain or spine? To some extent in real life and certainly on TV, there can be "It's a miracle!" tumor remissions.

In the case of brain tumors in particular, people with fatal tumors tend to have some months of remissions where they seem pretty cured, before it gets bad again and kills them. I say that based on a very small, possibly non-random sample of people I've known or known of with the condition.


A tumor in remission is probably a perfectly valid explanation, and a plausible one, but how would that work on the show? Something like that could really only be divulged with a very medi-technically-laden flashback, and some lengthy explanation of not only the condition that Locke has, but how it may go into remission. Your average-joe viewer probably doesn't know about the realities of them. I know I don't. So they'd have to spend a lot of time explaining that one.

It's definitely a possible explanation, but one that would require a whole lot of exposition and on-screen/flashback explanation.

I still stick to the psychosomatic illness interpretation, even if they never label it as such.

eg. we may see that Locke, going to work, forgets to wear pants. Out of sheer psychological shock, his legs stop functioning. They would never have to label it as that specific condition, but the average viewer will be able to know what went on.

That's my feeling as well, and that's precisely what I just posted over in the locke/paralyzation thread... No one had mentioned it yet, oddly enough. A psychosomatic condition, or even severe neurosis could explain Locke's 'miracle' quite easily...

Here's what i've posted on the "Was Locke Really Paralyzed" thread.
I think it might help.


Got it !

Zoom function is a GREAT invention !
I wanted to know the brand of the device, the more I zoomed, the more blurred was the picture (obvious).
But I could fortunately figure it out !
It's Hako. I've googled it, and look what I've found :

http://www.electromedicine.com/products/proelecdt.html

It's the one on top.

Woohoo good spotting! So I was wrong, but I looked through pages of google and couldn't find anything close to that pic. Awesome find Crashover. ;D

Thanks ! ;)
This site is a mine of information, we should definitely use it as a base for our work.

That's some seriously brilliant work, crashover. I'd been searching the wrong brand name for hours. Awesome, awesome find. This is the sort of thing this thread should tout - actual evidence. Now we can say for certain that Locke was at least potentially treating atrophy, and have evidence to backup that claim. Which helps us answer part of the mystery of how Locke was able to walk. It doesn't explain the sudden ability to control his legs, but it explains how he can physically stand on them and use them.

Updating the front page :D

Well, now my eyes turned red. When mom says "don't watch the TV so close ", listen to her ! ;D

INDICATIONS
Pain Management

* For adjunctive treatment of post-traumatic pain syndromes
* For management and symptomatic relief of chronic (long-term) intractable pain
* As an adjunctive treatment in the management of post-surgical pain problems

Muscle Stimulation

* Relaxation of muscle spasms
* Prevention or retardation of disuse atrophy
* Increasing local blood circulation
* Muscle reeducation
* Immediate post-surgical stimulation of calf muscle to prevent phlebothrombosis
* Maintaining or increasing range of motion

EMS devices should only be used under medical supervision for adjunctive treatment of medical diseases and conditions.

CONTRAINDICATIONS

1. Thrombophlebitis
2. Manifest thrombosis
3. Cardiac demand pacemaker
4. Acute danger of hemorrhage
5. Disturbances in cardiac rhythm
6. In tetany, caution should be exercised in dosing.
7. Acute local inflammatory processes caused by bacterial or viral infection (for example: furuncle phlegmon, herpes simplex, acute herpes zoster)
8. Do not stimulate over carotid sinus!
9. Do not stimulate transcerebally!
10. Should not be used on cancer patients.

So we can keep muscle atrophy, and eliminate tumor and stroke (thrombosis).

I don't see anything about psychosomatic illness, but since it's a therapy for physical symptoms and not psychiatric symptoms, I think we can keep it.
What do you think ?

I'd say that it would/could go hand in hand with a psychosomatic condition. I don't imagine the product cares how you lost the use of your muscles, it would stimulate them all the same, regardless of the cause.

Here's an explain-all pic:

http://home.comcast.net/~therealvertical/LockeExplained.jpg

Great job Vertical, and many thanks for the credits !

Well, now my eyes turned red. When mom says "don't watch the TV so close ", listen to her !* ;D

So we can keep muscle atrophy, and eliminate tumor and stroke (thrombosis).

I don't see anything about psychosomatic illness, but since it's a therapy for physical symptoms and not psychiatric symptoms, I think we can keep it.
What do you think ?



I'd definitely say we can keep the psychosomatic disease.

This, facts and truth is what I sometimes been missing here. I KNOW the truth and facts sometimes isn't as "interesting" as the reality, but why search for complicated and far-fetched answers when there are simple ones ???

However, if Locke's condition is psychosomatic, the cause of this condition, the trigger of it is a very interesting question. I don't know very much about psychosomatic conditions, but wouldn't the stimuli have to be VERY strong, really intense to induce such a condition ???

I just posted on the other thread regarding Locke's condiation; http://www.thefuselage.com/threaded/index.php?topic=9731.msg197355#msg197355

I've done a lot of wild theorizing and it's fun to do and has proved to be educational as well. I'm hoping this thread can & will stay true to how it has started out. Whether reasonable or wild, I get frustrated when the smallest details are scrutinized. I'll use this as an example, not trying to point to anyone in particular, but there was a 2 page discussion about the bank manager's name Mark being partially covered and looked like the word map. IMO those types of nitpicking or scavenger hunting for clues are "trying". I promise to keep on topic and leave my wild speculations to other threads. I hope I can look at things in the simple reality of what is shown and also take my flight of fantasy(not here of course)another words I Want My Cake and I Want to Eat it To. So if you will allow I would enjoy joining your fine thread.

Regarding Locke's paralysis, IMO a herniated or ruptured disk impinging on the nerves of the spinal column is a simple answer. Both my father and older brother have had herniated disks. In researching the ailment, I have found that: This condition causes immense pain, partial paralysis, can confine people to bed for months at a time and necessitate the use of a wheelchair. My father was able to get relief by seeing a chiropractor, who in essence snapped the disk back into place. EMS/TENS units are used to stimulate the muscles in the region because muscle toning is very important in treating it. In Locke's case, IMO it is just as easy to speculate that his paralysis is from a disk pinching a nerve in the spine, he is using EMS/TENS to stimulate the muscles in conjunction with physical therapy, keeping his muscles in good working order and that the impact of the crash caused the disk to move relieving the pressure on the spinal nerves.

A quite plausible theory, about the disk....

I'm convinced that we will get some more answers in the next epis, but the waiting is tough :laugh:

Welcome Lostbylost! You are #19. ;D

Thank You Zoriah.

The Waiting is Killing ME.

Thank You Zoriah.

The Waiting is Killing ME.


Speaking of that -- when is the next episode, and is that date confirmed?

Regarding Locke's paralysis, IMO a herniated or ruptured disk impinging on the nerves of the spinal column is a simple answer.

Agreed. In many ways it is a far simpler explanation than a psychosomatic condition. It gets my stamp of approval of a simple, straightforward, workable solution that is backed up by visual clues and evidence in the show.

I Agree too. My mom has a herniated disk, doctor says it's too soon to treat it in surgery, if the operation turns bad she could be paralyzed.
Her chiropractor prevents the damages to get worse and he hopes one day he'll be able to put the disc back in place.

CAM - next ep. airs on Mar. 30, it's been confirmed here :

http://www.tvtome.com/Lost/eplist.html

There is the possibility that Locke has some use of is legs, like being able to walk a few feet from his wheelchair to his office chair or bed. This could explain where he sat on the plane. He wouldn't have much of a problem getting to an "inside" seat especially if he boarded in the "passengers requiring assistance" boarding call.

However he did seem pretty amazed that he could wiggle his toes after the crash. Unless he was amazed that he could wiggle his toes without pain.

I made a mistake. A stroke is still valid. I ruled it out because of the "thrombosis" mention in the contraindications, but it can be another type of stroke according to this :

http://www.strokeassociation.org/presenter.jhtml?identifier=1014

Sleestack - I think there are two interpretations for Locke's reaction : wether he was amazed or he was reassured that he still could wiggle his toes.

Actually, I think that makes three valid interpretations:

1) Amazed he could move his toes at all
2) Amazed he could move his toes with no pain
3) Relieved to discover that he could still move his toes (indicative of having previously regained the use of his legs prior to the crash)

Locke was paralyzed and now he can walk. *I think that is the main theory we were to get from his assention to the *world of two leg drive. *I just assumed from the moment that they flashed back to him in the wheelchair that crashing on the island had given him mobility back. *:o *
We do know that he was adamant about going on the walkabout and the reason he could not go was because of his condition. *IMO if it was "all in his head" then just that motivation of not being able to go would have caused him to at least try to stand (Not knowing the plane was going to crash he saw this as his last chance to fulfill his dream) *
From the evidence I saw in the show after the crash he looked down at his foot and could move it, had feeling in it etc... where there was none before.
From this it seems the disk theory is the one that works for me.

Speaking of Locke's paralysis, there is this:

http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/000312.htm

Periodic paralysis. If the writer's were to take creative license, they could use this as a reason why Locke was paralyzed and regained the use of his legs (and why it may feel as though its coming on again). The catch ... episodes last less than 24 hours. Though they can be chronic.

Then there's this:

http://www.wvhealthweb.com/articles/rehabilitation/athletes_temporary_paralysis.htm

Temporary spinal cord injury. It's mostly suffered by atheletes, and we all know that Locke is pretty physical. Perhaps he was in the midst of physical therapy when the accident occurred, on his way back from a TSCI? That could account for part of his disappearance ... Maybe he's continuing his physical therapy in the jungle and doesn't want anyone to know.

Simple, real world reasons for Locke's temporary paralysis.

I think the important bottom line here is that there are several plausible, realistic, workable conditions that Locke could have had which could be 'cleared up' rather abruptly. That fact alone is more important, IMO, than which particular explanation the writers go with to explain it. The only one that offers a little bit of a more unique/intriguing backstory possibility is if it is psychosomatic... Something extremely traumatic would have had to have happened to him, and that opens up a whole slew of possibilities.

I’d like to tackle these questions through the POV of a writer on the series. In other words, I think one of the best “duck, duck, duck” ways to approach these mysteries is to think in terms of plotting the story.

To that end, there are 3 reasons why these mysteries exist:

1. Plot device Something of this nature/magnitude has to happen to propel the story forward. That doesn’t mean that there doesn’t have to be a logical reason why it happened, just that it had to happen.
2. Logical reason. The true “duck, duck, duck” answer. In other words, the writers’ know Character X is allergic to substance B – it’s somewhere in his yet-to-be-divulged backstory – and they’re applying that to the current situation. This happens all the time in stories and creates “mysteries.”
3. Magical realism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magical_realism). The writers’ know what they bigger mysteries of the island are and how far they stretch the realm of believability. I’m inclined to think that their forays into the supernatural will be muted. In other words, there’s no vast government conspiracy at play. It doesn’t fit the tone of the show, which I believe is neither science-fiction nor fantasy, but magical realism. Elements of this category fall into the show’s mythology.

I can’t, of course, answer all these questions, but I wanted to try to answer some based on these three blankets. Those marked magical realism I can only speculate on – and won’t bore you with speculation in this thread!

That said:

What caused the plane crash?
Plot device. It’s a show about castaways on a deserted island. The easiest way to get them there is by plane (and one of the most dramatic). The cause of the plane crash could conceivably go unknown for the entire length of the series. It just happened. Having said that, the writers have created an opportunity to insert it into the show’s overall mythology, should they choose.

How did so many survive?
Plot device and logical reason. I don’t recall the flight, but I remember the video footage as clear as day. A 737 making an emergency water landing in a tropical setting. The wing catches the water and it tumbles a bit and, if I remember correctly, breaks apart. Many survivors swim to safety. The writers may remember this as well. And it accounts for the number of survivors.

What happened to the pilot?
Magical realism. The beastie got ‘im.

