Invisible Man Reboot

  • Thread starter new6ton
  • Start date

new6ton

Gold Member
223
5
Tosh. We'll never agree on some global conspiracy by the Illuminati or whoever, I don't even find sci-fi with such motivations that compelling. You can't hide aspects of the world that are amiable to the scientific method!
Here is how it works. The fundamental forces can only be controlled or accessed by consciousness. Since we are just scratching the surface and don't even have a science of consciousness. This is the reason it is not so amiable to the current scientific method. You understand?
 

fresh_42

Mentor
Insights Author
2018 Award
11,764
8,280
Here is how it works. The fundamental forces can only be controlled or accessed by consciousness.
There is no reasonable context within this would be a reasonable statement. I'm quite happy that I can rely on the electromagnetic forces while I'm unconscious.
Since we are just scratching the surface and don't even have a science of consciousness.
Yes, we do. We call it neurology.
This is the reason it is not so amiable to the current scientific method. You understand?
No.

Please stay within the discussion of science fiction. Even in this forum we like to have sources. The difference is only, that it doesn't have to be peer-reviewed. The invisible man is such a source, but consciousness is not covered by it.
 

new6ton

Gold Member
223
5
There is no reasonable context within this would be a reasonable statement. I'm quite happy that I can rely on the electromagnetic forces while I'm unconscious.

Yes, we do. We call it neurology.

No.

Please stay within the discussion of science fiction. Even in this forum we like to have sources. The difference is only, that it doesn't have to be peer-reviewed. The invisible man is such a source, but consciousness is not covered by it.
Source/Reference: Ghost in the Shell 1995 movie. Got this conversation inside from the *.srt file

"336
00:38:11,520 --> 00:38:15,410
...he'd just run down a naked lady wandering
around on the highway.

Which brings us to here.

I've heard Megatech Body's tied pretty closely
to the government...

...and that all the shells
made there are secret.

If a hacker did this,
he had to swim through...

...some of the heaviest protection around.

And that isn't the only problem.

Of course, it doesn't have
an organic brain in its head...

...but we've detected
what looks like a ghost...

...in the auxiliary computer brain.

It isn't unlike
the virtual ghost-line you get...

...when a real ghost is dubbed off.

But it shows none of the data degradation
dubbing would produce.

Well, until we map the barrier perimeter
and dive in there...

...we won't know anything for sure.

(snipped.. conversation contiues)

...and I'm a replicant
made with a cyborg body and computer brain.

Or maybe there never was
a real "me" to begin with.

You've got real brain matter
in that titanium skull of yours.

And you get treated like
a real person, don't you?

There's no person
who's ever seen their own brain.

I believe I exist based only
on what my environment tells me.

Don't you believe in your own ghost?

And what if a computer brain
could generate a ghost...

...and harbor a soul?"

------------------------
Back to reality. Neurology is good. But somehow the neurons are connected to our "ghost". Or true AI who can think like us can only occur if it's connected to a "ghost". The "ghost" science is something that belongs to the future. But we can manipulate our ghost even without understanding the science.

About that movie Ghost in the Shell 1995. What does auxiliary brain mean? and "ghost-line"? (I gave reference :) ) Btw.. this is what made the original cartoon movie so beloved with over 80% Tomato rotten score. This is because people have intuition. In the Scarlett version, there is no mentioned of ghost-line. It's all neurons, and much lower rotten tomato score because people have intuition to feel it's missing someting.
 
Last edited:

new6ton

Gold Member
223
5
I added the missing movie conversation which was deleted which I hit "Post Reply".
 
279
110
It's all neurons, and much lower rotten tomato score because people have intuition to feel it's missing someting.
It was missing something, but I disagree that had anything to do with whatever a "ghost line" is. I think bronsencollins put it best in the their review:

"This money seeking product has been homogenized, pasteurized and sterilized by the Hollywood Lack of Originality Machine for the pickpocketing of the stupid. The end result is a product that is totally Americanized without any Japanese nutritional value but it contains a Japanese mother nonetheless. Acting ability is not a requirement."

No intuition required, you can watch Scarlett make a mishmash of the content because the filmmakers put special effects ahead of plot.

Source/Reference: Ghost in the Shell 1995 movie. Got this conversation inside from the *.srt file
I don't think that's what @fresh_42 meant by source, but even if so, quoting science fiction movie scripts does not automatically make something true.
 

new6ton

Gold Member
223
5
It was missing something, but I disagree that had anything to do with whatever a "ghost line" is. I think bronsencollins put it best in the their review:

"This money seeking product has been homogenized, pasteurized and sterilized by the Hollywood Lack of Originality Machine for the pickpocketing of the stupid. The end result is a product that is totally Americanized without any Japanese nutritional value but it contains a Japanese mother nonetheless. Acting ability is not a requirement."

No intuition required, you can watch Scarlett make a mishmash of the content because the filmmakers put special effects ahead of plot.



