That both sounds familiar and makes sense.Eru wrote:On the topic of possession, haven't we discussed the possibility of Sheeana donning the skin, in which case her control over the new worms/trout may diminish the risk?
My skin is not my own...
Moderators: Freakzilla, ᴶᵛᵀᴬ, Omphalos
- SandChigger
- KJASF Ground Zero
- Posts: 14492
- Joined: 08 Feb 2008 22:29
- Location: A continuing state of irritation
- Contact:
Re: My skin is not my own...
- Omphalos
- Inglorious Bastard
- Posts: 6677
- Joined: 05 Feb 2008 11:07
- Location: The Mighty Central Valley of California
- Contact:
Re: My skin is not my own...
Im talking about in universe, but I'm also not talking about a BT product. The subject here is the potential in the worms on Rakis, right? The potential of the "pearls." Or am I confused? Sorry if I got the topic wrong guys.SandChigger wrote:Wait, are you talking Real World or Duniverse here? Real World, right?Omphalos wrote:No, it most certainly would not. First, none of Leto's memories would be in there. Second, a recopied Leto would be no more Leto than the sheep Dolly would be of its "mother." The potential is there, but you could not guarantee (or probably even realize) a photocopy of Leto by cloning his DNA. DNA is potential, not blueprints. Any geneticist will tell you that. We could clone Thing a million times and have a million different individuals.
I'm confoosed now.
A clone/ghola of Leto II (by Duniverse "rules") should have the potential of remembering his memories up until the time the DNA sample was taken (or death if it's a ghola grown from cells harvested after death ... from the carcass by the river?), but wouldn't actually remember them until some trauma designed to awaken them ... just like any other ghola/clone.
Anyway, there is still a difference. The BT have a ghola/clone process for making new copies. I assume that even in Frank's world, which is essentially our universe, ordinary cloning without a ghola process would result in the same thing we create; a copy from the genetic material that would express genes randomly. IOW, just because you are in the fictional Dune world doesn't mean that cloning works by different rules. You have to scientifically control those variables.
- SandChigger
- KJASF Ground Zero
- Posts: 14492
- Joined: 08 Feb 2008 22:29
- Location: A continuing state of irritation
- Contact:
Re: My skin is not my own...
I was using clone here in the Teg-sense: ghola from cells from a living individual.
- A Thing of Eternity
- Posts: 6090
- Joined: 08 Apr 2008 15:35
- Location: Calgary Alberta
Re: My skin is not my own...
Whoa, of course I agree with all that, I've been one of the people arguing that OM is technical BS the whole time - I'm talking strictly in-universe here, where as far as I know DNA DOES convey OM. OM is genetic memory, that is how FH defines it repeatedly (unless my memory is seriously missfiring).Omphalos wrote:No, it most certainly would not. First, none of Leto's memories would be in there. Second, a recopied Leto would be no more Leto than the sheep Dolly would be of its "mother." The potential is there, but you could not guarantee (or probably even realize) a photocopy of Leto by cloning his DNA. DNA is potential, not blueprints. Any geneticist will tell you that. We could clone Thing a million times and have a million different individuals.A Thing of Eternity wrote:That is certainly true, though as was pointed out earlier the question isn't actually how much of Leto is in his "pearls" the question is whether those pearls hold any of his DNA. If they do hold his DNA, then the DNA (in the Dune universe, not the real one obviously) would hold a full and complete copy of Leto's mind., regardless of how functional/complete the pearl is.
I realize you address some of this in a later post, I'm sorry I'm much to tired right now to coherently debate, so I'll have to pick it up later.
-
- Posts: 1504
- Joined: 14 May 2010 14:11
- Location: Grubville
Re: My skin is not my own...
I expect i'm getting pretty far off topic, but as long as we're exploring OM, I can follow the idea that those mighty Atredes can some how gain access to the memories of their parents, but, when the Duncan manages to remember all his past incarnations- it seems to blow the curve for me. this is a new thing different from other OM. The BT enjoyed thier immortality by reawakening a new ghola from an old. I thought all the Duncans came from the original- none had memories of previous Duncans so how'd he do it? He could see himself as 'links of sausage... so many times killed by the tyrant.' Far as I remember, it was only his memories too, not his ansestors. In the Dune-verse I think Duncan was from relativly ordinary stock, so perhaps anyone can get some OM in one form or another?
Leto II is gone for good, except for OM. The "pearl" was just that; a miniscule portion of what Leto was, and not a compressed version of the whole. The pearl that the worms have do not make them Leto, or in any way similar to him.
-Omphalos
-Omphalos
- Freakzilla
- Lead Singer and Driver of the Winnebego
- Posts: 18454
- Joined: 05 Feb 2008 01:27
- Location: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
- Contact:
Re: My skin is not my own...
