Author Topic: EP276: On a Blade of Grass  (Read 37258 times)

Scattercat

  • Caution:
  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 4904
  • Amateur wordsmith
    • Mirrorshards
Reply #75 on: February 07, 2011, 01:33:35 AM
@Umbrage

That would have been a cool story.  Unfortunately, all we have right here is the bare idea that could lead to that story. 

It's a good idea. 

I don't think it got the treatment it deserved. 

I agree with what someone said above, that this felt like Mr. Pratt read about Toxoplasmosis, went, "Woah, cool!" and did this up really quickly, like a treatment.  I've read stories of his where he did really think about things and came up with all kinds of awesome implications and subtleties, so I know he could have done more with this.  Which is why I, personally, was disappointed; I get all excited when I see that name but sometimes it just kind of... well, does what this story did.



Kanasta

  • Peltast
  • ***
  • Posts: 81
Reply #76 on: February 07, 2011, 02:43:55 AM
I like the Forehead Aliens explanation.
Or, the parasites and the Phages are knowingly symbiotic. The parasites are nearly immortal and the Phages are Galactic Gourmets. In return for regular tasty snacks, the Phages allow the parasites to breed in their gut.



yicheng

  • Matross
  • ****
  • Posts: 221
Reply #77 on: February 07, 2011, 06:03:50 PM
I enjoyed the story, but it felt a bit gimmicky.  The OMG-moment that goes with "the human race is just a vehicle to spread XYZ", where XYZ is religion, memes, culture, parasites, etc... has been stated before, and as such it didn't really resonate with me.  Basically it came down to: if it isn't true, then it doesn't really mean much, and if it is true, there's nothing we can really do about it.  Either way, it's not provable.  So, meh....



Unblinking

  • Sir Postsalot
  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 8729
    • Diabolical Plots
Reply #78 on: February 07, 2011, 06:57:12 PM
(snip)
Oh, and any parasite with enough distribution through our population to effect the growth of civilization wouldn't cause deaths or extremes of behavior or whatever as Scattercat suggested is silly.  If we are that highly infected, how would we see it as extreme.  It would just be that normal was much less adventurous than the human average appears to be.  Maybe extremes would have cropped up in Mesopotamia or a cave somewhere, but certainly not noticeable today.  And likely such a drive would have been helpful to humans too (societally if not geneticall), right up to the point where we got eaten by aliens.

Sure, it is a simpler to assume humans evolved that drive on our own.  But maybe parasites made it stronger.  Or maybe this makes a better story.  I don't know that I'd have given this guy funding if I were on the NSF board, but I don't have the problems with the story a lot of you guys seem to.

I don't think that Scattercat is saying "the human drive to explore cannot possibly be caused by viruses", only that "there's no reason in this story or otherwise for us to consider that a likely conclusion".  The parasitologist's argument is mostly based on his assumption that exploration is not evolutionarily advantageous, which as Scattercat pointed out is a faulty assumption.  Basing the rest of his reasoning on a false assumption means that all of the rest is questionable.  Exploration may be dangerous to an individual, but is generally not dangerous to our existence as a species.  When proto-humans were isolated to a small geographic region it makes sense to explore and spread out to ensure that population growth doesn't deplete local resources, more resources per capita means that more breeding can occur, thus strengthening our evolutionary thread.

Also, I wouldn't say that desire for exploration is even a species-wide trait.  It's more of a random individual trait.  Me, I'm quite risk-averse.  Sure, I have done some traveling but I generally travel to places that I already know about and can ascertain to be relatively safe for me to travel to.  I don't have any major desire to explore space, and if I lived in times where there were some major undiscovered land frontier I'm certain that I'd be quite happy to let someone explore it first and perhaps I'd visit later when things were more settled.  And that mix of personalities may be part of our evolutionary advantage as well--if EVERYONE wants to go find new places all the time, then we wouldn't have permanent cities which also have an evolutionary advantage of giving more solid stronghold against weather and other dangers.  But with the added safety of cities tends to come crime and disease, so the parasitologist could just as easily argue that our desire to stay in one place was caused by a virus (which would be likewise based only on conjecture and no actual scientific reasoning).



