LOST-Theories.com

Good ideas. I haven’t seen the documentary you speak of, nor am I a physics expert, but I have read that what we perceive as solid is in fact not, in somewehat the same manner as what you post.

Of course, I can’t know if it will be true or not, but I like your last comment at the bottom of your theory.

A film called “The Secret” is also of interest along these lines. Of course, it doesn’t really matter if these people are right are wrong about the nature of reality. All that matters is… is all of this good fodder for a story? I tend to think so. (Whether or not LOST turns out to be based on these ideas.)

Seems that documentary describes a universe similar to the Astral Plane and other theories, basically an interactive universal consciousness. All these theories seem to provide is the scientific possibility for the Island to exist so that Lost naysayers can’t complain too vehemently. I believe these theories help us understand the conditions and the ground rules but not the story or conflict, mainly, what is it that Ben’s side does/wants/is working towards.

I usually don’t comment on theories or give them bad ratings but I feel compelled to for this one. I don’t consider myself a physics genius but I am an undergraduate student studying physics and I have done research on the film “What the Bleep Do We Know”. From what I have gathered and from what my professors have told me this film is downright pseudoscience and should recieve no credibility in the science community. But, like Profozone says, if this makes a good story for the show than so be it. But I personally hope that the producers will use a different explanation so that this bogus documentary won’t come off as being actual science, like it has so far.

The entire show is based on psuedo-science, and the mere fact that you’ve discussed it with your professors makes the subject a viable enough element for a work of fiction. They’re only after suspension of disbelief, like the plane crash, like dreams directing people, etc. It’s all pseudo-science.

Thanks for the post JacksEyes. I’ll have to check out that documentary.

I wouldn’t be to quick to dismiss theories along these lines. The following is an article from LiveScience that I read a couple weeks back. It would appear that the act of “watching” and measuring the outcome actually effects the outcome. You can draw your own conclusions folks.

“A quantum enigma has been put to the test once again, but this time physicists have made the experiment smaller than it has ever been.

The classic double-slit experiment tests the behavior of light, electrons, atoms and some molecules as both particle-like and wave-like, a mysterious duality that has intrigued and puzzled scientists for more than a century.

Light or electrons are aimed at a solid plate with two parallel cuts in it, offering two choices: go through the slit on the left or the slit on the right. Subatomic particles will sometimes break the rules and go through both slits, just as a wave would.

The most bizarre aspect of this particle-wave duality is that it depends on how much an observer pays attention. The more carefully the observer measures whether it was the left or right slit, the more the object in question chooses a single slit, just as a particle would.

Now an international team of scientists has exhibited this quantum identity crisis using a single hydrogen molecule as their lab equipment.

In this case, an incoming X-ray beam strikes the hydrogen molecule, thereby liberating the two electrons that typically buzz around the molecule’s two central nuclei. But before these electrons shoot off into the surrounding space, they make a quick pass by one of the nuclei, which act like left and right slits.

The researchers concentrated on the “fast electron” that carried away the majority of the energy. As expected, the fast electron acted sometimes like a wave and sometimes like a particle.

Interestingly, this behavior depended on the other “slow electron,” which interacted very slightly with the fast electron and in so doing played the part of the “observer.”

If the slow electron had little energy, it had trouble measuring the fast electron’s movement. As a consequence, the fast electron went through both slits like a wave. But if the slow electron had more energy, it got a good look at the fast electron, which responded by choosing one slit like a particle.

The results, detailed in the Nov. 9 issue of the journal Science, give some insight into how a future quantum computer might work as it relies on the phenomena of “superposition” and “entanglement” to perform operations on data stored in units called quantum bits.”

http://www.livescience.com/strangenews/071123-double-slit.html

Link to “What the Bleep…” http://www.moviesfoundonline.com/what_thebleepdoweknow.php

I have seen this documentary many times and highly recommend it to anyone interested in the time/space theories. I never thought lost and that movie could be compared. Except for how confusing they both can get.