The last Duncan had cells from all the gholas the BT could find samples from. The real mystery is that he even got the memories from the gholas they didn't have cell samples for.
How did this happen?
Magic.
How did this happen?
Magic.
Paul of Dune was so bad it gave me a seizure that dislocated both of my shoulders and prolapsed my anus.
~Pink Snowman
- Hunchback Jack
- Posts: 1983
- Joined: 30 May 2008 15:02
- Location: California, USA
Re: My skin is not my own...
Personally, I doubt if anyone merging with a post-Leto sandtrout would gain any Leto personality or memories.
I don't think any individual "pearl" of awareness would have any influence on a host, as I think they are incomplete fragments of Leto, not complete. Just as a single worm has little or no prescient influence, so would a single sandtrout have little or no Leto "identity". So I don't think anyone merging with a post-Leto sandtrout would have much "Leto-ness" as a result.
As for DNA conveying memories, I speculate that there's a distinction between being grown from cells which contain memories, and being injected with cells from someone else. A ghola's body was grown from all the cells of the same person; the memories are intrinsic to all the cells in that body. If Duncan was injected with cells from Paul, he wouldn't get Paul's memories (or his OM). So the existence of Leto-trout DNA in a new human-trout hybrid wouldn't automatically result in Leto memories.
(I don't know about Sharing; while it requires physical contact, it doesn't *appear* to be DNA-based, but I don't think FH was explicit about that. Perhaps a BG could acquire Leto's memories by merging with a trout *if* Leto's identity were complete enough, which I personally doubt).
HBJ
I don't think any individual "pearl" of awareness would have any influence on a host, as I think they are incomplete fragments of Leto, not complete. Just as a single worm has little or no prescient influence, so would a single sandtrout have little or no Leto "identity". So I don't think anyone merging with a post-Leto sandtrout would have much "Leto-ness" as a result.
As for DNA conveying memories, I speculate that there's a distinction between being grown from cells which contain memories, and being injected with cells from someone else. A ghola's body was grown from all the cells of the same person; the memories are intrinsic to all the cells in that body. If Duncan was injected with cells from Paul, he wouldn't get Paul's memories (or his OM). So the existence of Leto-trout DNA in a new human-trout hybrid wouldn't automatically result in Leto memories.
(I don't know about Sharing; while it requires physical contact, it doesn't *appear* to be DNA-based, but I don't think FH was explicit about that. Perhaps a BG could acquire Leto's memories by merging with a trout *if* Leto's identity were complete enough, which I personally doubt).
HBJ
"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
- Carl Sagan
I'm still very proud of The Quarry but … let's face it; in the end the real best way to sign off would have been with a great big rollicking Culture novel.
- Iain Banks
- Carl Sagan
I'm still very proud of The Quarry but … let's face it; in the end the real best way to sign off would have been with a great big rollicking Culture novel.
- Iain Banks
-
- Posts: 1504
- Joined: 14 May 2010 14:11
- Location: Grubville
Re: My skin is not my own...
That last paragraph is my conclusion, it comes down to how much of Him is in his pearl of awareness.
Leto II is gone for good, except for OM. The "pearl" was just that; a miniscule portion of what Leto was, and not a compressed version of the whole. The pearl that the worms have do not make them Leto, or in any way similar to him.
-Omphalos
-Omphalos
- mrpsbrk
- Posts: 158
- Joined: 20 Dec 2008 11:08
- Location: Brazil
- Contact:
Re: My skin is not my own...
Look, i know many people dislike this idea, but, please, does anyone have a QUOTE about Worm DNA? I mean, as far as we know, they are aliens and COULD have no DNA whatsoever, so no mixing of DNA would be possible -- even if the "aware" worms could carry DNA but then it would be... even weirder.SandChigger wrote: Venturing into whacky Duniverse genetics/science, I see two possibilities (let me know if you see more!):
(1) Leto was a true hybrid of human and sandworm, meaning mixing of DNA; or
Anyway, i think in Ch:D the Tleilaxu Master Scytale talks about the chapterhouse worms as "The Prophet Restored" or something like that (only have the Spanish edition with me here) -- doesn't that imply that Leto is there? {i realize this goes against what i was saying just one paragraph above, but...}
Marcio (mrpsbrk) does believe in Lord Leto over all other wills and reasons
- Freakzilla
- Lead Singer and Driver of the Winnebego
- Posts: 18454
- Joined: 05 Feb 2008 01:27
- Location: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
- Contact:
Re: My skin is not my own...
"It is difficult to understand, I know. I will die four deaths the death of the
flesh, the death of the soul, the death of the myth and the death of reason. And
all of these deaths contain the seed of resurrection."
"You will return from..."
"The seeds will return."
flesh, the death of the soul, the death of the myth and the death of reason. And
all of these deaths contain the seed of resurrection."
