|
|
Post by pitbulllady on Jul 29, 2010 13:06:56 GMT -5
Just saw another programme on the Nat Geo channel which covered the topic of the possibilities of time travel and interdimensional travel, or as the physicists put it, travel through various co-existing universes. Naturally, that relates to the movie, since the Scarers utilized travel between two parallel universes to do their job in the movie. The Nat Geo programme brought up the possibility that traveling back and forth between our universe and a parallel universe would also, by default, involve time travel to some degree, even though the differences in time between the two parallel universes might be in nanoseconds. That made me think of the ages given for some of the monsters in the movie, Waternoose in particular, who was what, 142? He seemed to indicate that he'd worked as a Scarer at some point. IF the time in the corresponding part of the Human world was, say, two seconds behind that in the Monster World, then a Scarer would effectively go back two seconds in THEIR lifespan each time they entered the Human World, and if by some chance some discrepancy allowed them to hang onto at least one of those seconds when they returned, it would effectively slow down their natural aging process, given enough trips through the door station, which might help explain why monsters, Scarers at least, seem to live longer then we do, plus, since they've figured out how to control the space-time continuum to the point of inter-universal travel, it also stands to reason that their medical fields have found ways to slow down the effects of time on the body, too.
Bad thing is, for monsters living in the Human World for whatever reasons, they would be deprived of those benefits, and would age at probably the same rate that we do, if not actually faster, depending on their metabolism. Randall would have a fast metabolism to maintain a high internal body temperature in the absence of insulating covering like fur or feathers, which means he'd age faster than say, a really cold-blooded monster or one with a slower metabolic rate.
pitbulllady
|
|
|
|
Post by mentalguru on Jul 29, 2010 14:01:19 GMT -5
mmm. That's pretty interesting PBL! Shame about Randall really though. It's possible there could of course be other things which increase their life span too though I'd have to think on that. But it was a curious thing with Waternoose and his age.
Another question (only loosely based) would be whether 24 /25 in the monster world is even the equivilant to the same age in ours. For all we know it might be, mentally speaking at least closer to 20 or even late teens, even if the school system is the same. (I think I remember something about us not reaching full awarness/maturity or something to that effect until 25).
|
|
|
|
Post by Theophilus Hatta on Jul 30, 2010 13:11:51 GMT -5
Interesting theory, Lady, but sadly, that's not how it would work. The aging part. Of the time travel at least.
Jumping backward in time- despite what Superman might tell you- does not de-age a person. If anything, it *ages* a person. You see, a person is like a wind-up clock. No matter where in the time-stream you drop them, the clock continues to wind down. If you drop them further in the past, then they wind down for longer.
Essentially, a Scarer going back 2 seconds in time means they lived an extra 2 seconds, not gained an extra 2 seconds of life. If they continue to age two seconds for every door... say they go through a 100 doors a day... a day is 86400 seconds long... plus 200 additional seconds (that's 86600) ... and work 5 days a week (433000)... and a year is 31,536,000 seconds...
...ok, could a math wiz take over now? Sorta ran myself into a wall here...
My calulations show that's a 605800 second week vs the normal 604800 seconds, so it's about 1000 seconds which means... bah, I'm not sure precisely, but it would add up to quite a lot over the years. The point is, going back (or foreword) in time will shorten a Scarer's lifespan.
Their longivity must be an innate quilty. Perhaps their year is simply shorter than ours?
|
|
|
|
Post by pitbulllady on Jul 30, 2010 14:12:29 GMT -5
Interesting theory, Lady, but sadly, that's not how it would work. The aging part. Of the time travel at least. Jumping backward in time- despite what Superman might tell you- does not de-age a person. If anything, it *ages* a person. You see, a person is like a wind-up clock. No matter where in the time-stream you drop them, the clock continues to wind down. If you drop them further in the past, then they wind down for longer. Essentially, a Scarer going back 2 seconds in time means they lived an extra 2 seconds, not gained an extra 2 seconds of life. If they continue to age two seconds for every door... say they go through a 100 doors a day... a day is 86400 seconds long... plus 200 additional seconds (that's 86600) ... and work 5 days a week (433000)... and a year is 31,536,000 seconds... ...ok, could a math wiz take over now? Sorta ran myself into a wall here... My calulations show that's a 605800 second week vs the normal 604800 seconds, so it's about 1000 seconds which means... bah, I'm not sure precisely, but it would add up to quite a lot over the years. The point is, going back (or foreword) in time will shorten a Scarer's lifespan. Their longivity must be an innate quilty. Perhaps their year is simply shorter than ours? If their year was shorter than ours, then their clocks should also be different, but they aren't. You'd also expect their months to be different, too, but on the stock performance data printout that Sulley had on his clipboard near the end of the movie, the months of October and November not only were named the same as our months, but had the same number of days indicated at the top of the graph. Dr. Stephen Hawking is quite adamant that traveling back in time would slow down the aging process in humans, and there have been extensive studies trying to connect space travel with slowing of the aging process, too, and given that most of our first astronauts are still around AND in good health, there seems to be evidence to support it. Now, monsters possibly DO have naturally longer lifespans, but I still can't help but wonder if being able to move through different dimensional doorways doesn't help. That's something that at this point, we can neither prove nor disprove(the effects of that on aging)since we have yet to master it, although many prominant astrophysicists believe that we are right on the verge of doing so. Of course, we also have to consider environmental issues and THEIR effects on lifespan, too. In the Monster World, there appears to be very little atmospheric pollution, since most parts of their world aren't dependent on burning of fossil fuels for energy like we are, so the air they breathe would be very pure and clean compared to ours, something else that monsters stuck in the Human World would have to deal with that would likely shorten their lives. pitbulllady |
