missing matter

[Vuldari]

I've become a bit more open-minded about the mass issue, but only because I've come to appreciate the idea of the werewolf as a metaphysical concept that doesn't neccessarily conform to physics.

In stories where it's definitely a virus, you've made a commitment to general science. And thus, you're going to have to deal with the consequences.

If, however, you're making it something other than a virus, such as some sort of metaphysical transcendance or Matrix style reality loophole, then physics can step aside. However, if you do this, you're also free of other obligations, such as grace periods between infection and first change (i.e. on a full moon night, getting bit and shifting right away), or the dreadfully painful first transformation--it could instead make you feel, say, warm and fuzzy, or relaxed, like a cup of tea on a cool spring afternoon. Maybe it's relaxing and Zen-like. Or, maybe it's still horribly painful.

I agree with Scott's viewpoint the most.


If you go one route...it is essentially assumed you are trying to follow natural biological tendencies and shooting for a Werewolf that "could really exist". (Or rather...look convincing enough to make you believe that it could).

This, I think, is an awesome goal. I'd love to see someone create a really believeable feelling Werewolf, that is also really cool. (Looks Kick@**, and has full Shapeshifting abilities and enhanced strength/senses.)


Mystical/Supernatural Werewolves, on the other hand, are ignoring science and physics right from the core of thier existance, and so need not conform to ANYTHING. One person could transform into an entire PACK of Clydesdale sized Werewolves, and then combine back into a single scronny human again for all I care, in this instance. The entire POINT of "Magic" is that it ignores the rules of science alltogether.

...but if "MAGIC" is not going to be involved at all, then presenting 12-foot werewolves as biological creations of "Nature" is just absurd. You would then be taking your audience for "Fools".


You really have to make up your mind about it one way or the other, because there really is no middle ground.


"Natural"...or "Magical"* (*Which would also include "SCI-FI", like comic-book mutant superpowers.)

[Lupin]

Larger werewolves are preferable to smaller ones, but only when they can be supported by the plot. Really, it just depends.

Something tells me that if the sun turned into a black hole, we wouldn't worry about freezing, as all of us on Earth would have about 8 minutes to fret before we get sucked in.

Gravitational attraction is dependant on mass and not volume. At 1AU, a 1 solar mass, 6km diameter object exerts the same force as a 1,400,000km diameter, 1 solar mass object.

[Scott Gardener]

You can do "soft magic" versus "hard magic."

Soft magic: these are mostly plausible with the option to fudge. It is based on the idea that magic really exists in our world, but operates in a way that is so subtle that most people don't notice it. (i.e., how Wiccans and other Pagans view the world.) Werewolves would be elusive, hard-to-find, and the like, but would exist none-the-less, and have some unexplainable qualities about them. There could be--and usually will be--some parallels with hard science werewolves, and conservation of mass might apply. The bigger the rule breaks, the harder it is for them to exist, so the fudging will be done sparingly, as existance itself is a big break in the appearant probable continuity of the cosmos.

Hard magic: screw plausibility. Werewolves can become ten feet tall, walk on walls, and shoot lightning out of their paws.

[Vilkacis]

Simply because one decides to go the Magic route rather than the Natural route doesn't mean one has to toss all rules out the window. Often the best stories of those with magic in them are the ones that exchange one set of rules for another, not necessarily entirely different, set.

In the best stories, things make a certain amount of sense, even if you can't grasp it all. There's something going on there, behind the scenes.

In this case, I would say that we're the ones behind the scenes. Right now, in some sense, we're working out the nitty gritty details so that the audience gets something consistent, even if they never see but a small fraction of it.

Back when I worked as phone op, they used to tell us, "The customer can tell if you're smiling over the phone." I think it's the same thing: people will be able to tell the difference, even if they can't put a finger on exactly why.

-- Vilkacis

[Renorei]

I think many of you are underestimating how much emphasis the average person puts on aesthetics.

The people who complain when something doesn't conform to science are a minority, compared to the people who value physical appearances more.

If the Freeborn werewolves look highly realistic, they're going to end up looking like anthro wolves instead of werewolves.

[Vilkacis]

I think many of you are underestimating how much emphasis the average person puts on aesthetics.