Where is Jack's father's body?
Logical reason. Questions I don’t have the answer to (mainly because I haven’t seen every episode … eek!) … Did Jack ID his father’s body? If not, then maybe Jack’s father was never in the coffin in the first place (though why would you just transport a coffin? … so nix that idea). My guess … beastie got ‘im.

Where is Danielle's son, Alex?
Logical reason. Danielle said she shot him. He’s dead.

How did Ethan get onto the island?
Logical reason. It’s a big island and there are other castaways here. Locke has said he knows the castaways aren’t alone on the island. We know it, too. It’s a big island and no one has explored the whole thing. But “The Others” would know all its nooks and crannies.

What does Ethan want with Claire?
Logical reason. We don’t know enough about Ethan yet to understand his motives. But my guess is that he wanted to start a little family of his own. Why else would you kidnap a pregnant woman and somehow induce amnesia? So you can fill her brain with the story that you’re her husband and that baby’s his.

What is 'the monster'?
Magical realism. No clue. I think it’s a snark. Or maybe a boojum.

What is 'the hatch'?
Logical reason and magical realism. It’s definitely part of the overall mythology, but it’s easy to see why there would be some kind of manmade storage facility on the island. There are lots of instances of the military using island atolls and archipelagos as testing and training grounds. Better question: What is in the hatch?

What is the purpose of the cable on the beach?
Logical reason. I just don’t know what it is.

What is the significance of 'the numbers'?
Magical realism. They’re cursed. Isn’t that enough?

Who are 'the others'?
Plot device, logical reason, magical realism. I think they’re other castaways from other wrecks. Even “Survivor” has two tribes pitted against one another. We need our second tribe. I include plot device because an outside antagonist for our castaways would crank up the tension. Notice how we all kinda like our castaways and don’t want any of them to turn out “evil”? Well, we need some evil.

What is the source of 'the whispers'?
Magical realism. I’ve no clue. Bad boar?

What does Locke know that the rest don't?
Logical reason and magical realism. He’s the biggest explorer of the island, so he knows the most. He’s also really damn lucky he didn’t get himself killed the first couple nights there. If he really has a military background, he may have some idea of what the island could have been used for. Otherwise, he’s the “wizard” in the Joseph Campbell’s monomyth (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monomyth).

Where did the polar bears come from?
Logical reason. I’m all for the idea that they were brought or crashed on the island. Duck, duck, duck. They survive in zoo climates all over the world. Why not on a tropical island?

Tomten,

I like your analysis, taking the POV of a writer is a good idea.
But I disagree with some of your statements :

How did so many survive?
Plot device and logical reason. I don’t recall the flight, but I remember the video footage as clear as day. A 737 making an emergency water landing in a tropical setting. The wing catches the water and it tumbles a bit and, if I remember correctly, breaks apart. Many survivors swim to safety. The writers may remember this as well. And it accounts for the number of survivors.

We've never seen the crash from the outside, nor any survivor swimming. At the beginning of the pilot, all we see is the wreckage on the beach, a redshirt is vacuumed through an engine, making it explode, and the castaways are scattered around the wreckage.
They've always shown us the crash from the inside, through the POV of Jack, Rose, Kate and Charlie. In Kate's flashback we clearly see the tail section cutted out and going down while the plane was still in altitude.

Where is Jack's father's body?
Logical reason. Questions I don’t have the answer to (mainly because I haven’t seen every episode … eek!) … Did Jack ID his father’s body? If not, then maybe Jack’s father was never in the coffin in the first place (though why would you just transport a coffin? … so nix that idea). My guess … beastie got ‘im.


Yes, we see Jack ID his father's boby during his flashback in Sydney.

Where is Danielle's son, Alex?
Logical reason. Danielle said she shot him. He’s dead.

She said she shot Robert, her husband, not Alex. Actually she's looking after him/her.

What is the significance of 'the numbers'?
Magical realism. They’re cursed. Isn’t that enough?

I'll only speak for myself. I don't buy the curse thing.

We do know that he was adamant about going on the walkabout and the reason he could not go was because of his condition. IMO if it was "all in his head" then just that motivation of not being able to go would have caused him to at least try to stand


Theres more the psychosomatic disorders than that. Some people just wake up blind one day. Needing or wanting to see doesn't make it go away.


We've never seen the crash from the outside, nor any survivor swimming. At the beginning of the pilot, all we see is the wreckage on the beach, a redshirt is vacuumed through an engine, making it explode, and the castaways are scattered around the wreckage.
They've always shown us the crash from the inside, through the POV of Jack, Rose, Kate and Charlie. In Kate's flashback we clearly see the tail section cutted out and going down while the plane was still in altitude.


the way I understood it, tom was referring to footage of a crash in the past, not a clip from lost. Correct me if I'm wrong

the way I understood it, tom was referring to footage of a crash in the past, not a clip from lost. Correct me if I'm wrong

I've read it too quickly. My bad. :-[

Tom, I apologize.

Excellent post, Tomten. Good categorizations. I agree with most of your assessments, outside of the one concerning the numbers. I don't believe they're 'cursed'. I think their significance lies only in the fact that they are for identification purposes. Nothing more sinister than that. Any 'curse' attributed to them is done so via paranoid human minds. I think that's a far more simple and rational solution than starting to introduce curses and whatnot into the mix.

I'm beginnin' to agree with you.

In regard to the plane crash, no apology necessary. I was indeed referring to actual footage of an actual plane crash. Though the "Lost" plane breaks apart in the air and the real crash shows that the pilots were able to "land" the plane on the water (or attempt to land), this still begs the question of how so many did survive.

Also, I read this via a link to an article about Lost. The quote is from Damon Lindelof. And I think it would do us good to consider it during our speculation:

"We're still trying to be firmly ensconced in the world of science fact. I don't think we've shown anything on the show yet that has no rational explanation in the real world that we all function in. We certainly hint at psychic phenomena, happenstance and being in a place where they probably shouldn't be, but nothing is flat out impossible. There are no spaceships, there isn't any time travel.""

Theres more the psychosomatic disorders than that. Some people just wake up blind one day. Needing or wanting to see doesn't make it go away.

I completely understand that there is more to it than that. *I am saying that given what we have been shown, not going on the walkabout was a traumatic experience. *Waking up on the beach after a plane crash... traumatic experience. *The difference is the phyisical force of crashing.

I know that waking up on a beach after a plane crash is more traumatic that not being able to go on a walkabout, but it is also like telling a 6 year old that their friend not talking to them is not the end of the world. *In thier life experiences thier friend not talking to them is the worst thing that has happened in their life so far. *For Locke not being able to live his dream is the worse news he could have gotten at that time.

I am not saying that it is not psychosomatic, *just that what we have seen so far.... Wheelchair(not walking)...plane crash(sudden force to body)... Hey I can move my foot now... IMO points to impact fixed problem.

Had to edit... had everything looking like a quote.

"We're still trying to be firmly ensconced in the world of science fact. I don't think we've shown anything on the show yet that has no rational explanation in the real world that we all function in. We certainly hint at psychic phenomena, happenstance and being in a place where they probably shouldn't be, but nothing is flat out impossible. There are no spaceships, there isn't any time travel.""

So Walt doesn't have any magic power.
He sees a polar bear in a comic, and there are at least two on the island ? Coincidence.
He reads a book about birds and there's one crashing on the window ? Coincidence.
He throws a knife and spot the target ? Coincidence.

Brian Porter says "things happen when he's around" ? Locke says he's different and asks Micheal to "allow his boy to realize his potential" ? The ep. about Walt and Micheal is called "Special" ?

Plot devices to make us believe he's special, different. But he's not. Or is he ?

Where is Jack's Dad's body?

In Jack's first flashback he is told he does not have the correct paperwork to take the body on the plane. Was this ever rectified and Jack allowed to take the body on the plane?

I completely understand that there is more to it than that. I am saying that given what we have been shown, not going on the walkabout was a traumatic experience. Waking up on the beach after a plane crash... traumatic experience. The difference is the phyisical force of crashing.


Ok, I get what you mean now, I misunderstood.


Plot devices to make us believe he's special, different. But he's not. Or is he ?


All Lindeloff said was that it's not conclusive evidence yet, and that they've hinted at happenstance, but there is not yet a definite "power" that he has

So Walt doesn't have any magic power.
He sees a polar bear in a comic, and there are at least two on the island ? Coincidence.
He reads a book about birds and there's one crashing on the window ? Coincidence.
He throws a knife and spot the target ? Coincidence.

Brian Porter says "things happen when he's around" ? Locke says he's different and asks Micheal to "allow his boy to realize his potential" ? The ep. about Walt and Micheal is called "Special" ?

Plot devices to make us believe he's special, different. But he's not. Or is he ?


Why do viewers assume that Walt does have special powers? Well, because of those examples you cited. But all of those things have 'science fact' rational explanations also:

Walt sees a polar bear, yet we already knew that there were Polar Bears on this island. So what? There were also aliens in that comic book (I believe)... where are they? If Walt has magic powers, why only Polar Bears? The rational, 'real science' explanation is that (for some reason) Polar Bears were pre-existing on this island (evidenced by the polar bear in a previous episode), and one happened to attack Walt. It's only a coincidence because the writers chose to show us that comic book. The real question is why do they show that to us?

Walt is reading a book about birds and a bird crashed into the window... And we assume it's because Walt has special powers? Why? Why can't a bird just have flown into the window. Two things are happening at that time - A bird is flying into the window and Walt's mother is dying. Why not assume Walt is killing his mother? The rational 'real science' explanation is that a bird just flew into a glass window. It happens a lot. Walt did not make the bird appear. It did not materialize at his command. He did not control its flight. It just ... happened. Duck, duck, duck.

The reason people think Walt has special powers is because the writers have written and editted the show in such a manner as to leave the subject ambiguous. Why? I don't think Walt does have special powers, but why do the writers want to leave the issue open for debate? To make Walt an interesting character? If we didn't think Walt had special powers, or that he might, would we really care about him as a character? Then again, I don't care for him now, so there's that to consider. I think he's obnoxious. Heh.

Does Walt have telekinetic (spelling?) powers? Unlikely. That's not 'science fact'. Although it seems as though they've crashed on the Twilight Zone Island, I don't think that's where the writers want the show to go. Just my opinion, though.

I found a source for Damon's Interview. Adding it to the front page in the meta section. Did we come to an agreement on the most likely cause of Locke's paralysis? It would be fun to put up our best guesses, so that if it ever gets explained we can compare.

I don't think there's a consensus on the specific medical problem/condition which caused Locke's paralysis at this point... My personal guess still lies along the psychosomatic lines, but I also acknowledge that there are several other valid H.O.R.T.A. 'approved' theories. Sometimes there's not always just one 'simple' explanation. Sometimes two explanations are equally simple. :)

I think the only thing we've effectively established is that he was treating his muscles with an EMS-device. My belief is that this was shown as a fallback for those who asked "what about atrophy"?

I want to quickly put this out there. *The more I read the interviews, the more tongue in cheek I think they are. *We are told the show is based on real science and pseudoscience. *Pseudo meaning "Fake". *If it is real or fake then just about everything is covered. From my research Pseudoscience includes; UFOs, Ghosts, time travel, wormholes, spiritualism and on & on. *So basically anything goes. *Now we have been told no aliens or time travel. *My thought is they are trying to tell us this isn't going to be Buffy or the X-Files. *Yes we would like to Keep everything simple, but at the same time let's not go overboard and tie the writers hands. *There are many things I am sure we all can agree are plausible even if we don't personally believe them to be scientific fact. *If they want us to believe Walt has some type of ESP without it being too far out there then that could easily be the answer. *The simplest solution is usually the answer. *They wanted us to believe that the Psychic forsaw the crash and that was why he wanted Claire to be on the Plane. *For those who believe that Psychic's are charlatans, it is a hard pill to sallow, *but Psychic's are used by some police department's as parts of their investigation. *I am not attempting to start a discussion as to whether Psychic ability is factual or not just that there is popular belief in today's world that it is possible. *This has not ended up very KISS.

