I've been thinking about the Zat...

[spider]

We all know the rules...one direct hit causes intense paine(or, depending on the target, nocks em out), two direct hits kill, three direct hits disintegrate the body. Watching this got me to thinking...the brain has a low level of electricity flowing through it at all times(hell, that's what our thoughts are)...so maybe the Zats merely emit an electrical charge high enough to disrupt the current in the brain, thus the sevear paine or unconsiousness. Death could be explained by two such shocks being too much for the brain to handle, and the current shorting out. The third shot...I'm kinda reaching here, but maybe three such shocks to the existing electrical current of the body excelerates it so much that it burns up the body.

...thoughts?

 

[PTeppic]

There was an earlier thread considering how the zat works - but it included some fairly far-edge thoughts.

I would have to pretty much agree with your principles - some sort of energy discharge, which, over time, the body can dissipate. How many times have each of SG-1 actually been hit, but only once at a time? Loads. So it obviously only works if the consecutive shots are within a certain time. And then, as you say, it kills if the level is too high. As for disintegration, anything could be causing it - but "burning up" is one possibility.

 

[lysdexia]

No, the brain does not experience pain. The nerves surround the brain in muscles, the same responsible for headaches. Read my better explanation in the thread with the light bulb, and it explains all three effects. You should work on your spelling, btw.

 

[PTeppic]

We certainly could read your alternative explanation. It is not, per se, either better or worse. This is a factional TV show - and this weapon is just on the fiction side of the divide. It's an alien ray-gun, for goodness sake - we have NO IDEA how it works, only theories. Your's may be more complex, but does not make it better.

An electrical-like energy could quite easily cause nerve disruption, causing temporary paralysis with the symptoms seen on the show. A second shot in close succession would almost certainly lead to immediate heart-failure and death. This energy could also as easily build up in the body of the victim, such that a third shot could lead to molecular disintegration or vaporisation.

Any electrical disruption to the brain, which interprets "pain" signals would give the effect of pain, even though the brain itself does not feel pain. Same effect as "seeing lights" when electrically stimulating the optical centre of the hind-brain, even when the patient has no eyes!

You should work on your patronisation and arrogance, btw...

 

[lysdexia]

It's an alien ray-gun, for goodness sake - we have NO IDEA how it works, only theories. Your's may be more complex, but does not make it better.
Yours
My version does make the explanation better because it's as complex as necessary, and not more, to explain all the effects seen and known and because it's consistent with reality. All past explanations have been too simplistic, vague, or speculative to work. Why did you repeat the explanation in your next paragraph?

Any electrical disruption to the brain, which interprets "pain" signals would give the effect of pain, even though the brain itself does not feel pain.
Can you give examples?

Same effect as "seeing lights" when electrically stimulating the optical centre of the hind-brain, even when the patient has no eyes!
the occipital lobe? Hmm, well you can see in dreams. But can you feel pain? I don't remember experiencing it.

You should work on your patronisation and arrogance, btw...
When one's penomniscient, one deserves to be arrogant!

 

[PTeppic]

Originally posted by lysdexia
It's an alien ray-gun, for goodness sake - we have NO IDEA how it works, only theories. Your's may be more complex, but does not make it better.
My version does make the explanation better because it's as complex as necessary, and not more, to explain all the effects seen and known and because it's consistent with reality. All past explanations have been too simplistic, vague, or speculative to work. Why did you repeat the explanation in your next paragraph?

Complexity or lack of does not make an explanation better. The explanation above is perfectly adequate to explaina a FICTIONAL device and its effects. Yours is EQUAL on that basis, not better.

Any electrical disruption to the brain, which interprets "pain" signals would give the effect of pain, even though the brain itself does not feel pain.
Can you give examples?

I should have said "could".

Same effect as "seeing lights" when electrically stimulating the optical centre of the hind-brain, even when the patient has no eyes!
the occipital lobe? Hmm, well you can see in dreams. But can you feel pain? I don't remember experiencing it.

Take a 10lb hammer - hold in right hand - swing sharply at a point 2" behind the eyes, within the skull. Experience pain.

 

[System Lord Gypsy]

SPOILER

-
-
-
-
-
-
S

P

O

I

L

E

R


The time thing is explained in Prodigy when they have to shoot Jack to get him to the gate and is also seen in the double episode at the end of season 1 when they shoot Klorel/Skaara twice without killing him.

Basically after time the electrical field caused in the body by the zat will disapear and you are able to be shot again without being killed.

Gypsy

 

[spider]

lysdexia, I'm not trying to compete with you, just stating what was on my mind. Zats effect people a specific way, they apear to emit electric charges, people carry their own electric charges around inside...thus my post. We're not in competition here.


...and it's been my experience that not many people react well when someone brings back up an old thread (maybe it's different here).