I don't think that's what @fresh_42 meant by source, but even if so, quoting science fiction movie scripts does not automatically make something true.
Why is it so hard to believe there is non-physical extension to the brain?
Bohm Implicate Order - Mind
Bohm Explicate Order - Neural network - Brain

What's wrong with the above?

To be on topic.

1. In Hollowman, does anyone think the invisibility drugs made Sebastian (Bacon) crazy? I think he was just driven the edge. His former ex was someone he still adored who was the partner of his colleague, and he was about to be exposed. Others may do the same without drug induced mental illnesses.

2. The Joke about Superman and Wonder Woman and Invisible Man's assess. Was this an original joke in the movie?

3. Spoiler. Do no proceed if someone hasn't seen the movie yet.

What chemicals was that mixed in the test tube that exploded when it was centerfuged. Are there something like these?
 
108
25
In so far as making something invisible, would it not be largely down to perspective?

To us, air is invisible, as we can see through it. To an x-ray machine, flesh is mostly invisible, but bones are not.

Am I right in thinking that the spectrum in which you view things (the Visible Light of the observer) is crucial to this?

EG the mantis shrimp can see in a wider scale than us, they say, due to having much more receptive eyes. to them, air (or water, in their case) might not be invisible, as they can see the heat being radiated from warm patches of it.

Not sure how you'd go the other way - giving a material a diffractive index of air (or whatever medium it is in) to render it invisible. It's like those gel balls in water - they are practically invisible, if they are in water.
 

new6ton

Gold Member
223
5
In so far as making something invisible, would it not be largely down to perspective?

To us, air is invisible, as we can see through it. To an x-ray machine, flesh is mostly invisible, but bones are not.

Am I right in thinking that the spectrum in which you view things (the Visible Light of the observer) is crucial to this?

EG the mantis shrimp can see in a wider scale than us, they say, due to having much more receptive eyes. to them, air (or water, in their case) might not be invisible, as they can see the heat being radiated from warm patches of it.

Not sure how you'd go the other way - giving a material a diffractive index of air (or whatever medium it is in) to render it invisible. It's like those gel balls in water - they are practically invisible, if they are in water.
How about very little mirrors (nano mirrors?) where the light is move around the jacket? Can't this be done? This won't produce invisibility but would make the light rays bend around the object merging it with the background (like grass).
 
279
110
Why is it so hard to believe there is non-physical extension to the brain?
Bohm Implicate Order - Mind
Bohm Explicate Order - Neural network - Brain

What's wrong with the above?
It's perhaps not as off-topic as you might think, as this is conceptually as invisible as the Invisible Man reboot that prompted the whole discussion. :wink:

But more seriously, this is one interpretation of quantum behavior and as far as I'm aware, has not been shown to be the interpretation. Bohm's holomovement, plenum, multidimensional reality, Subtle Nonmanifest, and the rest, is philosophy not science.
 

new6ton

Gold Member
223
5
It's perhaps not as off-topic as you might think, as this is conceptually as invisible as the Invisible Man reboot that prompted the whole discussion. :wink:

But more seriously, this is one interpretation of quantum behavior and as far as I'm aware, has not been shown to be the interpretation. Bohm's holomovement, plenum, multidimensional reality, Subtle Nonmanifest, and the rest, is philosophy not science.
It's not philosophy but simply lack of scientific theory.
To be part of reality. Something has to be

1. Applied consistently
2. Experiments and repetitions
3. Science Theory

We don't have the third only. In China and Taiwan and other countries. We can put non-physical spirit into a person and remove it at will and consistently. Enough to support 1. Applied consistently and 2. Experiments and repetitions. Even Scott Peck who wrote the famous The Road Less Travelled has known it and wrote the book "A Psychiatrist Personal Account of Possession, Exorcism and Redemption". We just don't have the scientific theory, hence it is not philosophy.

The world would advance a century into the future if we can understand the physics of it. And many ailments and mental disorders can be cured. This is because for the neural network out of order there is a corresponding disorder in the non-physical part. Right now we can treat the non-physical part and many millions can benefit from it immediately. But most can't avail of it because scientists discourage the study and even mention of it with their head just looking up and eyes rolling from left and right. Just think that it can benefit your love ones too in the future when they need this. Therefore my appeal to scientists is not to ignore it simply because it is not part of the standard model.

There is hope though. One can go to Michio Kaku and let him be possessed and I think he would share to the entire physics community this thing and it will change everything. Perhaps the last hope.
 

new6ton

Gold Member
223
5
Part II of Hollowman (2006) is good in spite of what the reviews said. Here it was there explained that cell damage can occur when the invisibility serum was taken.

There was a part where the invisible man can be viewed by using green night mode of a normal camera. Supposed the invisibility in the movies was the result of the electrons being kept from transition to excited states by some kind of sci-fi mechanism. Is it not the green night mode is also viewing infrared electronic transition? How about thermal imager, it can view the molecules black body radiation temperature so its the molecules vibrating and not from electronic transition so it should technically 'see' the thermal images like in part I of it and not the green night mode, right?
 