"You will return from..."
"The seeds will return."
Paul of Dune was so bad it gave me a seizure that dislocated both of my shoulders and prolapsed my anus.
~Pink Snowman
- SandChigger
- KJASF Ground Zero
- Posts: 14492
- Joined: 08 Feb 2008 22:29
- Location: A continuing state of irritation
- Contact:
Re: My skin is not my own...
The sandtrout are described as haploid.
Haploid means "having only a single set of chromosomes".
If there is a form of chromosome that does not contain DNA, please tell us what it is.
Fucking mrn.
Haploid means "having only a single set of chromosomes".
If there is a form of chromosome that does not contain DNA, please tell us what it is.
Fucking mrn.
- lotek
- Posts: 5784
- Joined: 28 Jul 2009 08:33
Re: My skin is not my own...
http://www.scientificamerican.com/artic ... of-dna-yetScientists today announced that they have crafted a bacterial genome from scratch, moving one step closer to creating entirely synthetic life forms--living cells designed and built by humans to carry out a diverse set of tasks ranging from manufacturing biofuels to sequestering carbon dioxide.
Spice is the worm's gonads.
- Robspierre
- Posts: 2162
- Joined: 19 Feb 2008 10:49
- Location: Cascadia
Re: My skin is not my own...
Nekhrun wrote:That's why I don't get why there are laws agains cloning humans.Omphalos wrote:No, it most certainly would not. First, none of Leto's memories would be in there. Second, a recopied Leto would be no more Leto than the sheep Dolly would be of its "mother." The potential is there, but you could not guarantee (or probably even realize) a photocopy of Leto by cloning his DNA. DNA is potential, not blueprints. Any geneticist will tell you that. We could clone Thing a million times and have a million different individuals.A Thing of Eternity wrote:That is certainly true, though as was pointed out earlier the question isn't actually how much of Leto is in his "pearls" the question is whether those pearls hold any of his DNA. If they do hold his DNA, then the DNA (in the Dune universe, not the real one obviously) would hold a full and complete copy of Leto's mind., regardless of how functional/complete the pearl is.
Maybe you could snag the memories from Leto until he merged at age 9? But they'd have to be reawakened like a ghola right?
I always thought it would be strange that the last OM memory that you'd have from your male ancestors would be doing your female ancestors, maybe it would be just one or two days before the doing. You'd remember it as your mother though right? Either way, sexy.
I wonder how Heinlein would of worked that angle.....
Rob
-
- Administrator
- Posts: 2980
- Joined: 17 Feb 2008 18:44
- Location: Den Haag - The Netherlands
Re: My skin is not my own...
Rob, you disappoint meRobspierre wrote: I wonder how Heinlein would of worked that angle.....
Rob
"... the mystery of life isn't a problem to solve but a reality to experience."
“There is no escape—we pay for the violence of our ancestors.”
Sandrider: "Keith went to Bobo's for a weekend of drinking, watched some DVDs,
and wrote a Dune Novel."
“There is no escape—we pay for the violence of our ancestors.”
Sandrider: "Keith went to Bobo's for a weekend of drinking, watched some DVDs,
and wrote a Dune Novel."
- Freakzilla
- Lead Singer and Driver of the Winnebego
- Posts: 18454
- Joined: 05 Feb 2008 01:27
- Location: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
- Contact:
Re: My skin is not my own...
Paul of Dune was so bad it gave me a seizure that dislocated both of my shoulders and prolapsed my anus.
~Pink Snowman
- Robspierre
- Posts: 2162
- Joined: 19 Feb 2008 10:49
- Location: Cascadia
Re: My skin is not my own...
While he did explore limited aspects of incest, the focus of incest as VIEWED through OM is something Heinlein did not explore. Heinlein mainly focused on the genetic aspect or his World as Myth tales. OM is a very Herbert only concept.Serkanner wrote:Rob, you disappoint meRobspierre wrote: I wonder how Heinlein would of worked that angle.....
Rob
Rob
-
- Posts: 314
- Joined: 06 Jan 2010 11:25
Re: My skin is not my own...
Sorry to stray off-topic, but this phenomenon of writing of instead of 've caught my attention recently. I've encountered cases of mixed up homophones - I occasionally mix up two/to/too or suchlike words myself when I'm not careful while typing, but this case seem slightly different to me in that there's a drastic contrast between of and 've in terms of grammar, and the result almost looks like a new verb form (?). So is this case the same as other mixed-up homophones, or something else might be behind this phenomenon?Serkanner wrote:Rob, you disappoint meRobspierre wrote: I wonder how Heinlein would of worked that angle.....
Rob
WHAT IF YOU NO LONGER HEAR THE MUSIC OF LIFE?
MEMORIES ARE NOT ENOUGH UNLESS THEY CALL YOU TO NOBLE PURPOSE!