The people who complain when something doesn't conform to science are a minority, compared to the people who value physical appearances more.

I think there's a place for both, and everything in between. Aesthetics and plausibility are not necessarily always at odds. When you come to points of dysfunction, I believe they should often be resolved on a case-by-case basis, rather than by any set priority or rule.

I don't deny that we've been a bit too detail-oriented at times when we would be better off focusing on aesthetics rather than realism. In fact, I believe I've pointed out a number of these occasions, myself.

I think we latch on to reality so readily because it's the only solid arbitrator we have. It's a way to say, "This is right; that is wrong." It's is probably not the best approach, but it's certainly the easiest.

I believe the problem is not so much the priority of good looks vs. reality, but rather that sometimes one or the other is used as an excuse not to even consider the benefits that the other might offer. Or worse, as I've seen on a dismaying number occasions, used to disregard someone's opinion out of hand.

In its own way, this is art, folks.

And, I, for one, would like to see more than just one masterpiece, not just my favorite.

-- Vilkacis

[Vuldari]

I think many of you are underestimating how much emphasis the average person puts on aesthetics.

The people who complain when something doesn't conform to science are a minority, compared to the people who value physical appearances more.

If the Freeborn werewolves look highly realistic, they're going to end up looking like anthro wolves instead of werewolves.

Actually, if you are trying to be "realistic" then it is not reasonably possible for a humans body to change to such an extent that it looked like an upright standing wolf, and thus, a "realistic" werewolf would be Incapable of looking like an Anthro-wolf, but would rather look significantly different.




...but overall...I think I'm just really tired and should not be posting after midnight.


I'm contradicting my own viewpoints and preferences all over the place. I'm really not sure WHAT I want, as I really want Every option.


Once again, Scott's words ring more true than my own. "Soft Magic" ...Magic-Like feats ARE possible, but are accomplished by new energies and forces of nature that follow consistant and understandable rules and laws. "Impossible" accomplishments are achieved by harnesing these new frontiers of science and it's elements in ways previoulsly unimagined...

AKA "Sci-Fi". In other words...you CAN pull extra Mass out of thin air...but (true to the laws of science, nature and physics), this would mean that it actually WAS "pulled" from somewhere...

... be it actually abosorbing mass from the air molecules, or from the ground, or by the cells in the body performing some sort of miraculous energy fusion, combining stray proton/nutron/electron radiation particles from the envoronment into new atoms of solid mass...

... or phasing in stray matter from the parralel anti-void that exists all around us, invisable to the world, but constantly effecting, and being affected by the happenings of the world in nearly undetectable "Butterfly Effect" Ways.

...or something.



Heh...even then, its still easier to beleive that Werewolves that increase in mass do it by "MAGIC", rather than Trans-quantum mumbo-jumbo like that.


...or just give it up and accept that NON-Mystical werewolves would be of exactly the same mass in thier tansformed state as they are in Human form. ...because trying to explain such a thing in Sci-fi termanology just gets Silly.



But my mind is just far too inquizitive to EVER just say "Don't explain Anything...Nothing has to make any sense, as long as it's cool."



...no...there Must be ORDER.


IMHO.

[Renorei]

...or just give it up and accept that NON-Mystical werewolves would be of exactly the same mass in thier tansformed state as they are in Human form.

Heh. Never.

...because trying to explain such a thing in Sci-fi termanology just gets Silly.

While trying to find a way to explain mass-increase in sci-fi terms might be silly, I find the notion of a werewolf that increases only slightly in height and doesn't gain any mass to be far sillier...it's like it's not even a werewolf at all. Which is why I'm an advocate of not explaining everything. I'd rather not lose the mysticism by having it all laid out and explained.

But my mind is just far too inquizitive to EVER just say "Don't explain Anything...Nothing has to make any sense, as long as it's cool."



...no...there Must be ORDER.


IMHO.

Maybe I'm just freakishly open-minded when it comes to werewolves and other mystical creatures, but I have never felt this way. True, I may wonder why something is the way it is, but I won't fret over it if I don't get an answer. I'd rather be presented with something awe-inspiring for which there is no answer than be presented with something that leaves a lot to be desired and is perfectly explainable.