108
25
Looking at the lens system in the above video, it seems clear that the pattern from behind is being stretched from the edges to meet in the centre, cutting out the person in the middle. Every surface behind them has horizontal patterns, and when they move closer you can see the lines turn to a "V" shape. I suspect if the person walked any further to either side, they would appear, stretched and distorted, on the lens.

it's a neat trick, but I struggle to see a practical application for it!
 

DaveC426913

Gold Member
18,320
1,916
it's a neat trick, but I struggle to see a practical application for it!
It doesn't have to be perfect. No form of camouflage is.
All it has to do is lower the visibility of an object to enemy surveillance.

If applied strategically, and in conjunction with other types of stealth tech (for example, if the guy in the video was wearing light grey-blue garb) it would be very effective.

Imagine this on tanks in a battlefield.
 
Last edited:
108
25
It doesn't have to be perfect. No form of camouflage is.
All it has to do is lower the visibility of an object to enemy surveillance.

If applied strategically, and in conjunction with other types of stealth tech (for example, if the guy in the video was wearing light grey-blue garb) it would be very effective.

Imagine this on tanks in a battlefield.

I still think it would be impractical.

the lens would have to be held ahead of the advancing tank. The tank would have to keep it perpendicular to the observer (we have no idea what strange distortion can occur if you don't view it straight-on), and it could only be on one face, as it would simply be distorting the image of the lenses behind it is it wasn't. Also, there would be no way for the tank to shoot!
 

DaveC426913

Gold Member
18,320
1,916
I still think it would be impractical.
What does impractical mean when it comes to a trillion dollar budget and fighting wars?

1] Is this the same government that researched the ability to kill goats with mind powers alone?
2] Any advantage that saves lives and wins battles is worth it.

the lens would have to be held ahead of the advancing tank. The tank would have to keep it perpendicular to the observer (we have no idea what strange distortion can occur if you don't view it straight-on), and it could only be on one face, as it would simply be distorting the image of the lenses behind it is it wasn't. Also, there would be no way for the tank to shoot!
You're thinking a tad bit unimaginatively here.
Just a couple of notes, off the top of my head:
1] Stealth the bulk of a tank, not the barrel. Tanks operate over thousands of yards, not point-blank.
2] You only need confuse the enemy long enough for them to explode before they figure it out.
3] Protection from aerial attack.
etc. etc.
 

new6ton

Gold Member
223
5
What does impractical mean when it comes to a trillion dollar budget and fighting wars?

1] Is this the same government that researched the ability to kill goats with mind powers alone?
About killing goats. I heard of the book but never got to read it. And googling now. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Men_Who_Stare_at_Goats

And I just read now they have a film about it. Has anyone seen it already? It would be a good sci-fi if no one believes a word about this (and would be fun: Imagine that instead of the Jedi able to strangle a person at distant. The americans can stop the heart beat of goats at distant. Has a Jedi able to stop a heartbeat of someone in any of the movies before?.

"A fictionalized feature film version of the book was released in 2009 under the same name. Grant Heslov directed from a script by Peter Straughan.[6] It is set in Iraq, but was filmed in Comerío Street, Bayamón, Puerto Rico and at the New Mexico Military Institute. The story centers on "Bob Wilton" (Ewan McGregor)—the Ronson stand-in—a desperate reporter who stumbles upon the story of a lifetime. He meets "Lyn Cassady" (George Clooney)—a composite character—who claims to be a former secret U.S. military psychic soldier re-activated post-9/11. Jeff Bridges plays "Bill Django"—clearly a version of Jim Channon—the founder of the psychic soldier program and Lyn's mentor. Kevin Spacey plays "Larry Hooper"—a wholly fictional character—who is a former psychic soldier now running a rogue PsyOps unit in Iraq.[7] The film is prefaced with a title card stating "More of this is true than you would believe". The DVD release of The Men Who Stare at Goats includes a bonus documentary featuring Ronson and many of the people who feature prominently in his book.

Coinciding with the release of the feature film in 2009, John Sergeant, the producer of the TV series Crazy Rulers of the World, accused Ronson of "airbrushing him out of the story". While Ronson dedicated his book to Sergeant and included an afterword commending his research and guidance, the feature film did not mention his contributions.[8][9]

2] Any advantage that saves lives and wins battles is worth it.
You're thinking a tad bit unimaginatively here.
Just a couple of notes, off the top of my head:
1] Stealth the bulk of a tank, not the barrel. Tanks operate over thousands of yards, not point-blank.
2] You only need confuse the enemy long enough for them to explode before they figure it out.
3] Protection from aerial attack.
etc. etc.
 

Related Threads for: Invisible Man Reboot

  • Last Post
Replies
2
Views
410
  • Last Post
3
Replies
55
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
3
Views
667
Replies
9
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
972
  • Last Post
Replies
7
Views
926
  • Last Post
Replies
16
Views
4K
Top