Everyone has a different view of what is possible and impossible. *We need to figure out what the writer's believe is possible. *IMHO.

Sleestak: I found this in another section -

(Jan 30 - Feb 5) TV Guide - There's a section with pics of the cast and blurbs that say WWK (what we know) and WUN (what's up next).

Jack: WWK-The island’s doctor and de facto leader; was transporting his estranged father’s body home the day of the plane crash; carries a torch for Kate. WUN-He’ll make the risky decision to trust Locke and show him where the gun-filled Halliburton is.

It has also apparently been confirmed on the Fuselage boards by Javi that Christian Shepphard's body was indeed on the plane before it crashed (see Spoilerfix) but I can't find the original source.

Also, in terms of the dramatic nature of the scene, to me it does not seem plausible that Jack's vision quest would be so important to him, and end with him destroying the coffin AFTER he opens it and finds it empty, if in fact he knew his father was not meant to be inside it anyway. It seemed to me that Jack needed closure, and was hoping to finally put his father to rest. When he opens the coffin to check (and why would he check if he was not expecting him to be there?), he registers surprise and shock IMO and then proceeds to violently destroy the casket.

I read the same thing. Javi posted it in an answer in JAVI. Excellent points about Jack and his father.

Was the coffin broken or open at all before Jack attacked it? Could it be that the body was blown out (a la Vincent from his cargo crate?) and is somewhere on the island?

I thought psuedo science had to do with the idea of something close to real science. It usually invovles theories that if explained we could imagine it MIGHT be feasible. Things that are loosely based on real life science. The only examply I can think of is of course Star Trek. They have all kinds of techno-babble that makes sense even if we know nothing about transponder couplings or plasma generators. Warp drive makes sense..that we could actually 'warp space and travel that way.

I admit I might be wrong but that is what I always thought of when the idea of 'psuedo science' was raised. UFOs, ghosts, psychics etc were in the 'paranormal' camp and not science.

At least that's not the way I looked at it.

I thought psuedo science had to do with the idea of something close to real science. It usually invovles theories that if explained we could imagine it MIGHT be feasible. Things that are loosely based on real life science.* The only examply I can think of is of course Star Trek. They have all kinds of techno-babble that makes sense even if we know nothing about transponder couplings or plasma generators. Warp drive makes sense..that we could actually 'warp space and travel that way.

I admit I might be wrong but that is what I always thought of when the idea of 'psuedo science' was raised. UFOs, ghosts, psychics etc were in the 'paranormal' camp and not science.

At* least that's not the way I looked at it.





Here is a link to a definition of Pseudoscience. *Maybe this will help, eventhough just about everything is debatable.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudoscience

Thanks.

It appears that I stepped on some toes in the paralysis thread, and was told that if I didn't like them theorizing that I should not read the speculations and theories. I admit my initial comments were strongly worded and have edited them, but I still am frustrated that dissenting opinion is frowned upon in the other threads. Anyways it appears that from now on I will be lurking in the other threads but only posting in here till I can refrain from being preachy and making other people feel small and stupid.

Zoriah, I happened to have been on the other thread and as has happened with me in the past, many times it has more to do with other things that are happening and not just with the post or postee. I agreed with some of what you had to say. I also would like to work off of what we have been shown instead of what hasn't been shown. I think the difficulty lies in the interpretation. If you take what we have been shown and then go on from there to theorize, that's one thing. It is completely different to fill-in information about the past based on nothing more than the fact that nothing has shown us it didn't happen that way. I hope I'm making sense. If not, relax take a deep breath and continue to enjoy being "LOST" and on the Fuselage.

I feel like the grinch sometimes.

But it's cool, yes it is true that there has to be flexibility for some amount of subjective interpretation of what we are shown on the screen. But then again I am the kind of person that assumes that if a person is shot with what looks to be a common expression of surprise, they are most likely surprised. :lol2:

I feel like the grinch sometimes.*

But it's cool, yes it is true that there has to be flexibility for some amount of subjective interpretation of what we are shown on the screen. But then again I am the kind of person that assumes that if a person is shot with what looks to be a common expression of surprise, they are most likely surprised.* :lol2:


That can be so subjective and we have to go with the person's total behavior, not just one look. For example many said that after Charlie shot Ethan Claire looked 'disgusted'. Ok...to me she looked confused* but they were entitled to their opinions. However in the next scene she didn't act like she was 'disgusted.'* *She was talking to Charlie quite calmly.* I will on that evidence of what we were shown conclude that her look was one of confusion and not disgust. If she had gone up to Charlie with " You scare the living crap out of me! Leave me alone!" then I would have agreed she was 'disgusted'.

That's just one example. There are so many more out there.

Oh, I agree that one should always try to look at the surrounding factors too. With regard to the person in question's total behaviour before and after the event.*

I mean it would be fair to say that Claire's expression did not look to be joyous, and it would be illogical to interpret it as such, given the context. I guess my comment above was probably too simplistic, I was just trying to say that if you use the evidence shown, in the context it was shown, then you should be able to extrapolate a reasonable plausible interpretation of what was shown,* narrowing down the possible interpretations, as it were, to those which were most likely, given the circumstance.

I hope that makes sense.

Amen!!!!

It makes perfect sense.

Don't worry Zoriah, it does make sense.
After all, we're all eager fans having eager conversations. ;)

Here is a link to a definition of Pseudoscience. Maybe this will help, eventhough just about everything is debatable.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudoscience


Excellent survey. Thank you.

I would add two categories that are largely overlooked in that article:

1. Making false inferences.
2. Denying true inferences.

I could rant on those related subjects for quite a while, but I think for now I shall keep my blood pressure more under control.

Why do viewers assume that Walt does have special powers? Well, because of those examples you cited. But all of those things have 'science fact' rational explanations also:

Walt sees a polar bear, yet we already knew that there were Polar Bears on this island. So what? There were also aliens in that comic book (I believe)... where are they? If Walt has magic powers, why only Polar Bears? The rational, 'real science' explanation is that (for some reason) Polar Bears were pre-existing on this island (evidenced by the polar bear in a previous episode), and one happened to attack Walt. It's only a coincidence because the writers chose to show us that comic book. The real question is why do they show that to us?

Walt is reading a book about birds and a bird crashed into the window... And we assume it's because Walt has special powers? Why? Why can't a bird just have flown into the window. Two things are happening at that time - A bird is flying into the window and Walt's mother is dying. Why not assume Walt is killing his mother? The rational 'real science' explanation is that a bird just flew into a glass window. It happens a lot. Walt did not make the bird appear. It did not materialize at his command. He did not control its flight. It just ... happened. Duck, duck, duck.

The reason people think Walt has special powers is because the writers have written and editted the show in such a manner as to leave the subject ambiguous. Why? I don't think Walt does have special powers, but why do the writers want to leave the issue open for debate? To make Walt an interesting character? If we didn't think Walt had special powers, or that he might, would we really care about him as a character? Then again, I don't care for him now, so there's that to consider. I think he's obnoxious. Heh.

Does Walt have telekinetic (spelling?) powers? Unlikely. That's not 'science fact'. Although it seems as though they've crashed on the Twilight Zone Island, I don't think that's where the writers want the show to go. Just my opinion, though.


Sorry, V, I was rushed and forgot that I meant to continue my thought....Walt's presence or absence of "powers" will probably not be revealed for a long time, because it keeps us wondering now, and adds to the overall effect of the show. As long as we keep open minds, we will eventually see if it is truly paranormal, or merely coincidence, but as you ask why they showed us the book, its exactly for that reason...to keep us pondering.

I get frustrated when people say "The others should want Walt too because of his powers", because of several reasons:
1. We don't know if these powers exist
2. We don't know who/what the others are, or if they exist
3. We hardly know anything about Walt, everything we've seen has been form michael's perspective.
.
.
.
it goes on

As long as we can all keep open minds here, it should be ok, but it is mucho frustrating when people make assumptions based on 3 subjective occurrences. When we see walt concentrate on something and what he wants happen, we may be able to draw conclusions, but until the writers choose to show us that, we will be left pondering it all

Excellent survey. Thank you.

I would add two categories that are largely overlooked in that article:

1. Making false inferences.
2. Denying true inferences.

I could rant on those related subjects for quite a while, but I think for now I shall keep my blood pressure more under control.


My take on pseudoscience is that it's something that some, even many view as fact, but academia and the realm of traditional science scoffs at.

Galileo's theories would have been considered pseudoscience at one point, (and heresy too), but have since been accepted as scientific fact. The line between science and pseudoscience is often blurry, and can be difficult to determine....fortunately LOST incorporates both! Aren't we lucky?

I think the main point is that the writers want to keep us engaged. The more they leave things open to intrepretation the more latitude they will have in future episodes.

I think the main point is that the writers want to keep us engaged. The more they leave things open to intrepretation the more latitude they will have in future episodes.

I couldn't agree more. I happen to be of the opinion that many of these things they're 'engaging' us with won't have the ultra-fantastic implications some think they will, but I concede some might. But for the purposes of this thread, I'm only concentrating on answers to those teasers that are of the more 'simple' kind. :)

Galileo's theories would have been considered pseudoscience at one point,


Neither the word nor concept of "science" was established in Galileo's time, so it's safe to say that his work wasn't considered to be "pseudoscience".

I also don't see why people on this board feel the need to redefine "pseudoscience" away from its common meaning, namely the one found in dictionaries, the Wikipedia, common usage, and so on.

"Pseudoscience" does NOT refer to everything that is regarded as incorrect. Is specifically refers to things that are incorrect due to scientific confusion, scientific illiteracy, scientific fakery, and the like.

ESP isn't pseudoscience, because it isn't necessarily claimed to fall in the area of science at all. Thelma Moss's experiments at UCLA in the area of ESP are, however, probably pseudoscience -- and I say this as somebody who arranged to have dinner with the lady because I was interested in her work.

Belief in religious miracles is not automatically pseduoscience. Textbook stickers stating falsehoods about the state of scientific theories of evolution are pseudoscience.

CAM,
I understand that the discussion of Pseudoscience is a hot button for you. Whether you are right or wrong, I am not making a judgment here, some people are just going to disagree with you or change it to accommodate what they believe.

I just think the context of how it was used by the creative team is much more important , IMHO they have purposely used it in a manner of, it will either fall under "real" science, or if it not, "fake" science. What does that mean? It it's not real and it's not memorex, then it's made up. A typical tongue in cheek answer.

There's bigger fish to fry then finding an acceptable definition of Pseudoscience, like maybe PseudoTheories.

I think the kind of "pseudoscience" we'll see on LOST is very similar to that which we see on Alias. On Alias, they take things that are utterly preposterous scientifically, and present them as "fact". But when they hint at something that is more like the paranormal, they generally do NOT provide any kind of exposition as to the explanation. The same goes for other classes of absurdity, such as the distribution of Rembaldi artifiacts at remote locations around the world.

Everything that they've purported to explain sounds at least superficially as if it's grounded in genetics or physics or mathematics or whatever. I have the same expectation for LOST. If there's something for which I don't expect a pseudoscientific explanation (or else a wholly reasonable one -- yeah right), then it's something for which I don't expect any explanation at all.

For example, I don't expect any explanation at all of the psychic with whom Claire dealt. I do expect an explanation of Lock'e's medical condition. I could be wrong on both counts, of course, but those are my current expectations.

Two quick things ... First, we're automatically assuming Damon is using the term "pseudoscience" definitively. He may have said "pseudoscience" the way people say "thingamajig." He may mean simply, things that seem scientific but aren't. In other words, no ghosts, but maybe "electro-photographed mind signatures of past island dwellers" ... or some kind of technobabble like that. You know what I mean?

Second, it might be worth checking out some of the links in that pseudoscience entry in Wiki. They may generate some ideas (maybe not KISS ideas, but who knows?).