Wilson Fowlie

  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1475
    • The Maple Leaf Singers
Reply #79 on: February 08, 2011, 07:45:49 PM
Also, I wouldn't say that desire for exploration is even a species-wide trait.  It's more of a random individual trait.  Me, I'm quite risk-averse.  Sure, I have done some traveling but I generally travel to places that I already know about and can ascertain to be relatively safe for me to travel to.  I don't have any major desire to explore space, and if I lived in times where there were some major undiscovered land frontier I'm certain that I'd be quite happy to let someone explore it first and perhaps I'd visit later when things were more settled.

You, apparently, have not been infected with the parasite.

"People commonly use the word 'procrastination' to describe what they do on the Internet. It seems to me too mild to describe what's happening as merely not-doing-work. We don't call it procrastination when someone gets drunk instead of working." - Paul Graham


Scattercat

  • Caution:
  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 4904
  • Amateur wordsmith
    • Mirrorshards
Reply #80 on: February 09, 2011, 12:17:23 AM
You, apparently, have not been infected with the parasite.

I am the parasite.



CryptoMe

  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1146
Reply #81 on: February 15, 2011, 07:55:14 AM
I think the point of making humans explore was to get it into some other animal's gut. The example in the story was exactly that, an example of this in action.

And the reason that makes no sense is that we haven't had enough interaction with extraterrestrials for parasites to evolve to use both of our species as transmission vectors, hence my dismissal of the crazy parasitologist's hypothesis.

I kind of envisioned the human race as being analogous not to ants, but rather to *one infected ant*. So, the alien parasite didn't evolve to use humans as a transmission vector any more than that other parasite evolved to use one specific ant as a transmission vector. Instead, there are millions (billions?) of planets that have been infected with the alien parasites, which have evolved to use whatever native species is available to get back into space and complete their life cycle.

That's the way I understood it, anyway.



Scattercat

  • Caution:
  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 4904
  • Amateur wordsmith
    • Mirrorshards
Reply #82 on: February 15, 2011, 10:27:01 AM
Um... that's not how evolution works.  You can't evolve the ability to adapt to *anything*.  (If you know how, please let us know.  I suspect it involves waterbears.)



eytanz

  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 6109
Reply #83 on: February 15, 2011, 10:41:10 AM
Um... that's not how evolution works.  You can't evolve the ability to adapt to *anything*.  (If you know how, please let us know.  I suspect it involves waterbears.)

Not entirely true - the parasites could have evolved to have a short breeding cycle, and have a biochemistry that encourages mutation (maybe instead of DNA their genetic information is coded on something very volatile). In other words, they could have evolved to encourage mutation, which would mean that future generations would adapt faster.

However, that's not compatible with the fact that the parasites in this story were very clearly playing a very long game - if they mutate beyond recognition before their hosts get eaten by aliens, that's no good.

Possibly the parasites are themselves not one organism but two - a symbiosys between the actual parasite, which is very genetically stable and has a life cycle that takes millions of years and involves being seeded on planets, encouraging space exploration, and getting re-eaten - and a intermediate host which is prone to mutations and adapts very quickly to its environment.



Umbrageofsnow

  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 754
  • Commenting by the seat of my pants.
Reply #84 on: February 15, 2011, 04:29:39 PM
Not entirely true - the parasites could have evolved to have a short breeding cycle, and have a biochemistry that encourages mutation (maybe instead of DNA their genetic information is coded on something very volatile).

Two hosts idea is neat.  SF writers love going to this "more versatile than DNA" well, almost as much as the triple helix (whatever the hell that would mean, molecularly).  But not only would DNA make it easier to interact with life on Earth (assuming seeding here), but you can have a much less stable genome while still being DNA based.  This is how bacteria have a less stable genome than chimps, for example:

Use a more error-prone DNA Polymerase.  It's that simple.



Scattercat

  • Caution:
  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 4904
  • Amateur wordsmith
    • Mirrorshards
Reply #85 on: February 15, 2011, 05:26:37 PM
I think any molecule unstable enough to adapt to conditions on any given world featuring life of some kind would be too unstable to actually manage to pass on meaningful information from one generation to the next.

Could make for an interesting story idea, though.