Hey Mr Prof-

“Is all of this good “fodder” for a story?” lol!… “fodder“?

um…animalfeed? …really?

What… so like, did you… grow up on a farm or something? lol!

(BTW, before everyone gets in an uproar… noooo, I’m not trying to be rude to Mr Ozone… I’m just being… playful… and you have to admit, that is a funny word… well, atleast I think so)

I like it… It’s got pizazz; certainly more interesting than a mundane word like material.

You can talk about ProfOzone’s fodder all you want, just don’t bad mouth his mudder. ;)

LOL!! Funny!! I like you Sham… you get it! And I agree! “Fodder” is better than “Material” - (BORRRR -INGGGG!!!)

And with that said, I’d like to say…

“Way to go, Mr Ozone!…

WAY…

TO…

GO!!”

It is not a documentary in the usual sense. For one thing, it stars Marlee Matlin (Children of a Lesser God, West Wing)

That movie is just a bunch of feel-good, crystal-gazing, new age, harmonic convergence, John Tesh, pseudo-scientific brain mush. To top it off, Marlee Matlin doesn’t even have a nude scene.

yeah, unfortunately WTBDWK is a crock… i thought it was amazing when i first saw it but further research turned up some issues.

apparently, not only were a whole lot of the scientists mis-represented (quoted incorrectly or edited so much that their interviews were unrecogniseable), but one of the “spiritualists”, ramtha i think her name was, is a nutcase who reckons she’s a 75,000 year old spirit-warrior. she has a cult, & the cult was hugely involved in the production & distribution of the movie.

that doesn’t mean it wasn’t a reference for the show or that this theory isn’t valid though.

Scanning for trolls: ……………………….. Area clear!

ShirtLifter? That is a sweet name! hahaha And i like your troll scanner. You should patent it. Then sell me one. For half price.

I can’t sell it, cause as you know I can’t reveal my true identity, I have to stay undercover so that I can defend y’all from the troll threat. Don’t worry its in good hands and you see any trolls you let me know, but I think that them just knowin’ I’m around is keepin ‘em scared.

It was filmed in Portland!…just thought i’d add that haha :]

I own the documentary, actually a longer version called down the rabbit hole…I thought it was pretty cool but you have to remember that it’s quantum physics, which roughly translates to: unprovable stuff that someone made up. I really like the part about observation having the biggest effect on matter, like when they bombarded the sheet with particles, then put a camera to observe the bombardment, and found that the two patterns were distinct in that when an observer was added, the particles stayed where they should be, and when unobserved they randomly pierced the sheet and made a wider pattern. Imagine if everything really was like that, in every place at every time until observed…I don’t have a corrolation to lost but I just liked the fact that you mentioned this movie because it’s one of my favorites…and I used to work at a video store!1!!!!!!1!ONE!!!!1!!!!1

JacksEyes: After reading this post ,there was something I remembered that could possibly be a clue. It is that name “Arntz” This name has actually came up on Lost before. It was when Danielle was taking some of the losties to the Black Rock to get the explosives. It involves the character “Artz”,and Hurley’s mispronunciation of his name.We all know what happened to him! He was blown to pieces. But I do digress,instead of my telling the story. Read about it here. http://lostpedia.com/wiki/Artz. It has the transcript of Hurley & Artz discussing this, it is on the page ,under “Name Confusion” You just may have stumbled onto some signifigant information. +1

Something else I Should mention here is the release date was 14 April 2005(Australia)There is another comment made in the trailer “How far down the Rabbit Hole do you want to go” Sound familiar… http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0399877

The writers have obviously been inspired by so many books and films that this could also be one of them. Collective thoughts changing the reality, telepathy and moving things using your brain were also subjects brought up in Stephen King’s Dark Tower, which has been a huge influence on the writers so far.

So I agree that they are using these tools to create a background that is psychologically more challenging than the actual world and to focus more on free will, fate vs coincidence, faith vs science etc.