I agree that pseudoscience is going to be a way for the writers to explain certain mysteries.
If it walks like a duck, talks like a duck it's a duck... unless Locke put some hippie crack on your head, then you just thought it was duck.
Not exactly pseudoscience but a good way to get creative and then say *"he was tripping when that happened" *:flower:
We have been told that the first fight between Jack and Ethan was real because after Boone had his trip ppl started to question if alot of what had happened was real.
(IMO)I hope they explain any chemically induced journey's within the context of the episode it is occurring.
pseudoscience can cover a broad range of possibilities and I hope the writers lean more to the science side of pseudoscience.

Maybe we should just hold their feet to the fire and ask them outright..."What do YOU mean by pseudo-science?"

Yeah, unless we know what he meant when he said "pseudoscience", it's pointless to try and define its parameters. He could have meant something totally different.

Neither the word nor concept of "science" was established in Galileo's time, so it's safe to say that his work wasn't considered to be "pseudoscience".


Didn't cross my mind. My apologies.


I agree that pseudoscience is going to be a way for the writers to explain certain mysteries.
If it walks like a duck, talks like a duck it's a duck... unless Locke put some hippie crack on your head, then you just thought it was duck.


:lol2: :lol2: :lol2: thats great. I actually never believed it was a hallucination until the writers said it was. I felt that the island "showed" him what he needed to see, but in the end it was chalked up to be a hallucination because of what Locke did. I did believe that it was quasi-real, though....until I was told otherwise.


Yeah, unless we know what he meant when he said "pseudoscience", it's pointless to try and define its parameters. He could have meant something totally different.


Sounds to me like they used it as a catch-all to let them tell viewers something to satisfy them, but still give the writers lots of freedom to do whatever they wanted.

Exactly. I'm sure they've told the writers something to the effect of "Try to keep it as scientifically plausible as you can. But if you feel like you need/want to do something a little weird, we'll figure out a way to give it a pseudo-rational explanation".

Oh, and one more question that I'd like to propose to the group:

Who knocked out Sayid, and why?

There were a lot of posts for me to read, so I apologize if I'm repeating someone's earlier statement.

As to Locke's paralysis, I think post-traumatic shock would be a good explanation. It would be a bit psychosomatic, and a bit physical. However, an even more traumatic incident, such as a plane crash, could be the reason his paralysis suddenly was gone.

Another question to add...don't know if it fits well with the others, but it is a major mystery of the show...What exactly did Kate do?

I think it's pretty obvious Kate removed the tags from her mattress.

*smacks forehead* how did I miss that one?

Oh, and one more question that I'd like to propose to the group:

Who knocked out Sayid, and why?


I think Locke knocked Sayid out. He doesn't want to leave the Island. After watching the way he hit Boone last night it reminded me of how Sayid was hit.

I agree...." I'm gonna knock you out... Momma said Knock you out"

I think Locke knocked Sayid out.* He doesn't want to leave the Island.* After watching the way he hit Boone last night it reminded me of how Sayid was hit.


The thing is about that theory that bothers me is...will someone hold a gun to Locke's head and force him to go? I mean if he wanted to stay all he he had to do was...not go. He doesn't need to go whacking people in the head.

Did Locke even know what Sayid was up to? Kate, Boone and Sawyer and Shannon knew. Did they have any contact with Locke during that episode? Locke spent most of his time pontificating with Charlie or taking care of the boar he had captured. I think Sawyer might have said something to Charlie in passing but I don't think it registered.

The thing is about that theory that bothers me is...will someone hold a gun to Locke's head and force him to go? I mean if he wanted to stay all he he had to do was...not go. He doesn't need to go whacking people in the head.


I've got to agree with that. I don't think Locke would sabotage the other Lostlings being rescued.

I've got to agree with that.* I don't think Locke would sabotage the other Lostlings being rescued.


I think he might if knows some of the secrets of the island. Not wanting people to come there at all or the Lostaways to leave and tell about the island

I too think it is Locke who knocked out Sayid.

I am shakey on how he found out, unless he heard about it from Boone or Charlie?
But I think he is the only one unaccounted for except for Claire at that time. When we see him with Charlie he is pretty much done with skinning the boar (which was the alibi he presented).

I think his motive is he believes staying on the island is truly a good thing, and beneficial to all of them in sorting out their 'demons'. Don't forget this is a guy who has a skewed sense of reality, and of 'destiny'. I think he does think he will be forced to leave with the others if they are rescued. I don't actually see how the authorities would let some guy just live alone on an island. The island could belong to a particular country, or be owned privately, and Locke might be considered trespassing, so I don't think it is unreasonable for Locke to believe his dream life of the hunter/sage might be shattered if they were to finally be rescued.

We have seen him knock out Boone in a similar manner, and also successfully sneak up behind Sayid.

The scene that for me pointed towards Locke's guilt was when Sayid came to visit him and asked him where he was. He very skillfully cast suspicion onto Sawyer, deflecting it from himself, and then armed Sayid:

Sayid: Locke. Where were you last night, around sunset?

Locke: Well, I'm afraid the only witness to my whereabouts is the boar that I was skinning for our dinner. I heard you were trying to send out a distress call? So it would seem whoever attacked you has a reason for not wanting to get off the island. Maybe someone who is profiting from our current circumstances? And from what I've seen you and Mr. Sawyer share a certain animosity.

Sayid: No, he has an alibi. Just before I was struck, he set off a bottle rocket, a signal we had worked out. 2 kilometers away. He wouldn't have the time to go. . .

Locke: Unless he found a way to time delay the fuse on his rocket.

Sayid: How could he possibly have. . .

Lock: Anyone who watches television knows how to improvise a slow fuse. Use a cigarette.

[Locke offers Sayid his knife.]

Locke: Just in case there's a next time.


Note Locke acts as though he is helping Sayid figure out who the attacker is, leading him through supposed steps of logic: Someone who doesn't want off the island, someone who is profiting from the situation, Sawyer doesn't get along with you...

When you think about it, the first two things are more descriptive of Locke's situation than Sawyer (Since when has Sawyer ever given the Lostaways cause to believe he doesn't want to leave the island?). And as soon Locke deliberately drops Sawyer's name into it, he locks Sayid's focus onto him. Then when Sayid protests, trying to sort through what he knows of the situation. Locke strips Sawyer's alibi of credibility, even though the arguments he offers are weak. Slow burning fuse? Cigarette? What about the fact that Sawyer would still have to have climbed the tree to turn on the antenna at the right time (all of which were supposed to have very little juice left). If Sayid had been thinking straight he would have not forgotten the antenna and been seduced by Locke's fuse theory. But Sayid trusts Locke more than he trusts Sawyer so he wants to believe Locke's reasoning. And then Locke hands him the knife, 'in case there is a next time' - implying he may be attacked again and raising Sayid's level of paranoia.

I think they are holding onto the reveal of Sayid's attacker until a time when it can better serve the drama of the plot.

Some people have suggested it could be Danielle. However, we have seen that she did not know of Sayid's situation, did not recognise him and did not know he spoke english. She flung several languages at him at first when he was captive in Solitary. But when he was knocked out in The Moth, he was definitely speaking english out loud just prior to being knocked out. If she had knocked him out, surely she would have captured him and taken him back to her hut, and she did in Solitary, or if she had suspected him as being an infected other, you'd think she would have killed him. It also doesn't seem her MO. She sets booby traps. Also she is not introduced till Solitary, and none of her interactions with Sayid in that episode would suggest she was the one knocked him out, and one would think that would be the ideal time for the writers would reveal that connection.

Some have suggested it might have been Ethan. I am doubtful because Ethan was not even introduced until Solitary, and while it is possible they might have wanted to insert clues earlier, again IMO we are given no indication in Ethan's interactions right up to his death that he might have knocked out Sayid and destroyed the transceiver.

What about the others? Again, possible, but for me it would not be a particularly satisfying reveal. We don't hear about the others until Solitary. And Danielle says she's never seen them jus heard them. So have we any hard evidence to believe the 'Others' have physically harmed anyone? I can't recall but someone else might remember if that is so.

I think that Locke being the attacker, and it being revealed in later eps of the show, would have the most dramatic impact for the story. Imagine the sense of betrayal. The other options such as Danielle, Ethan or the Others seem to be to be far weaker choices.

What was Sayid specifically trying to do, though? He was trying to find the source of the transmission, which we now know to be at the Black Rock. So whoever knocked him out wasn't necessarily trying to stop rescue, just discovery of the location of the Black Rock.

Edit to add: I just started a poll on this subject, just out of curiousity for the subject (and I wanted to make a poll for once, i never had)

Excellent analysis Zoriah !
And one that can fit to the spoiler saying (using Kristin's actual words):

Someone is outed, and it's très traumatic and shocking for many of the gang.

In addition, here's "who does what and where" during The Moth :

Boone, Hurley, Jin, Sun, Micheal, Walt : digging at the caves to pull out Jack, and later both Jack and Charlie
Claire : the only indication is that Emilie De Ravin does not appear on the credits at the beginning of the ep.
Shannon : at the beach, firing a rocket
Locke : (see Zoriah's post), he's near the caves but when Jack and Charlie find their way out, we don't see him anywhere around
Sawyer : supposed to be firing a rocket but we don't actually see the scene
Kate : supposed to be going back to the caves after Sawyer told her about Jack, we only see her going and getting to the caves

baner17 - Good point, directly related to "What does Locke know about the island that the others don't ?", and it's also why I think we should keep Ethan and the others as potential suspects.

Does anyone know anything about skinning and preparing boar for barbeque? How much time it would take? I'm assuming it takes a little bit of expertise and its not simply a matter of a cutting and ripping the hide off. I know it takes a bit of know-how to dress a deer.

I don't know who much time passed between Charlie asking for his drugs and his return to the cave and the cave-in. By the time he ran to the beach and alerted everyone..went and found Locke the boar appears to have been skinned.

I'm assuming it also took a fair amount of time to clean out the boar to have it fit to eat unless some of the suvivors like to eat 'organ' meat.

Then Locke was barbequing the boar that evening...I assume it would take a fair amount of time to set it up and cook it. It wasn't a small boar. There is a time element involved.

So Locke could do a bit on the boar and run over to where Sayid is (and we're not sure if he knew where Sayid was or what he was doing) whack him on the head and then run back and work on the boar some more in time to have it ready that evening?

So what I want to know is, crazy as it might sound, could the boar really be an alibi?

It's possible. But I still think it's a weaker alibi than the others. In the scene with Charlie, the boar look skinned and gutted to me, but I will have to go back and rewatch it and figure out where it was in terms of the timing.

Since I can't talk about spoilers here yet (do upcoming episode descriptions count as spoilers?)...I'm not sure I can add to my reasons why it makes sense to me that Locke is the culprit. Aside from the fact that IMO it would have the most dramatic impact if it was ever found out.

Use the nifty spoiler font. :)

These following spoiler hints could possibly help support my theory, mostly just me trying to connect the dots ;D:

Kristin on E!Online 3/15: - Sayid will set out to kill one of the main characters. Someone who wronged him in the past. Also, I'm hearing that we will soon find out who knocked Sayid over the head back in the days of those transceiver shenanigans. (Of course this may be too obvious, but Sayid got awful cranky the first time over the attack and nearly ended up killing Sawyer. If it were Locke, then add the betrayal of Locke pointing him at Sawyer and handing him the knife, ergo Locke 'helping' Sayid to break his most solemn vow and do something that ashamed him so much he left the group.)

Kristin on E!Online 3/21: Someone is outed, and it's très traumatic and shocking for many of the gang. (I'm presuming a secret or agenda is revealed to the survivors, and it has to be pretty earth shattering, I doubt it would be just that Locke used to be paralysed or Kate used to be a criminal. I think it pertains to their current situation.)

According to Ausiello 3/23: In Do No Harm, Locke vanishes without a trace. (Why? One possibility is that he has been outed and needs to go into hiding.)

Great analysis about Locke, Zoriah.