ElectricPaladin

  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1005
  • Holy Robot
    • Burning Zeppelin Experience
Reply #86 on: February 15, 2011, 05:41:20 PM
I think any molecule unstable enough to adapt to conditions on any given world featuring life of some kind would be too unstable to actually manage to pass on meaningful information from one generation to the next.

Could make for an interesting story idea, though.

In some ways, it wouldn't be about the adaptability of the molecule and more about the durability of the creature. Given enough time - and a form tough enough to survive whatever - DNA will eventually adapt to fill any available niche. Look around you: that's pretty much what happened here.

I mean, in case you didn't notice, Earth isn't exactly friendly to life. We drink liquid so caustic it can eventually degrade metal and stone and breathe an atmosphere that is similarly caustic (not to mention incredibly volatile). We walk around absorbing tons of radiation from the sky. In order to survive this, we have evolved bodies so tough that we regularly consume other creature's waste matter and defensive toxins for fun.

I don't think you need to improve the adaptability of DNA at all.

Captain of the Burning Zeppelin Experience.

Help my kids get the educational supplies they need at my Donor's Choose page.


Scattercat

  • Caution:
  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 4904
  • Amateur wordsmith
    • Mirrorshards
Reply #87 on: February 15, 2011, 11:07:47 PM
But the positing statement was the idea that the parasite in question seeded itself on millions of worlds in order to drive those species to space so they could be eaten.  The diversity of life notwithstanding, I don't think you could lump all life on Earth into one single grouping other than "life on Earth."  For all the DNA out there, there's a lot we don't have in common with, for instance, anemones or bats.  For one species to be able to adapt to an infinite variety of worlds would require some pretty amazing adaptability traits, enough so that I don't see where it would end up behaving in similar ways at all.



Wilson Fowlie

  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1475
    • The Maple Leaf Singers
Reply #88 on: February 16, 2011, 11:05:52 PM
For all the DNA out there, there's a lot we don't have in common with, for instance, anemones or bats.  For one species to be able to adapt to an infinite variety of worlds would require some pretty amazing adaptability traits, enough so that I don't see where it would end up behaving in similar ways at all.

Humans don't share a lot of physical characteristics with anemones (in comparison, we share tons with bats!), or, say nematodes.  However, out of the approximately 20,100 protein-coding genes that the nematode species Caenorhabditis elegans has, humans share approximately 7000*, which is a pretty significant proportion.  The proportion of shared genes with bacteria or plants is smaller yet, but still, I believe, detectably large.

If an off-world parasite could adapt to DNA at all (which is where I think the sticking point of this story is), I think it could adapt to pretty much any "life on Earth."



*I think.  I'm not entirely certain I'm reading my sources correctly.  I do know that I've heard that it's a significant proportion of shared genes.

"People commonly use the word 'procrastination' to describe what they do on the Internet. It seems to me too mild to describe what's happening as merely not-doing-work. We don't call it procrastination when someone gets drunk instead of working." - Paul Graham


Scattercat

  • Caution:
  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 4904
  • Amateur wordsmith
    • Mirrorshards
Reply #89 on: February 17, 2011, 08:49:43 PM
If an off-world parasite could adapt to DNA at all (which is where I think the sticking point of this story is), I think it could adapt to pretty much any "life on Earth."

That was my point, though.  We have all this DNA in common with these really weird local lifeforms, and we sure as hell can't do most of the things they can do, and in many cases we can't even eat each other.  A parasite from another planet would have a hard time adapting to life on Earth, let alone be able to adapt to *any* ecosystem based on *any* mode of life using *any* available molecules.



CryptoMe

  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1146
Reply #90 on: February 18, 2011, 07:31:49 PM
A parasite from another planet would have a hard time adapting to life on Earth, let alone be able to adapt to *any* ecosystem based on *any* mode of life using *any* available molecules.

What if it's a universe where panspermia predominates?

Honestly though, I don't think we can say definitively what alien life can and cannot do. There are plenty of very strange critters here on Earth that thrive in "inhospitable" environments, survive the vacuum of space, etc. Who knows what else could evolve.... 