And for me, no-mass-increasing, only-a-tiny-bit-of-height-gaining werewolves would be just that...something that leaves a lot to be desired.


But of course, this is all just IMHO. I'm not criticizing anyone's views, I'm just explaining my own, so perhaps people can understand where I'm coming from better.

[Lupin]

But my mind is just far too inquizitive to EVER just say "Don't explain Anything...Nothing has to make any sense, as long as it's cool."



...no...there Must be ORDER.


IMHO.

Peronally I don't really need order, just consistancy. 2+2=5 is fine, just as long as it always equals 5, and doesn't randomly change to being 7 or 8 or 3 or something.

[Renorei]

But my mind is just far too inquizitive to EVER just say "Don't explain Anything...Nothing has to make any sense, as long as it's cool."



...no...there Must be ORDER.


IMHO.

Peronally I don't really need order, just consistancy. 2+2=5 is fine, just as long as it always equals 5, and doesn't randomly change to being 7 or 8 or 3 or something.

If I'm understanding what you're saying correctly, then I agree with you.

[Ratha]

I think that a werewolf has an accelerated metabolism, for injuries, and when not Changing or healing, that metabolism converts food energy into a sort of "super fat" that's lightweight and compact at once. So when a 'wolf Changes, her body accesses that cache of energy, expending it at a rate that is impossible to modern-day physics. This extreme rate would also dissorient and exhaust her momentarily, but also due to the extreme metabolism, she should recover quickly.

When Changing to a smaller form, the 'wolf would instead consume that extra mass and energy to do so, and, being an effecient species, would store any extra.

[Set]

You know...just because something is realistic doesn't mean it has to be ugly. So many of you seem to forget that. It's obnoxious, quite frankly. Your version of beauty may be different from mine, but that DOESN'T make mine any more or less beautiful (pretty, majestic, whatever) than yours.

Ratha: I never liked the "eat until you can eat no more eat some more then shift" thing. It never made sense. What happens to the stuff in your belly that isn't digested yet? A werewolf shifts only their body, nothing else. It's not like you automatically convert what you eat to fat either. It takes time to break down, absorb, and use that food. Most of what you eat, if you eat in excess all at once, will just pass through your system as partially digested waste.

Super hyper metabolisms don't make sense either. I'll use the equine comparison, because it's demonstrated quite well with horses. Thoroughbreds have high metabolosms. It's VERY hard to keep any weight at all on them. And I mean just to get them to not look like a walking skeleton. Animals like that use so much energy they need an extreme amount of calories just to be in decent condition. If they don't get it their muscles deteriorate because their own bodies pretty much "digest" themselves in order to supply what's needed. You can't "turn off" a metabolism. You just can't. Therefore a werewolf using something like what you suggested would quite literally waste away, because it would be next to impossible to get enough to sustain the creature without getting caught.

[white]

Is there any reason that a metabolsim can't be variable? Sure, maybe it hasn't occured in nature yet, but that doesn't necessarily mean anything. Computers don't appear in nature (well, to the extent of our knowledge) and they work well enough.

[Apokryltaros]

It would be possible to metabolically "change gears" through hormonal intervention, like raising the metabolism by having an adrenalin rush, or slowing it down by getting ready to hibernate.
But, things like those are only temporary, and altering your metabolism by doing funny stuff with hormones is extremely taxing on the body, and if you do it too often, or maintain this altered metabolism for too long can either wear out or cause irrepairable harm to the body.
Like the way anabolic steroid users tend to develop cancer from using illegal steroids, or the way male antechinus opposums from Australia go on a month long adrenalin rush during mating season, and die of exhaustion immediately after.

[Lupin]

You can't "turn off" a metabolism. You just can't. Therefore a werewolf using something like what you suggested would quite literally waste away, because it would be next to impossible to get enough to sustain the creature without getting caught.

You can't turn it off, but you can modify it. The human metabolism will change in response to various factors, such as the amount of calories consumed. I read an article somewhere where they semi-starved people for several months. What happned during the starvation period and aftwards. At the beginning of the study, they lost weight, then their metabolism adjust, so the weightloss stopped. After the starvation period ended, their weights shot up, then slowly retrned to the levels before the starvation period.