MEMORIES ARE NOT ENOUGH UNLESS THEY CALL YOU TO NOBLE PURPOSE!
- merkin muffley
- Posts: 1584
- Joined: 23 Apr 2010 15:18
- Location: War Room
Re: My skin is not my own...
When Onasander does it, it's a case of a mixed-up homophobe.
high five!
high five!
-
- Posts: 11
- Joined: 12 May 2010 12:58
Re: My skin is not my own...
i'm glad we all agree on this subject.
- Robspierre
- Posts: 2162
- Joined: 19 Feb 2008 10:49
- Location: Cascadia
Re: My skin is not my own...
Technically could of and should of do not exist as verbs. The proper thing to do is to use have or write it as a verb contraction. However, could of is a hold over from my youth and a way of speaking that does break written grammatical rules.MrFlibble wrote:Sorry to stray off-topic, but this phenomenon of writing of instead of 've caught my attention recently. I've encountered cases of mixed up homophones - I occasionally mix up two/to/too or suchlike words myself when I'm not careful while typing, but this case seem slightly different to me in that there's a drastic contrast between of and 've in terms of grammar, and the result almost looks like a new verb form (?). So is this case the same as other mixed-up homophones, or something else might be behind this phenomenon?Serkanner wrote:Rob, you disappoint meRobspierre wrote: I wonder how Heinlein would of worked that angle.....
Rob
So no, it is not a case of mixed-up homophones, more a case of how people speak, on occasion, that continues to find its way into how people write.
Rob
-
- Posts: 314
- Joined: 06 Jan 2010 11:25
Re: My skin is not my own...
Well, if could've and could of are pronounced the same, and are confused in written speech because of this, then it's the case of mixed-up homophones (both 've and of in this case are not stressed and are thus enclitics).Robspierre wrote:So no, it is not a case of mixed-up homophones, more a case of how people speak, on occasion, that continues to find its way into how people write.
WHAT IF YOU NO LONGER HEAR THE MUSIC OF LIFE?
MEMORIES ARE NOT ENOUGH UNLESS THEY CALL YOU TO NOBLE PURPOSE!
MEMORIES ARE NOT ENOUGH UNLESS THEY CALL YOU TO NOBLE PURPOSE!
- Freakzilla
- Lead Singer and Driver of the Winnebego
- Posts: 18454
- Joined: 05 Feb 2008 01:27
- Location: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
- Contact:
Re: My skin is not my own...
Y'all lost me with the Greek when you started talkin' 'bout homos.MrFlibble wrote:Well, if could've and could of are pronounced the same, and are confused in written speech because of this, then it's the case of mixed-up homophones (both 've and of in this case are not stressed and are thus enclitics).Robspierre wrote:So no, it is not a case of mixed-up homophones, more a case of how people speak, on occasion, that continues to find its way into how people write.
Paul of Dune was so bad it gave me a seizure that dislocated both of my shoulders and prolapsed my anus.
~Pink Snowman
- Robspierre
- Posts: 2162
- Joined: 19 Feb 2008 10:49
- Location: Cascadia
Re: My skin is not my own...
MrFlibble wrote:Well, if could've and could of are pronounced the same, and are confused in written speech because of this, then it's the case of mixed-up homophones (both 've and of in this case are not stressed and are thus enclitics).Robspierre wrote:So no, it is not a case of mixed-up homophones, more a case of how people speak, on occasion, that continues to find its way into how people write.
I asked my Grammar professor about this. Technically, because could of and should of do not exist, it is not case of mixed-up homophones. Technically, to be considered homophones, could of and should of need to exist. Also to be considered a homophone, could of and could've must have different meanings. They can be considered contrived contractions similar to I'll and eye'll (as in my eye'll be on you.) Contrived contractions come out of conversation, which brings us back to, it is a case of how people speak that finds its way into written English.
Yes, this all hinges on could of and should of not " technically existing." if they did "technically exist" it would be a case of mixed-up homophones.
Don't you just love the wackiness of English?
Rob
- TheDukester
- Posts: 3808
- Joined: 20 Jun 2008 13:44
- Location: Operation Enduring Bacon
Re: My skin is not my own...
Jesus wept ... technically, y'all need to get some more poontang into your lives. Soon!
"Anything I write will be remembered and listed in bibliographies on Dune for several hundred years ..." — some delusional halfwit troll.
- Robspierre
- Posts: 2162
- Joined: 19 Feb 2008 10:49
- Location: Cascadia
Re: My skin is not my own...
TheDukester wrote:Jesus wept ... technically, y'all need to get some more poontang into your lives. Soon!
Sadly Duke, I've had to resort to technicalities with some of the 7th graders during my student teaching. Some of them made the antics of lawyers down right saintly!
And no, my sex life is not lacking, thank you very much!
Rob