Balu

  • Guest
Reply #91 on: February 20, 2011, 12:35:23 AM
A parasite from another planet would have a hard time adapting to life on Earth, let alone be able to adapt to *any* ecosystem based on *any* mode of life using *any* available molecules.

Yep, the universe is a hard old place. That's why that vast majority of species and ecosystems which the virus can't grab a hold of aren't going anywhere. All they're doing is waiting until the niche they're holed up in is wiped out. It's only the rare ones that are driven by this wild hare that spread across the universe.

To put it simply, the virus is omnipresent because it gives its hosts such an evolutionary edge.



tinygaia

  • Peltast
  • ***
  • Posts: 81
Reply #92 on: March 12, 2011, 01:56:24 AM
Found this comic today that reminded me of this story/thread:
http://theoatmeal.com/comics/captain_higgins

The Oatmeal has some funny stuff. Some very wrong stuff as well. But mostly funny.



LaShawn

  • Lochage
  • *****
  • Posts: 550
  • Writer Mommies Rule!
    • The Cafe in the Woods
Reply #93 on: March 17, 2011, 07:24:46 PM
I'm a huge Tim Pratt fan, so you have to believe me when I say this one bored me. Maybe it's because I just got off the phone with my uncle-in-law, who's one of those who fully believe Obama is a Muslim spy. All I heard was a guy going off on a drunken rant. I love Pratt's stories, but this one fell flat on me. Oh well...can't win them all.

--
Visit LaShawn at The Cafe in the Woods:
http://tbonecafe.wordpress.com
Another writer's antiblog: In Touch With Yours Truly


FNH

  • Matross
  • ****
  • Posts: 309
  • F Napoleon H
    • Black Dog Of Doom
Reply #94 on: March 19, 2011, 01:01:56 PM
A good story, I give it a thumbs up.  :)


iamafish

  • Matross
  • ****
  • Posts: 261
    • Thoughts from a Fish Bowl
Reply #95 on: August 08, 2011, 10:22:52 AM
Today's SMBC uses the exact same premise of this story to take the piss out of Astrophysicists

http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&id=2331#comic


Gamercow

  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 654
Reply #96 on: August 08, 2011, 08:52:32 PM
Today's SMBC uses the exact same premise of this story to take the piss out of Astrophysicists

http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&id=2331#comic

I tweeted Zach this morning, directing him to the story link.

The cow says "Mooooooooo"


childoftyranny

  • Matross
  • ****
  • Posts: 175
Reply #97 on: August 08, 2011, 10:34:40 PM
  A parasite from another planet would have a hard time adapting to life on Earth, let alone be able to adapt to *any* ecosystem based on *any* mode of life using *any* available molecules.

Reading through this conversation made me think of what might be the most volatile "creature" on Earth, the virus family that form Influenza. They essentially swarm across our planet on a yearly basis different versions taking precidence and co-existing and fighting one another for supremacy. Every year we meet a different virus, they share certain characteristics and we can identify if this is a virus of the 5b or 2a family but we're pretty much lucky when we predict the right virus for our vaccine.

A parasite, more complex, that can adapt to any planet and species is certainly a pretty far stretch, but considering the million or billion year old virus of influenza I think there is room for doubt. One concept I've toyed with is a parasite that functions in the way that a retrovirus does. It is only a small piece of DNA which writes itself into hosts and creates new versions of each species in which they are now one of the parasites and spread it through mating and such. Certainly not whats being implied in this story, but a concept I'm fairly fond of.



Wilson Fowlie

  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1475
    • The Maple Leaf Singers
Reply #98 on: August 09, 2011, 04:12:11 PM
Today's SMBC uses the exact same premise of this story to take the piss out of Astrophysicists

http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&id=2331#comic

I tweeted Zach this morning, directing him to the story link.

Oh, cool. I hoped someone would. I considered it, then didn't get to it.

"People commonly use the word 'procrastination' to describe what they do on the Internet. It seems to me too mild to describe what's happening as merely not-doing-work. We don't call it procrastination when someone gets drunk instead of working." - Paul Graham


luka datas

  • Guest
Reply #99 on: December 16, 2012, 08:32:44 AM
i've been quoting facts from this out the yazoo. hope there's some truth to them. ;D