 

[lysdexia]

PTeppic
Complexity or lack of does not make an explanation better.
I never said anything about that. Reread my reason.

The explanation above is perfectly adequate to explaina a FICTIONAL device and its effects. Yours is EQUAL on that basis, not better.
Vagueness or limitation does not make adequacy.

Take a 10lb hammer - hold in right hand - swing sharply at a point 2" behind the eyes, within the skull. Experience pain.
But my skull is in the way. As I said, the brain itself does not experience pain, and is why surgery can be done on it without hurting the patient. You still didn't answer my two questions.

spider
Zats effect people a specific way
affect

 

[spider]

Originally posted by lysdexia

spider
Zats effect people a specific way
affect

You knew what I ment, that's all that matters. Don't be picky about the unimportant stuff.

 

[PTeppic]

Originally posted by lysdexia
PTeppicTake a 10lb hammer - hold in right hand - swing sharply at a point 2" behind the eyes, within the skull. Experience pain.
But my skull is in the way. As I said, the brain itself does not experience pain, and is why surgery can be done on it without hurting the patient. You still didn't answer my two questions.[/color]

I'm not contesting the BRAIN doesn't feel pain. I was suggesting, in your response to the statement you had never experienced pain, that you try it. And swinging large weights at your head WOULD create pain, due to the nerves in your scalp.

And yes, I have had several head wounds, so can confirm there are nerves there.

 

[PTeppic]

Originally posted by lysdexia
The explanation above is perfectly adequate to explaina a FICTIONAL device and its effects. Yours is EQUAL on that basis, not better.
Vagueness or limitation does not make adequacy.

I prefer to disagree. How are things explained to children? To them, the explanation is adequate. As we get older we are effectively taught in greater level of detail, in some cases contradicting what we already know to give us the next level of understanding.

I believe the same can be said of explaining things which are fictional anyway.

In this case, two suggestions have been put forward, both of which have elements of science. Both of which address the visual evidence portrayed on the show. As a fictional show we don't need to KNOW how it works - as long as we, within ourselves, have an explanation that we are comfortable with, (and for a child "its an alien ray-gun" may be adequate!) then it is neither better nor worse than any other.

In this particular case, however, I believe both are similar anyway, with only minor details between them.

 

[lysdexia]

I was suggesting, in your response to the statement you had never experienced pain, that you try it. And swinging large weights at your head WOULD create pain, due to the nerves in your scalp.
You seem to have some sort of reading problem. I was talking about sensations in dreams, which was relevant to this thread because the rest of the body is immobile. I could not feel pain in dreams, and I'm not somnambulant which means I can't swing a large weight at my head in my sleep either. You still could not come up with examples of neural firing that the brain interprets as pain, that could be caused by a zat zap.

How are things explained to children? To them, the explanation is adequate.
I believe the same can be said of explaining things which are fictional anyway.
Are you a child? Not only is your second sentence non sequitur, it defeats the purpose of this forum.

In this case, two suggestions have been put forward, both of which have elements of science. Both of which address the visual evidence portrayed on the show. As a fictional show we don't need to KNOW how it works - as long as we, within ourselves, have an explanation that we are comfortable with, (and for a child "its an alien ray-gun" may be adequate!) then it is neither better nor worse than any other.
But the show is frequently explained with RL terms, as per the writers' intention. That's why Sam and Daniel are there. It's like through your positivist overagnosticism against posturing you want to remove those elements from the show. We are supposed to know and to need to know how it works. Perhaps you've been watching too much Star Wars. Besides, one suggestion addresses more of the evidence than the other.

 

[PTeppic]

Apologies for mis-reading. I am not as perfect as you...

As you yourself have suggested, we can experience sensory stimuli through dreams - I can recollect touch and pain. What is pain? Interpretation of nerve stimuli? Electro-chemical reactions within the brain? I am not a neurologist, and don't have the time to research such a field, therefore I can't simply lay my hands on such research. However, it is my hypothesis that "pain" can be triggered by electrical (or electric-like energy from the zat) stimuli directly to the brain. I don't mind if you disagree.

No, I'm not a child. I was attempting to infer that we each accept different levels of "reality" or explanation when we watch sci-fi entertainment. We all choose to interpret our experiences, factual and fictional in terms of our own understanding, so by nature this has to be sequitur... The youngest members of the audience, as I suggested, are happy it is a ray-gun. Perhaps more complex thought examines the possibilities of electricity or similar energy. People like yourself may go further to discuss even more detail. This is mirrored in the views of people having watched films. I tend to go to watch a film, and decide if I enjoyed watching. I don't spend the next three days dissecting in my mind if the plot was 100% logical, or the actors behaved in character, as perhaps a critic may. I accept my own view of what was "good" about the film. I believe this is similar to the current discussion; we are experiencing different levels of expectaction over the "reality" or technical content of the primarily entertainment products. You appear to wish to take this to the ultimate level of understanding at all times, for all shows. I just want to have fun and enjoy myself. This would imply you are saying I should leave the forum, because I am talking about fictional technology in a fictional way, with lots of provisos and assumptions, whereas you are sticking entirely (or not) to factual science.