Locke's been at the top of my suspect list for months :) I think we're going to see more of the dark side of Locke soon. And I wonder how far he would be willing to do to
keep the use of his legs?

A possibility that occurs to me: perhaps Locke also hears whispers, but he hasn't told anybody about them. These voices, which Locke believes are coming from the Island Personified, are of course not supernatural at all (at least, not to us skeptics). They're coming from underground, or at least from behind some high-tech Wizard of Oz-like construct.

"The Island" may have made "suggestions" to Locke prior to now. Suggestions like, "recruit Boone to our side," or "befriend Claire and keep an eye on her for us." Locke would be willing to do this because he sees the Island as a mystical force in his life...a force that has returned to him his legs (which, according to this theory, were psychosomatically inactive).

If he should feel that the Island's favor is being withdrawn from him for some reason, he might be willing to go to rather extreme lengths to get it back.

Templeton

I agree it might well be Locke who conked Sayid. I'm just having a bit of difficulty with some nitpicky things.

As Templeton has said, Locke may have heard the whispers as suggestions to do things. According to what has been 'translated' as what has been whispered to others, 'they' have debated revealing themselves to other Lostaways.

I guess the things that I'm stuck at is... If Locke's paralysis was psychosomatic (which I believe it was), I have a hard time putting that together with the island being able to take away his ability to walk. Tho, the psychosomatisism could return, I suppose.

Hi,

I've got a theory which might bring possible answers to What caused the plane crash ?,What is the hatch ?, What is the sickness ? and from a more global point of view, we might finally find out about What is the island ?
It's not complete yet, but if you like it, maybe we can work this out together.
Vertical, I know you've approached the idea in another thread, so maybe you already have a few ideas in your pocket.

Ready ?

They are on a volcano. (Yeah I know it's old news, but I tried to work it out a little) :)

We know the movement of tectonic plates give birth to islands, volcanic islands.
And we know the area where they are is a theatre of mass tectonic activity as depicted here :

http://www.platetectonics.com/book/page_8.asp

Now, what do we know about volcanoes ? It's hot, dangerous, impredictable, but most of all, its underground activity causes many phenomenons.
And one of them are Electro-Magnetic perturbations.

Taking A Volcano's Pulse

Seismicity -- Earthquakes commonly provide the earliest warning of volcanic unrest, and earthquake swarms immediately precede most volcanic eruptions.

Ground Movements -- Geodetic networks are set up to measure the changing shape of the volcano surface caused by the pressure of magma moving underground. Techniques commonly used include electronic distance measurement using a laser light source (EDM); measurement of tilt, both electronically and by repeated leveling of triangular arrays; and standard leveling surveys to obtain elevation changes. Additionally, very simple and inexpensive techniques, such as measuring crack openings using a steep tape, or noting changes in water level around a crater lake, have proven useful in certain situations. Upward and outward movement of the ground above a magma storage area commonly occurs before eruption. Localized ground displacement on steep volcanoes may indicate slope instabliity precursory to mass failure.

Geophysical Properties -- Changes in electrical conductivity, magnetic field strength, and the force of gravity also trace magma movement. These measurements may respond to magma movement even when no earthquakes or measurable ground deformation occurs.

Hydrologic Regime -- Changes in ground water temperature or level, rates of streamflow and transport of stream sediment, lake levels, and snow and ice accumulation are recorded to evaluate (1) the role of ground water in generating eruptions, (2) the potential hazards when hot, energetic volcanic products interact with snow, ice, and surface streams, and (3) the long-term hazard of infilling of river channels leading to increased flood potential.

http://vulcan.wr.usgs.gov/Monitoring/Descriptions/description_monitoring_overview.html

Wait......"changes in electrical conductivity and magnetic field strength" ? Can it cause the deviation of a compass needle ? Yes.
Can it cause the dysfunction of the guiding and communication devices of a plane ? Maybe, in TV science.

Sayid : Let me ask you something. . . which way do you think North is?
Jack : Sorry?
Sayid : North? Which way is it?
Jack : Okay. [Looking around. Pointing.] The sun's going to set over there, so that makes that West. [Pointing again.] That'd be North. Yeah.
Sayid : Correct. That's where North should be. [Pulls Locke's compass out and shows Jack. North doesn't show up correctly on the compass.] Yet that is North.
Jack : I'm not. . .
Sayid : A minor magnetic anomaly might explain a variance of 2 or 3 degrees, but not this.
Jack : What are you saying?
Sayid : I'm saying this compass is obviously defective.

What if this compass isn't defective ? What if it's not a minor anomaly ?
The link above point to studies on Mount St. Helens, which is still in activity.
And we know an active volcano can stay still from time to time.
You can put your ear on the ground as long as you want, there's no way to know if it's still in activity unless you have the appropriate equipment.

Yes, I think they might be in deep trouble if they stay on this island too long.
But fortunately, the unpredictability of a volcano is a convenient way to make a show last and maintain its suspense, for our own sake. :D

Speaking of appropriate equipment, I'm thinking about the hatch.
Vertical assumed in another thread it was buried due to natural phenomenon, such as an earthquake.
And here's what I think : the hatch is some sort of seismic observation post, or something related to the study of the volcano,built to resist an eruption.
Here is the flaw, because I don't have any argument to support this idea.

About the sickness, I think it may be caused by these EM perturbations. But there is the second flaw, I've got nothing.
It would be interesting to find documents about the effects of EM waves on the human body.

Now you can shoot me, I won't blame you. :D

There is no way in real science that EM waves are going to have a rapid effect on the human body unless they're VERY powerful. Hospitals are full of machines designed to pump out large amounts of radiation, and people work around them all day. Ditto for the supermagnets used in nuclear colliders and other research. Ditto for broadcasts up and down the radio spectrum.

A whole generation of radiologists died young from cancer obviously caused by radiation exposure, but that's not exactly the same thing, was long ago, and even then happened only over decades.

So what about sulphur emanations then ? ???

So what about sulphur emanations then ? ???


Not a good choice, I would think, because sulphur is famously stinky. But some other kind of gas? Sure, at least within the scope of TV science.

Fashionably late, but I'm here.

I truly feel the whole show is based on "String Theory" and all the weird happenings are things that happen in different time dimensions (string theory says time folds on itself.....and can be just micromillimeters away!) and for some reason these characters have found a place where they are able to experience different time dimensions individually as well as collectively. That is why two characters sometimes experience vastly different things in the same situation. ;D

But I'm not a scientist, nor do I understand "String Theory". Just saw a show on PBS once and this makes perfect sense to me. And it fits within the world of psuedotheory!

Am I nuts? :lol2: Be kind!

I truly feel the whole show is based on "String Theory" and all the weird happenings are things that happen in different time dimensions (string theory says time folds on itself.....and can be just micromillimeters away!) and for some reason these characters have found a place where they are able to experience different time dimensions individually as well as collectively. That is why two characters sometimes experience vastly different things in the same situation. ;D

But I'm not a scientist, nor do I understand "String Theory". Just saw a show on PBS once and this makes perfect sense to me. And it fits within the world of psuedotheory!

Am I nuts? :lol2: Be kind!


Just seems a little too complex to explain on a drama tv show, if you ask me...does have implications in the "we are all connected" sense though

Welcome to Creme and Lemondrop! You are #20 and #21 respectively. Don't forget to introduce yourself at the Signup area in the Group section. ;D

Is anyone else excited about this week's upcoming episode? I feel that we may be getting a few answers to some of the mysteries that may involve Locke and the hatch somehow. (and more questions too probably heh).

I am very excited. Yes I believe we will get some answers but I also think that a lot more mysteries will unfold. Is it Wenesday yet. Being on the west coast means I have to wait even longer GRRRRRRRR.

I truly feel the whole show is based on "String Theory" and all the weird happenings are things that happen in different time dimensions (string theory says time folds on itself.....and can be just micromillimeters away!) and for some reason these characters have found a place where they are able to experience different time dimensions individually as well as collectively. That is why two characters sometimes experience vastly different things in the same situation. ;D

But I'm not a scientist, nor do I understand "String Theory". Just saw a show on PBS once and this makes perfect sense to me. And it fits within the world of psuedotheory!

Am I nuts? :lol2: Be kind!


I don't see where that makes any sense within the tone of the show. It would require Star Trek style exposition of bogus science to pull off.

What's more, there haven't actually been any apparent time paradoxes. I recall only two things that we've seen that seem to violate the laws of physics in a big way. One is lack of damage in the crash, which is what permitted all the survivors; the other is that nobody is detecting the distress call from the island.

Since we know the writers are playing very fast and loose with radio technology, the latter does not need such a sophisticated scientific explanation. As for the former, I'm guessing the writers didn't realize just how scientifically illogical they were being when they first created the events of the crash, and didn't have any sophisticated explanation in mind for that either.

And as for "string theory" meaning "we're all connected" -- I can see one or two writers making that error, but I would hope that a roomful writers and producers wouldn't get together and all agree on that. Certainly I can't think of any particular evidence that they're making that case.

I will have too disaregee with the volcano-theory, at least on the bases of what we have seen so far. We have seen no evident traces of volcanic activity, we have seen no traces of lava, lava flows or eruptions. And this is a show that is actually set on a volcanic (or used to be volcanic?) island, what would be easier than to get ANY feature of volcanic activity into the show??? Yet, they haven't, as far as I've seen, and though it may very well be presented in the future, I don't think volcanic activity is a key feature so far.

About the skinning of a boar, it does takes time, and is quite a hard work since the hide is quite firmly attached to the underlaying flesh. It is also the kind of thing you just don't do without previous knowledge, it takes practice and knowledge to do it right. And the same thing is true about taking out a boar, it takes knowledge. Which suggests that Locke has been doing this before, and is quite good at it.

Hey there all,

Seeing we're talking about Locke and his fascination with "Walkabout" (particularly his inability to participate because of his "condition"), I thought I'd just mention a little pastime we have here in Australia that goes on out bush ...

Here we don't call them "boars" as such - we call them "Razorbacks" - and it would definitely be something that Locke would have researched the hunting and killing thereof if he was thinking about going Walkabout in Australia.* This may explain, to a degree, his ability to hunt and kill boars.

BTW - There is also a movie called "Razorback" as well but good luck if you can find it anywhere!

You mean that you actually have boars (in Sweden we calls them "wild pigs", directly translated* :P) in Australia ??? That i didn't know that, were the originally imported (as bunnies or camels) or are they native ???

They are pretty much "big pigs", or giant boars. I think they originated from Europe somewhere ... not a native Australian species (hey - we only have nice fluffy Kangaroos and Koalas here! ;-) Oh ... and the occasional white pointer and fresh water Croc but we won't talk about them ...).

Yep. We definitely have boars here.

OK, then your "razorbacks" is probably the same thing as we have in Sweden. They are NOT very nice and friendly animals....
Hmm, what's a white pointer ???
Now I'm even MORE convinced that I will never travel "down under".... Australia seems to be a dangerous country, there are poisonous snakes (like 7 of the worlds 10 most deadly snakes?), spiders, scorpions and jelly fish. You have sharks and crocs, and those eel-like "fish" that lives in pits (muraenas, or what do you call them?).

You only having Kangaroos and koalas there, yeah sure...... :-\

"Razorback" is the name of a college football team, I think Arkansas, and if not then from thereabouts.

That doesn't exactly prove that these beasties can be found in the wild in the US, however ...

Anyhow, wild boar go back at least to Greek mythology.

A "White pointer" is a shark ... one of the deadliest. Unfortunately we have more than our fair share of those here. I a pretty sure "Jaws" was a white pointer? Showing my age aren't I?

I think you're referring to the lovely "Moray Eel" (the fish that live in holes in the coral reefs and come out to bite the divers' faces off). Yeah - we have some of those. Oh - and some nice Box Jellyfish as well. We have a coupl'a deadly snakes, but they don't eat much. Australia really is a lovely place, though. Come visit! I haven't seen a snake for weeks ...