|
|
|
Post by Theophilus Hatta on Jul 30, 2010 23:11:35 GMT -5
So what? The same number of hours on the clock desn't mean anything. An hour is only 1/24 of a day, it only means they divide into 24-hour periods. It's not unreasonable to think the Monster day might be a different length than our day. We only have a generic movie-time sampling of the Monsterworld night/day/2nd night(?) zipping around when it's plot conveniant... We have no idea what postion the Monster World even occuipes in their star system, for cricket's sake! Their orbit could be longer or shorter or even elliptical. Monster!October and Monster!Novemeber might coincidentally the same length as ours- and named the same. (Unless their history is even closer to Human history than I thought, you have to admit it's weird two months in different universes have an "October" and "Novemeber") That's silly. Firstly, we aren't talking about space travel-- only time travel-- and, secondly, loads of people around in 1969 are still hangin' about. Geez, the old astronauts are have only *hit* 80. Plus the hundreds of advancements in medicane, food, and technology might have helped a touch, eh? Not saying that Hawking isn't right about slowing the aging process- I think Einstein had something similar called the Twin Paradox- but that all has to do with special relativity and time dilation. I believe... that in order to slow the aging, you must increase the velocity by a couple g's while you're moving a great distance forward in time. But until we get a Starfleet engine strapped to the dimensional door, it's not really relivent to the 2-second theory... Simple time-travel *does* age you. However long you spend in the past (or the future, take your pick) is time you have *spent*. If you go and spend 3 weeks hanging around in 1920s New York, then hop in your TARDIS and travel back to the exact moment you left, you are still 3 weeks older than when you left. There is no way to de-age yourself using time-travel... This poses a prickly problem for Scarers use up their allotted time going through doors day in and day out. Retirement must come early... Unless- are you familar at all with the concept of "tessering"? www.math.brown.edu/~banchoff/Yale/project12/math.html This has the book excert describing it better (even has the pictures explaining it) but basically it's a way to fold space/time as shortcut from one end to the other, insantly. If doors were like that, then we wouldn't have to worry about the time-travel-ages-you headache because there would be no time-travel. Just dimension jumping between HW and MW. I bet you're right on that, Lady. The Monster World seems much cleaner. I suppose it'd be a bit like moving from the country to a big, smelly, open-sewer city... |
|
|
|
Post by mentalguru on Jul 31, 2010 16:09:20 GMT -5
We don't have much eveidence of that kind of orbit they have though TH, all we have are those two months which are exactly the same, and you have to wonder of course why that is. And the most simple explanation is that they have similar time frames that we do. Until there is evidence to the contrary to suggest different year length etc, it's the assumption and the simpilest explanation. It's more of a "Until evidence to the contary exists" because it's the simpilest one we have.
Of course, there's also one of those silly things about the movie I feel, I mean come on, an alien world, heck one maybe in a completely different dimension which... writes in english? Plus uses the same calander month names AND lengths as we do? I mean I can get the same number of hours/days being the same time if it's an exact other universe match to ours etc etc. but using the same number of days etc each month... it would have made more sense if they did every thing on the basis of what exactly their moons orbit was (which our months seem follow very ROUGHLY- it is 28 days). Both the moon and sun have been important in the development of our own time frames for obvious reasons.
Considering the fact without a moon the evolution of complex life on OUR planet would probably not be possible (and we wouldn't be here, yes you quite possibly owe your existence also in part to that lump of rock circling us on top of everything), I think it's safe to assume though that the Monster world has one given they have animals to eat, crops (probably selected artifically from the wild relatives there) and trees etc etc. Complex life forms.
It's a blunder you find in many Sci Fi things though sometimes. Of course it could be as you said something secertly 'pinched' from the human world and forgotten about or something they believed to develop themselves. Same with the english language. Or it could almost be the idea of the movie simply being set to make more sense to the audience kind of like the 'TARDIS' meant the travellers could read english/hear it no matter what language, so it is for the audience. We think and SEE english, but that's not what they're really have down on paper/ are talking in.
(... Does that mean Pixar creators are Time Lords?)
Though I'm also guessing for some monsters they take longer than two seconds in there, it depends on the 'style' that suits them. Someone like Randall who would probably 'creep' round more than Sulley for example would probably take longer. But then again that would probably keep an individual kid in the long term scared for longer too huh?
|
|