In terms of the writers, they started the show because they thought it was a good STORY. This is explained in the interviews on the R2 DVDs. As you say, there is a certain amount of technology, since the show is set in the present. But, as you suggest, with such long words, they actually need to keep explaining to the audience what they mean or why things are happening. They obviously recognise they are very close to the edge of comprehension regarding technology for their target audience. Would you have them stop "dumbing down" for the majority, in favour of a technical elite minority. An audience who can truly understand and appreciate the technical effort for authenticity that has gone into the show? This is what you have implied in this and "Making it real" threads.

 

[lysdexia]

You recalled pain in dreams, when? Fear or surprise doesn't count. Can stunguns deliver pain? If so, is it through the brain or through the muscles being targeted? If it's the latter, why did you bring the brain up in the first place?

You didn't have to repeat your inference which was understood by every reader here. It was not about how much depth each viewer accepted, but how much is necessary for a formal, written explanation. What was the creator of this thread looking for? If he was able to answer his own questions, why would he ask everyone else in the open? His action asked for more detail.

Your film would have to be in the same genre for your accusation to apply. Most of your rambling would be avoided had you read and understood my past messages. These discussions have nothing to do with your film of another genre. Usually I don't see technical problems in "all shows" to prevent me from enjoying them. I did not and am not; many parts of my messages were working within the context of the show's universe and which included those provisos and assumptions. What's the matter with you?

What's R2? The only explanation I asked for was one that was internally and externally consistent; "dumbing down" is fine as long as the audience isn't left too dumb and ignore it. Why do you keep overreacting to my requests? Moreover, why do you keep misreading them? You still haven't gained one of the premises in my essay, which was to open up the understanding to more people. Maybe you need to review the introduction and the periodic table parts.

 

[PTeppic]

The brain was originally brought up by the OP, not me. I was agreeing with it, on the basis of my pain induction hypothesis (as stated above). Pain through body cell disruption would also be consistent, as you suggest.

Film - my "accusation" was a suggestion about ALL film genres, and the experience of interpretation of stimuli, particularly in new environments. I was inferring it is a super-set of technical understanding in the sci-fi genre, and hence was relevant, as opposed by your earlier post.

R2 - region 2. I would argue that an explanation can be internally and externally consistent, and yet still rely on assumption or premise about fictional properties e.g. it is alien technology and therefore CAN do "X" however obscure it seems.

 

[System Lord Gypsy]

All I can say is Wow. I come here to get away from RL and arguments on other groups and forums and now find them here.

Not all of us are as technically minded as some of you on here but still like to participate in this forum and find most of the explanations we come up with between us to be adequate, or sometimes more than adequate as all we want is a disscussion on how things work and we generally get that.

If you want to complain that our "Vagueness" and "limitations" are not adequate for you then why not start a thread and only ask those who will be adequate for you to join in it.

I've not come here to see people slating each others opinions as I feel if you disagree with an opinion you can state that without putting the opinions of others down.

I for one don't think I'll be back here for a while.

Pteppic, can you please comm me on Ausgate when the arguing calms down.

On behalf of all us thickies who didn't major in astrophysics, etc and those who are willing to dumb things down a little for us,

Gypsy

{One quick thank you to those like Pteppic, etc who have made my stay on this forum enjoyable by dumbing things down slightly}

 

[lysdexia]

PTeppic
I was agreeing with it, on the basis of my pain induction hypothesis (as stated above).
why?

Film - my "accusation" was a suggestion about ALL film genres, and the experience of interpretation of stimuli, particularly in new environments. I was inferring it is a super-set of technical understanding in the sci-fi genre, and hence was relevant, as opposed by your earlier post.
Well it's not true of all film genres, and all writers don't intend them to be. It doesn't have to be a superset either, which only you and a few others believe.

R2 - region 2. I would argue that an explanation can be internally and externally consistent, and yet still rely on assumption or premise about fictional properties e.g. it is alien technology and therefore CAN do "X" however obscure it seems.
What's region 2? Of course it can, but you continue to generalise all shows as this particular show.


Gypsy, read the second and fourth paragraphs of my former message. You "thicky" inflicted it on yourself.

 

[shu_hunter]

*sigh* Remember back in the day when one could express their opinions without fear of being corrected? When one could assume something without any scientific evidence? When discussing Stargate was actually fun?
Ah, the age of lysdexia-lessness.

~Shu Hunter
:upto: Stargate fan{atic}

 

[lysdexia]

You can still do that, just don't be correctable.