Anyway! My point with the Razorback thing was to say that if Locke had been indeed researching this Walkabout trip for a long time, then he most probably made sure he was equipped to fend-off some nasty ones during his Bush Trek in Aus. Thus attempting to KISS the "how did he know how to kill and skin a boar" theory. :-)

Locke actually tells the group he thinks they are Razorbacks when he does his 'Those were piglets, there's gotta be a mama, let's go a hunting' speech in Walkabout. ;)

Aaah! Thanks Zoriah. I was beginning to think I was embarking on a non-KISS(ing) tangent there.

BTW ... Can I join H.O.R.T.A.?! Can I?! Huh?! I promise I'll be good ... ;)

Why you surely can!* ;D Gotta keep up the representation from Down Under!*

I'm a kiwi myself, hence the being up and posting at 5am EST ;).

ETA: You are #22.

Thanks for bringing the topic around to the boar skinning. On the 'So you think knocked out Sayid' thread there is an in depth post by Shootfire about the skinning and cooking of pigs..* *Quite interesting. According to that post it would take several hours to properly prepare and cook a domesticated pig. I would assume that the procedure for a wild boar would be* similar.

Suzzy; The shark in jaws what a great white. The ones you are refering to are they the white tipped reef sharks ???

Elfdream; Since there as some nasty parasites in boars (trikins) you MUST cook the animal well to eliminate the risk of infections. And if they do cook it whole (as Locke is at at least one occasion), it will take quite some time....

There are wild boars/pigs in Texas, my ex-husband's ranch was full of of them and he and his buddy used to hunt them. They're mean critters! You have to kill them with the first shot or expect damage to yourself. :o

Suzzy; The shark in jaws what a great white. The ones you are refering to are they the white tipped reef sharks ???

Elfdream; Since there as some nasty parasites in boars (trikins) you MUST cook the animal well to eliminate the risk of infections. And if they do cook it whole (as Locke is at at least one occasion), it will take quite some time....




Yes, I thought as much. The last thing Jack would need would be a cave full of sick castaways. ;)

There are "Wild Boar" all over the south.* If a domesticated pig gets loose it only takes it about 2 years for it to turn wild.* It could take several hours to prepare a cook and hog but there are several ways to do that.
Having had to get it done fairly quickly when the sun is going down and it is about a 2 mile walk back to camp the field dressing can be done in about 20-30 minutes.* As far as cooking goes you can start it cooking and not have to stay with it the entire time.* You could leave it on indirect heat for an hour or two w/o having to do anything to it.

There are "Wild Boar" all over the south. If a domesticated pig gets loose it only takes it about 2 years for it to turn wild.

what do you mean by that? "turn wild"? just curious what you mean

also, Locke said he was skinning it, not cooking it.

what do you mean by that? "turn wild"? just curious what you mean

also, Locke said he was skinning it, not cooking it.


It has had to live w/o being feed by humans and having to root for its own food. The tusk will start to grow longer and it will become aggressive when approached.

This is a quotes from the CEO of the National Swine Registry.

Darrell Anderson, CEO of the Lafayette, Ind.-based National Swine Registry, said farm-raised hogs grow as large as 1,300 pounds and measure as long as 7 feet along the backbone from head to tail. "If you hang them by their hind legs and you have the front legs stretching out, you'll get another four or five feet," he said.

. The animals will grow tusks in the wild. Domesticated, their tusks are trimmed because they are dangerous.

Skinning can be part of the field dressing process. If your knives are sharp enough it does not take long to skin a hog.

, Locke said he was skinning it, not cooking it.


I do believe that is the traditonal order in which those processes go.

Skinning a boar does takes some time, even if you know exactly how to do and are aided by machines.
Just to handle a 75 kg (150 pound or so?) boar by yourself is not the easiest thing, and to skin it efficiently you would have to hang it up in the legs. Naturally you can do it yourself, but it isn't easy and takes some time.

Another thing, wilded pig is NOT the tame(same) thing as wild boars. Boars are hairier, have another shape of the body, another temperament etc.

NOT the tame thing as wild boars


We have a contestant for Typo of the Week!!! :lol2: :lol2: :lol2: :lol2:

Changed it...... :-[

Changed it...... :-[


Too bad! I thought it was cute the way it was! ;D ;D ;D

Changed it again, I LIKE to be "cute" :lol2:

I will have too disaregee with the volcano-theory, at least on the bases of what we have seen so far. We have seen no evident traces of volcanic activity, we have seen no traces of lava, lava flows or eruptions. And this is a show that is actually set on a volcanic (or used to be volcanic?) island, what would be easier than to get ANY feature of volcanic activity into the show??? Yet, they haven't, as far as I've seen, and though it may very well be presented in the future, I don't think volcanic activity is a key feature so far.

There are many types of eruption, lava is not necessary involved, as it is mentioned here :
http://pubs.usgs.gov/gip/volc/eruptions.html
Hawaiian eruptions involve lava, ok, but they haven't gone very far into the lands yet.

As for the volcanic activity features, you can see one in Numbers, when they cross the bridge :
http://lost-media.com/modules.php?name=coppermine&file=displayimage&album=305&pos=351

I've just thought about Rousseau's maps, and I re-watched WTCMB.
Remeber when Shannon helped Sayid for the translation ?
Take a look at that :
http://www.xs4all.nl/~arie777/lost/maps/map4.jpg
Next to Shannon's shoulder there's a moutain draw, on top of which you can read "Le cratère", which means the crater.

Isn't that evidence ?

There are many types of eruption, lava is not necessary involved, as it is mentioned here :
http://pubs.usgs.gov/gip/volc/eruptions.html
Hawaiian eruptions involve lava, ok, but they haven't gone very far into the lands yet.


As for the volcanic activity features, you can see one in Numbers, when they cross the bridge :
http://lost-media.com/modules.php?name=coppermine&file=displayimage&album=305&pos=351



Yes there are many different types of volcanoes and eruptions, however, a volcano creating a crater is likely to have eruptions creating lava flows.

What I see in the picture is erosion due to a river, not due to lava.

And a crater can be the result of other things than volcanic activity, for example collapsing caves, earth quakes, meteors, explosions etc.

I'm not saying that the island is NOT volcanic, I'm just saying that I'm not convinced yet. And even less convinced that volcanic activity accounts for any of none of the strange things we've seen so far......

Skinning a boar does takes some time, even if you know exactly how to do and are aided by machines.
Just to handle a 75 kg (150 pound or so?) boar by yourself is not the easiest thing, and to skin it efficiently you would have to hang it up in the legs. Naturally you can do it yourself, but it isn't easy and takes some time.

Another thing, wilded pig is NOT the tame(same) thing as wild boars. Boars are hairier, have another shape of the body, another temperament etc.


My point was that you don't have to skin it efficiently (Time Permitting) you can (I have) field dressed one rather quickly just to get the most desirable meat.
Also that is the reason I put "wild boar" in quotation. The wild boar (razor back) does have a different build, the temperment of a wild hog can be the same. A "boar" is an uncastrated swine.
I can't wait until tomorrow night, look what we are discussing in our desperate attempt to talk about LOST. :D

I am glad you changed it back too. :lol2:

Yes there are many different types of volcanoes and eruptions, however, a volcano creating a crater is likely to have eruptions creating lava flows.

A crater can also be the result of an ash-laden gas explosion.

What I see in the picture is erosion due to a river, not due to lava.

I was thinking of a ground crack.

And a crater can be the result of other things than volcanic activity, for example collapsing caves, earth quakes, meteors, explosions etc.

On top of a mountain ?

I'm not saying that the island is NOT volcanic, I'm just saying that I'm not convinced yet. And even less convinced that volcanic activity accounts for any of none of the strange things we've seen so far......

I wasn't trying to be convincing, I've never pretended it was the answer to every mystery of the island, I only mentioned a few of them.
I've read the weirdest theories on this board : telepathy, biosphere, separate dimensions, bionic implants, ....
I only tried to elaborate one based upon scientific facts.

But if any of you think it's not a HORTA theory, that's fine with me, I'll drop it.

I think it is a HORTA theory given what we have been shown. As a matter of fact the Hawaiian islands were formed by volcano's, so in my opinion the place they are filming would look just like a volcanic island. ;D

I do believe that is the traditonal order in which those processes go.




I mean that we shouldn't be considering the time it takes to cook, because he didn't say he was doing that

A crater can also be the result of an ash-laden gas explosion.

I was thinking of a ground crack.

On top of a mountain ?

I wasn't trying to be convincing, I've never pretended* it was the answer to every mystery of the island, I only mentioned a few of them.
I've read the weirdest theories on this board : telepathy, biosphere, separate dimensions, bionic implants, ....
I only tried to elaborate one based upon scientific facts.

But if any of you think it's not a HORTA theory, that's fine with me, I'll drop it.


What I don't think is that a volcano may explain all the unansered questions, like why the plane went down ans so on.
The island may very well be volcanic, and I think it is quite proably that we will see a dramatic eruption in season 5 or so ;)


My point was that you don't have to skin it efficiently (Time Permitting) you can (I have) field dressed one rather quickly just to get the most desirable meat.
Also that is the reason I put "wild boar" in quotation. The wild boar (razor back) does have a different build, the temperment of a wild hog can be the same. A "boar" is an uncastrated swine.
I can't wait until tomorrow night, look what we are discussing in our desperate attempt to talk about LOST. :D

I am glad you changed it back too. :lol2:


Can someone PLEASE tell me ( a poor non-english speaking thing ::)) the difference between boar, wild boar, razorback and hog ???

I think it is a HORTA theory given what we have been shown. As a matter of fact the Hawaiian islands were formed by volcano's, so in my opinion the place they are filming would look just like a volcanic island. ;D


I have no problem with there being volcanic cracks on the island or even the possibility of an imminent eruption. I just missed the part where that would explain any of the top 20 mysteries in the show.

You know what ? Forget it.

Hey guys let's keep it cool in here please. If there's a theory you don't agree with, make your point and move on.* This is definitely a place for healthy skepticism but let's also try to keep it relaxed and fun if poss.

The pics of Danielle's map definitely show two views of a crater atop a mountain, not unlike Capulin Volcano (Nm) or Sunset crater (Co). It could definitely be a clue, however I think we need to see more evidence of actual volcanic activity affecting the survivors lives in some way e.g. finding a hot springs, minor earthquake, finding strange fissures in the ground etc.

...*slides in*

Hey there all!* Isn't it great weather we're having? ... boy!* And how about that game on the weekend, huh?!

Just how many hours to go until episode 19? ...

Useless post I know ... but keep smilin' ;D

*slides out* ...

Hi,

I've got a theory which might bring possible answers to What caused the plane crash ?,What is the hatch ?, What is the sickness ? and from a more global point of view, we might finally find out about What is the island ?
It's not complete yet, but if you like it, maybe we can work this out together.
Vertical, I know you've approached the idea in another thread, so maybe you already have a few ideas in your pocket.

Ready ?

They are on a volcano. (Yeah I know it's old news, but I tried to work it out a little)* :)



I like that theory!!

That is a good explanation for the hatch, government involvment, the malfunctioning compass, and problems with the radio signal as well.* It's just as good a theory as any other out there.* I mean, what else could be stopping a radio transmission from being received?

Kristina, as for some other explanation for the crater, unless the writers are going to take the path of aliens or some such creatures, it's more likely a crater on an island in the pacific is a result of volcanic activity rather than a meteor crash.* As a matter of fact, those island chains change so rapidly, craters from meteors most likely would be absorbed.* (Unless of course, it's quite recent).* *As for evidence of lava flow, there are certain areas in Hawaii where you can go and see the lava flows -- they're always there -- but it's not something you see in every picture of Hawaii.* It's there, but it doesn't have to be obvious.* *The castaways may indeed come upon something like that.* They have not even begun to really explore the island.