[Scott Gardener]

Believability relies heavily on continuity. That is, even if the underlying physics isn't explained, the rules are laid out. So, if you're supposed to grow seven feet tall, then you shouldn't be six feet tall in one scene and eight in the next. (Star Trek was bad about this particular example; how big is a Klingon bird of prey?)

[dnl]

I have not read all the post but there tons of stuff in science we could use becouse it not well know how it works (exe. junk DNA)

You could Theoretically not "turn off" But slow down metabolsim...Well hold the train it douse happen in nature.....fish in winter "Frogs, turtles, and other reptiles needn't surface to breathe, though they've developed a unique method of getting oxygen by changing their bodies and shifting to skin respiration. This way, they get enough oxygen through the lining of their mouths and cloacae. "Their metabolism is slowed down so much that if they were feeding, food would rot in their stomachs." Fish, however, continue to feed, though at a much slower rate of ingestion. In fact, winter is considered the prime time for fishing certain species (like perch), because there are fewer grubs in their flesh and stomachs. "They haven't spawned yet, and their meat tends to be firmer," says Mirick, who's also an avid ice fisherman."

The greatish exe of this elephant seal when diving

1.They have the ability to shift their blood flow. They can stop blood flow to areas of the body that may not require it during the dive and preferentially send it to the brain and heart, which are hypoxia-sensitive tissues.blood flow to the kidneys is shut down. lungs collapsed at hundred feet,
2.oxygen from their spleen
3.we dont think there's a limit to their dive.


studies on animals that showed
a slower metabolism doubled their life spans. AUTOIMMUNE THYROIDITIS.

[Renorei]

Believability relies heavily on continuity. That is, even if the underlying physics isn't explained, the rules are laid out. So, if you're supposed to grow seven feet tall, then you shouldn't be six feet tall in one scene and eight in the next. (Star Trek was bad about this particular example; how big is a Klingon bird of prey?)

I agree. Continuity and consistency are very important. As Lupin said, it's ok if 2 + 2 = 5, as long as it always equals 5.

[Ratha]

the metabolism I was talking about does not have to be entirely realistic.
the given and expected mechanics and powers of a werewolf are:
increased strength
ability to Change
regenerative health
savage/brutal/homocidal behavior

that does not mean a 'wolf that only Changes in extreme circumstances, say 3 times a month, can't have a metabolism that their body has modified to fit that criteria. our own bodies do that on a daily basis. if you're a lazy person, your body doesn't need more than 1800 calories a day. If you decide to join a sport for who knows what reason, your body will see an increased expenditure of energy, and compensate with fat. if the increase continues, the brain will tell the body to feel hungrier more of the time to ensure a greater caloric intake.

and i'm not talking about crazy regenerative powers. a greater than normal human metabolism would only warrant a greater than normal human healing.

Human 'Wolf
4x4=16 4x10=40
(who engages in (who, if Pack-concious,
nonlethal and safe activities) receives injuries nearly every day)

GREATER OUTPUT DEMANDS A GREATER INPUT!!

[dnl]

Truthfull it more matters on temp.

[Scott Gardener]

The problem with 2+2=5 is that if 1+1 still equals 2 and 1+1+1+1 still equals four, then there's a way for 4 to equal 5.

[Renorei]

The problem with 2+2=5 is that if 1+1 still equals 2 and 1+1+1+1 still equals four, then there's a way for 4 to equal 5.

I see no problem with that.

[Scott Gardener]

That's all fine and well, but if you can make 4=5, you can make any number equal any other number, thus making any mathematical expression true. It then becomes possible to extrapolate further and make any logical argument true as well. If absolutely nothing is a lie, you run into all kinds of paradoxes. The smallest particles can have infinite mass, and the universe collapses in on itself.

So there.

[Renorei]

That's all fine and well, but if you can make 4=5, you can make any number equal any other number, thus making any mathematical expression true. It then becomes possible to extrapolate further and make any logical argument true as well. If absolutely nothing is a lie, you run into all kinds of paradoxes. The smallest particles can have infinite mass, and the universe collapses in on itself.

So there.

[Set]

...

We really are a forum full of geeks.