On the topic of radio transmissions, what do you guys think is up with the transmission Boone received?* Who was able to to intercept a transmission from the plane, but not Danielle's transmission over the last 16 years?*

And didn't Sayid say they couldn't transmit because of the French Woman's signal?* How was Boone able to transmit and receive then?

I'm thinking it's someone else on the island.* One of the others, perhaps, or someone hiding from them as well.* I'm thinking only a local transmission would be able to go through, as somethings seems to be inhibiting transmissions from reaching others outside the island.

Any theories??

I think DEM poses many problems,as far as finding simple solutions.

The radio transmission itself poses many.

(1) If it was recieved by someone off the island, why was it able to be recieved but Sayid's attempt was blocked?

(2) If it was recieved by the survivor's fo the tail section, where did they get a radio? Why did they answer the way the did. "Is someone There?" and "Repeat your transmission Please" are the first 2 things that are said. Not Help, MAYDAY, SOS nothing even remotely resembling a distress situation. If the answer was "No We're the survivor's of Oceanic flight 815" why argue with a potential rescuer. I wouldn't care who it was. JUST COME GET ME.

(3) Would the Radio in the plane turn on that easily after all this time? Would the battery still be good?

(4) If the response is from the Other's were they waiting for this tramisssion and why tell Boone there were no survivors?

(5) Is the transmission a premonition of him dying?

There are probably more but it's a place to start.

There was a true H.O.R.T.A Moment in DEM. The whole subject of the source of Sawyer's headaches. The talk of tumors and everything else and then TADA he needing glasses. I thought that was great.

I agree! Everyone was speculating poison or some major ailment, and yet when Jack diagnosed it as Sawyer being farsighted and needing glasses - it was just perfect! Such a common problem, and all the signs were there, and yet I don't think anyone saw that coming. I love when the writers manage to surprise us with the 'small stuff'.

I was such a bookworm when I was a kid, reading with the flashlight or a candle well into the night, and mum used to warn me I'd strain my eyes. Turns out I am nearsighted, but my mum is far sighted and she used to get migraines too until she got some reading glasses. I can't believe I didn't think of that!!! :lol2:

On the topic of radio transmissions, what do you guys think is up with the transmission Boone received? Who was able to to intercept a transmission from the plane, but not Danielle's transmission over the last 16 years?

And didn't Sayid say they couldn't transmit because of the French Woman's signal? How was Boone able to transmit and receive then?


Unfortunately we don't know much about what frequency Boone was tuned in to. We do know, if I remember correctly, that Danielle's frequency was a long wave (i.e. low frequency) broadcast, because that's what we were told in Hurley's episode. Long wave broadcasts are more susceptible to atmospheric interference than shorter wave broadcasts. I don't know what the typical frequencies are for airline radio traffic, but I'll bet someone else around here does.

Possibilities that occur to me are: 1. Boone reached another aircraft flying somewhere in the vicinity of the island; 2. Boone reached a ship/boat somewhere in the vicinity of the island; 3. Boone reached a land-based radio operator somewhere in the vicinity of the island; Boone reached someone else on the island itself.

If the transmission did indeed say, "there are no survivors of flight 815," I think that would be a normal initial gut response from an incredulous listener. A month has gone by, and if any wreckage from the doomed airliner was actually recovered, it was probably so badly damaged that searchers have concluded the plane broke up in mid air (as it did!) and that nobody could possibly have survived.

However, if Boone's transmission was indeed received by someone off the island, it will have to be investigated (assuming that logic is still working on this show). That could be good or bad for the survivors, depending on who is doing the investigating...

Templeton

Well it does seem a bit strange that the transceiver could not get out (off island) due to Danielle's transmission and yet this plane's radio could. Then again I know nothing about radio waves and how to make transmissions so...

I'm leaning towards the idea that Boone's mayday was picked up by someone on the island, short range. Either at the tower by the black rock (the others?) or by the tail section survivors.

Apparently Damon had this to say about the transmission:


* "As to what Boone hears, we purposefully put that CREAK over the first part of the transmission so you, dear fan, would go crazy.* Therefore, I will not reveal (at least not today) what Boone actually heard."*

* "I promise this, though...we KNOW what Boone hears and we have plans to pay it off.* And those plans? Are AWESOME."*


And if you watch the recap on the ABC site, the voice on the transmission definitely says "WE'RE the survivors of Flight 815"* to my* ears (apparently the sound is a little cleaned up or something). So tail section anyone? ;)

The transmission was a real Gilligan moment.

ETA: As was the burning of the raft.

Gilligan moment? Sorry don't follow. I'm from NZ and I vaguely recall the show, but what did you mean? :)

Gilligan moment? Sorry don't follow. I'm from NZ and I vaguely recall the show, but what did you mean? :)


Gilligan's Island was about a group of people from very different backgrounds shipwrecked on an island. (Well, as diverse as was PC is the 60's).

On almost every episode there was some effort or chance to escape the island, or some chance to contact the outside world - but it was always foiled, sometimes through fate and sometimes through folly. That went on for years until they were finally rescued.

Ah! Okay now I get it. Thanks. :D

But I suspect that the plane's radio would not have been able to get through to the outside world any more than Danielle's transmission or the transceiver could. I'm sticking to the Boone contacted someone else on the island theory. ;)

Ah! Okay now I get it. Thanks. :D

But I suspect that the plane's radio would not have been able to get through to the outside world any more than Danielle's transmission or the transceiver could. I'm sticking to the Boone contacted someone else on the island theory. ;)


It still counts as a Gilligan moment. Often the castaways thought they were close to outside contact, only to learn they'd been fooled (or messed up) again.

Not that this has anything to do with Occam's Razor. Just a random observation related to television homage.

Well, I learned something hehe. And I guess it's a way of describing an actual TV conceit. That may well become a feature in the show. ;)

I've heard that from subtitles, it says that there "were no survivors" I've listened closely (ear to speaker; I know, I'm wierd) and thats what I hear

I've heard that from subtitles, it says that there "were no survivors" I've listened closely (ear to speaker; I know, I'm wierd) and thats what I hear


Me, too. I thought the other version ("No, we're the survivors...") on the ABC site had been put up on April Fools Day or something?

I guess I don't understand why Danielle's repeating signal would jam anything except the particular frequency it was broadcasting on. As long as Boone's tuned to a different frequency, he should be able to get a signal out to a passing ship or plane, IMO.

I don't think what he heard is coming from the tail end of the plane because I believe they are dead. Heck, I'm having enough trouble believing anyone survived from the front section without thinking anyone else survived the break-up of a jumbo jet at 35,000 ft. :)

But I agree of course Boone could have simply contacted someone else on the island who wasn't on flight 815...

Templeton

In my limited knowledge of radio's, I have recently done a lot of research on radio waves. I believe the transmission has to do with frequencies like Templeton mentioned. The plane and radio being older were probably set to frequencies that are not commonly used. That would explain some of the surprise that was originally registered by the person on the other end of Boone's transmission. The is someone there comment, was as if whoever it was was not expecting it. That just made me think of Sam and Lenny, who sat around listening for static and all of a sudden heard the numbers. It could be someone at the same listening post. I'm sure the plane crash was a huge story and that everyone from the flight was assumed dead. If the person on the other end was having as trouble hearing a clear signal, like we all are, He may have thought the person was asking about survivor's of Flight 815 and therefore responded"There were no survivor's of oceanic flight 815.

Just a quick question, at 35,000 feet, how far away would the horizon, and the ocean look? Because when the tail breaks off, you can see the ocean, and the angle does look like they are descending, but I wondered if that would give any clue of what altitude they were at that stage?

They seemed to have descended rather rapidly, but can we also assume that they had already begun a descent when they changed course after realising they had lost radio contact?* It would not be an unlikely scenario for that to happen (a safer cruising altitude) ... Maybe it's possible that they were already at a much lower altitude than 33,000 ft when disaster struck - and possibly that's also why they were "shot down" if that were the case ...

... not that I am saying that Zoriah!* Don't panic ... I'm just throwing it out there.

By the way - the "closed caption" (subtitles) in the episode indicated the radio transmission said "there were no survivors of flight 815".* *;)

Do you think it is possible that there MAY HAVE been survivors in the tail section?* After all, Roses husband who went to the bathroom before the plane crashed was in the tail section, and the writers have already had her say "I don't believe he is dead".* Is that a DEUS EX MACHINA ?* After all, they do say that the gun that kills the victim in the 3rd act must be shown in the 1st act.* Have we been thrown a clue here?

Do you think it is possible that there MAY HAVE been survivors in the tail section?* After all, Roses husband who went to the bathroom before the plane crashed was in the tail section, and the writers have already had her say "I don't believe he is dead".* Is that a DEUS EX MACHINA ?* After all, they do say that the gun that kills the victim in the 3rd act must be shown in the 1st act.* Have we been thrown a clue here?


That's a very interesting point....
I had been wondering about the Episode titles. All the previous Episode titles were quite clearly referenced in the show itself, like "Numbers", "Confidence Man", "Daddy issues.." etc. But it didn't hit me till yesterday....what *was* the DEUS EX MACHINA reference in this Episode? We must have seen it...but not recognised it ? If I may quote: ""Deus ex machina" is a Latin phrase literally meaning, "God from the machine." In literature, it usually means a plot device that comes out of nowhere and resolves everything."
And that's why I find your point so interesting Suzzy...that would most definitely "resolve" a number of the mysteries* :o

The "Deus Ex Machina" in this episode was Locke's dream. There's no way he could have known to go looking for a plane, so there's no way he could have found it. So, the writers gave him a prophetic dream. Deus Ex Machina.

While I enjoyed the episode, they (the writers) seem to be wandering farther into the realm of supernatural than I had hoped they would. Up until this point, everything could have potentially have had a rational explanation. But now, with Locke's psychic dream (the vision of the plane and his knowledge of Boone's nanny), I don't know how they could potentially have a rational explanation for that.

Do you think it is possible that there MAY HAVE been survivors in the tail section? After all, Roses husband who went to the bathroom before the plane crashed was in the tail section, and the writers have already had her say "I don't believe he is dead". Is that a DEUS EX MACHINA ? After all, they do say that the gun that kills the victim in the 3rd act must be shown in the 1st act. Have we been thrown a clue here?



Or, we've been thrown a line from a very religious perhaps slightly delusional old lady. Just kidding, the analagy of the guns fits (I suppose its actually a saying, but I've never heard of it), so I like your ideas, but originally I had just thought that she was having faith. Since then there's been multiple occurrences of strange stuff, so I don't know what to believe.


That's a very interesting point....
I had been wondering about the Episode titles. All the previous Episode titles were quite clearly referenced in the show itself, like "Numbers", "Confidence Man", "Daddy issues.." etc. But it didn't hit me till yesterday....what *was* the DEUS EX MACHINA reference in this Episode? We must have seen it...but not recognised it ? If I may quote: ""Deus ex machina" is a Latin phrase literally meaning, "God from the machine." In literature, it usually means a plot device that comes out of nowhere and resolves everything."
And that's why I find your point so interesting Suzzy...that would most definitely "resolve" a number of the mysteries :o


I started a thread on this, slightly mislead when I wrote it cause I said there were only 3 possible candidates for the DEM, but people came up with about 10. What I feel fits best is what vertical says about the dream, but also the loss of his legs. Another good explanation is the light in the hatch, but I feel it wouldn't work well to name an entire episode after something in the last 10 seconds.

I'm sorry if I'm missing something, but I don't understand how Boone (or anyone with broadcasting equipment) could contact the tail section of the plane. Most of the main things the Lostaways used to broadcast a signal was found int he front section of the plane. What would a tail section hold that could be used to contact someone in this manner?

Not complaining... Just wondering. :-)

The "Deus Ex Machina" in this episode was Locke's dream. There's no way he could have known to go looking for a plane, so there's no way he could have found it. So, the writers gave him a prophetic dream. Deus Ex Machina.

While I enjoyed the episode, they (the writers) seem to be wandering farther into the realm of supernatural than I had hoped they would. Up until this point, everything could have potentially have had a rational explanation. But now, with Locke's psychic dream (the vision of the plane and his knowledge of Boone's nanny), I don't know how they could potentially have a rational explanation for that.


Psychics would argue this point with you.

Some people believe that quantun physics might explain psychic phenomenon.

There's a good discussion on the DEM here:

Some people believe that quantun physics might explain psychic phenomenon.



Perhaps, but the next such explanation I see that is remotely based on evidence or sound logic will be the first such one I've seen.

Physics can explain psychic powers?

Physics can explain psychic powers?


Its a claim made by some, because quantum physics defies logic. I've heard two interesting theories, I've mentioned them before on the fuselage, but here is appropriate too. One is that the very consciousness of human beings arises from the quantum mechanical nature of proteins in the cells in the brain. The other is that mutations, and thus, evolution, are driven by quantum phenomena. It's really cool stuff when you get down to it, you just have to read past the jargon.

Its a claim made by some, because quantum physics defies logic


That reminds me of the old joke about the difference between a rooster and a lawyer:

A rooster clucks defiance, whereas a lawyer ...

.... but I digress. My point, and I do have one, is that one can be defiant yet ultimately be forced to submit. Similarly, while quantum physics creates logical problems, it does not operate wholly outside the confines of logic.

As for the idea that consciousness derives from quantum phenomena (and not the quantum phenomena that are part and parcel of all chemistry, but rather some special "quantum phenomena") -- I've never seen a defense of that more substantive than "Consciousness is mysterious and quantum physics is mysterious, so maybe they have something to do with each other." Or, if you prefer, the argument is that people try to invoke "quantum phenomena" as some kind of universal "get out of paradox free" card. Do consciousness and free will seem paradoxical? Invoke the word "quantum", with its aura of unpredictability, and all is good. Is random mutation operating at a seemingly inexplicable speed? Invoke the word "quantum", with its aura of difficult-to-comprehend randomness, and all is forgiven.

That reminds me of the old joke about the difference between a rooster and a lawyer:

A rooster clucks defiance, whereas a lawyer ...

.... but I digress. My point, and I do have one, is that one can be defiant yet ultimately be forced to submit. Similarly, while quantum physics creates logical problems, it does not operate wholly outside the confines of logic.

As for the idea that consciousness derives from quantum phenomena (and not the quantum phenomena that are part and parcel of all chemistry, but rather some special "quantum phenomena") -- I've never seen a defense of that more substantive than "Consciousness is mysterious and quantum physics is mysterious, so maybe they have something to do with each other." Or, if you prefer, the argument is that people try to invoke "quantum phenomena" as some kind of universal "get out of paradox free" card. Do consciousness and free will seem paradoxical? Invoke the word "quantum", with its aura of unpredictability, and all is good. Is random mutation operating at a seemingly inexplicable speed? Invoke the word "quantum", with its aura of difficult-to-comprehend randomness, and all is forgiven.


Ouch...don't make this an attack, I'm just stating some theories I've heard and found interesting, but ya I see how it can sometimes be used that way. The thing is we don't understand it, and seeing as the supposed "Theory of Everything" combines quantum physics and the general theory of relativity, everything that can not be explained by classical physics is expected to be explained by quantum gravity theory. When will this theory be solidified? Probably never, if you ask me. In that case, we may see more and more phenomena lumped in as caused by quantum phenomena, because they are, like you say, a catch-all, and until the Theory of Everything is developed, we will never know for sure.

A good book to read (where I got a lot of my background on the subject from) is "Quantum, A Guide for the Perplexed" by Jim Al-Khalili, it explains everything in laymans terms and makes it easy to grasp

Um...I hate to sound like a mod and this is not my thread but the purpose of this particular discussion was to find the SIMPLIEST explanations for the mysteries on the island. While quantum physics is fascinating the idea that it might influence psychic abiilties does not in my hunble opinion fall into the category of 'simple' theories.* It belongs with some of the other more intricate theories that are out there.

I think it probably deserves a separate thread.

I do find the DeM dream troubling, because as Vertical pointed out, there was no way that Locke would have known about the plane without the dream. Claire's seemingly prophetic dream about the baby could be explained away as a paranoic nightmare (inspired by the psychic's ravings) that coincided with a real life threat to her safety. However, her dreaming of the black rock cannot. I'm not sure where the writers are going with this, but it's one area where a rational, 'simple' scientific or 'real world' explanation can't really be possible.

Unless we go with the simplest answer (TV logic) that psychic dreams and visions on the island are in fact possible.

Just a thought. What do you think about hypnosis or subliminal messages ?

Um...I hate to sound like a mod and this is not my thread but the purpose of this particular discussion was to find the SIMPLIEST explanations for the mysteries on the island. While quantum physics is fascinating the idea that it might influence psychic abiilties does not in my hunble opinion fall into the category of 'simple' theories. It belongs with some of the other more intricate theories that are out there.

I think it probably deserves a separate thread.



Sorry, that was a tangent...i'm not offering it as a solution to anything on the island, just defending the theory itself, I don't believe it has an ounce to do with lost

A good book to read (where I got a lot of my background on the subject from) is "Quantum, A Guide for the Perplexed" by Jim Al-Khalili, it explains everything in laymans terms and makes it easy to grasp


Ahh. You have the advantage on me there. I've never read a layman's book on quantum mechanics.

I did, however, take a year-long course in the subject while I was still a physics major.

Hmmm, well I don't know if I believe in direct suggestion hypnosis (probably because I have never really experienced it or been convinced when I watch those types of shows). Regressive memory hypnotherapy intrigues me because I wonder how one can sort real memory from subconscious imagination.

But I think that subliminal messages are definitely something I could buy into, because I do believe our minds can process information without consciously being aware of it. If that makes any sense? :D

Ahh. You have the advantage on me there. I've never read a layman's book on quantum mechanics.

I did, however, take a year-long course in the subject while I was still a physics major.


That was for everyone to see, I assumed you had some sort of background in science, CAM. I do not want to argue here. In fact, I was agreeing with you. We are all here for the same reason. We have an interest in discussing this show. If you do not consider others' opinions as valid as your own, that's fine, but keep it to yourself.

Please take it to PM's. No need to get ornery in the Theory thread. Man, I'm beginning to realise that us skeptics are a passionate bunch. ;D

I'd offer you margarita's if that would help? ;)

Sorry, I'll stop, I just don't like being talked down to for apparently no reason. How would one PM someone? I've never known how.

Just click on the person's name and a page will come up that shows their profile. One of the options is 'send personal message'. :)

I'd offer you margarita's if that would help? ;)


Puts up hand for margarita!

Honestly, compared to some of the other irrational things we've seen on the show, the dreams don't bother me all that much. People do have weird dreams, and even though I'm not big into the woo-woo psychic weirdness stuff, dreams continue to mystify everybody, psychiatrists and neuroscientists included.

Perhaps Locke, in his tramping around the island, caught a momentary glimpse of the crashed Beechcraft -- maybe at night when it didn't really register clearly. Its image could have then been dredged up in his dream. (OTOH, that doesn't explain Claire's reference to the Black Rock).

Seems to me the real purpose of the dream was literary -- to mirror the events of Locke's flashback. As I and other folks have noted, the dream and the flashback are very close, from the locked gate/locked hatch to the "Let's find your bird," (Locke and his father) and the "let's find our airplane" (Locke and Boone).


Templeton

*passes an extra strong margarita to Templeton with one of them nice umbrella thingees*

Well, I don't know about anyone else but as far as Locke's paralysis goes, it seems to really point towards a psychosomatic disorder like hysterical paralysis or conversion. It doesn't seem all that possible to have a physiological condition that acts in this way.

Did someone say margaritas?!* *;D* Skip the umbrella thingy for me though - nasty accident once ...

I agree Zoriah.* Conversion seems to be the most logical HORTA/Simple Truth explanation for Lockes paralysis.* I posted something about it in my "The Simple Truth" thread if you haven't already noticed it there ...

There have been many cases of psychosomatic illness where the patient has been literally rendered dysfunctional (physically and mentally) as a result - usually due to major trauma.

Take a look at this link:-* http://www.psychnet-uk.com/dsm_iv/conversion_disorder.htm

In cases of Conversion Disorder, it can be simply brought on by remembering a traumatic event.* I read a story about a woman who had a paralysis of her arm whenever she was unconsciously reminded of her feelings toward her father.* *It turns out that at the time her father died she had been sitting at his bedside with her arm pressed against the chair at the side of the bed.

When we first see Locke things are going well for him, and things are under control.* As soon as Locke starts to lose control on the island - just like after the kidney transplant - we see him starting to lose the use of his legs.* When he was in control and carrying Boone to safety, he regained the use of his legs because he had a purpose.

It would also explain how he could have been impaled by a stick and not feel a thing, and have the souls of his feet burned.* We all know how mind over matter works with people who walk on hot coals ...

I would not be entirely surprised if we were to hear of more trauma from his early childhood in "several foster homes".*

If his paralysis was due to a more physical (rather than mental) affliction, I am skeptical as to whether he could actually walk AT ALL with no feeling in his legs...

*Well, I don't know about anyone else but as far as Locke's paralysis goes, it seems to really point towards a psychosomatic disorder like hysterical paralysis or conversion. It doesn't seem all that possible to have a physiological condition that acts in this way.


Yup...we're on the same wavelength there Zoriah, that was *sort* of my thinking too ;D
The thread Suzzy was referring to is here:
http://www.thefuselage.com/threaded/index.php?topic=9731.120

After reading your link, it does fit Locke very well. *You could see the reaction in his face after leaving his father's house. *That could easily have been the begining of the disorder. *In the Walkabout office his says he has been dealing with the condition for 4 yrs. *He doesn't say illness or injury. *I wonder if he thought that by going on this Walkabout he would somehow be able to get over his condition. *He said it was his destiny.

I noted in Ep 19 that Locke's mother made a few references about "it was meant to be" and about destiny. I am sure that Locke is affected by this mentally because despite seemingly fleeting knowledge of his mother, he seems to now cling to that very ideal. Now that you mention it lostbylost, it is certainly entirely possible that the Walkabout trip was something Locke was hoping to be a life-changing event. He also admitted that his "condition" had never stopped him doing anything before.

Perhaps he was hoping that the walkabout would take him back to the place (mentally) that he was when he was hunting with his father? He seemed very content and very able bodied at that time in his life...

*Hands Suzzy a nice chilled triple strength margarita - hold the umbrella* ;)

I find it ironic what Locke said in White Rabbit, about crazy people thinking they're getting better. It really does seem to apply to him, and how he thought he had all the answers.

Am I getting a warm and fuzzy feeling here because we are starting to make some logical sense of some of our long-term Lost issues or is it the triple strength margarita?!

Feels nice anyway.* *8)*

I am fighting back that little voice in my head that says to me ... "but you know Locke seems to be so much like a man in control of his life - how can he be messed-up enough to cripple himself mentally" .* I don't want to go there!* *Keep the margaritas coming.* *:lol2:

Perhaps Locke, in his tramping around the island, caught a momentary glimpse of the crashed Beechcraft -- maybe at night when it didn't really register clearly. Its image could have then been dredged up in his dream. (OTOH, that doesn't explain Claire's reference to the Black Rock).

Seems to me the real purpose of the dream was literary -- to mirror the events of Locke's flashback. As I and other folks have noted, the dream and the flashback are very close, from the locked gate/locked hatch to the "Let's find your bird," (Locke and his father) and the "let's find our airplane" (Locke and Boone).

Templeton



I agree that there are many similarities in the flashback and the way Locke & Boone were interacting that were most likely for story telling purposes.

While there has been talk in this thread about the validity of a 'psychic' dream and how it would fit in to all this that we are trying to explaining simply... He might have seen it as he explored the island. But what about how he knew about Boone's nanny's name?

But what about how he knew about Boone's nanny's name?


Maybe Boone talked in his sleep, or under the influence of the hallucinogen?