Eye: Introduction

[TMA_1]

Hey, a little note to mahdi, if you read the intro to Eye, tell me what you thought about how frank sounded with the info about starwars stealing a lot of Dune info.

Anyways, The intro is one of the more interesting things I have read about frank and his writing in a while. He went on talking about how David Lynch's Dune was amazing, that it was a "translation" of the book, and that in his understanding of film making you cant always make a direct translation, because the mediums of writing and film have different meanings for things. He went on saying that he was hoping that they were going to make a miniseries of the entire uncut 5 hour film of Dune. He said that David Lynch was wonderful but that the "fatcats" that controlled it all were the ones that messed it up. He said that even the cut version though was something he loved. He also went into the fact that starwars made 16 huge copies of Dune, and that the mathematical calculation of it in probabilities equaled a number larger than all the counted stars... That is a rough summary of what he said. He sounded quite annoyed or frustrated at george lucas, or the film I should say for it's copying.

Anyways it is interesting to see that He really loved Dune 1984 version. That though it is different he really liked it, though he had a few issues, like the fact that paul was shown as a god, instead of what he thought should of been shown with paul "playing" a god.

He also listed many of the important parts missing. Anyways it is really interesting to hear. Also, undoubtedly all of the rest of the film is on the cutting room floor so to speak, though it is a fleeting thought, maybe it could all be brought together if enough people voiced for it, as frank said, "just pray for it to happen".

have any of you read it? if so what did you think?

[nemafakei]

It was very informative indeed. Certainly about the film, and notably about how he saw the story as well. So I am pretty much in total agreement with you.

[Inoculator9]

I really should read this, lol ;) It's been sitting around for a month :P

[SpiceGuid]

I agree, the only real offense that Dune-Lynch commited is the movie being too short for such a layered story, but Lynch is not the one to blame for that.

Apart that, Lynch captured the violence and mysticism of the Dune world in a master way that is still unequalled.

About SW and George Lucas, i would say pointing similarities is most likely to confess some jealousy, SW is simply much more popular than Dune. Can you foresee a Dune LEGO theme? No you can't because SW is for kids and Dune is for adults.

Either SW is an original work, or it is an immensely successfull adaptation for kids, both mean SW has great merits on its own.

Moreover there is something that makes a big difference between Dune and SW: Star Wars is rather a manifest of individualism (one vs. all), Dune is rather a manifest of collectivism (one does not count). Such a deep departure from Dune can't be hidden by whatever many small superficial similarities. When it's the other side of the coin, then obviously it's the same coin.

[Egeides]

The similarities aren't only superficial. Before I had ever heard about people saying that SW was greatly inspired from Dune, I had by myself found it curious that that many similarities existed...

The similarities I had personally seen were around the "power-ideas" found in each world, which form the core of the ambiance, the essence of both worlds:

- Swords vs blades (both central to the mythology around the elite)

- Good at its paroxism vs Bad at its paroxism:

Jedis vs Atreides

Darth Vador Inc. vs Harkonnens

- SW empire and council vs empire and Landsrasd

- SW's elite vs Dune's elite: a few worth millions

- Mediclorians vs spice (it's a friend that showed me this one)

- Empire troops vs Sardaukars (I didn't found this one msyelf)

With only this, there was nothing more than some similarities I was curious to know "what brang both authors to the same path", but of course there's more. And when I say more, I do no mean only SW-Dune. SW seams to have invented NOTHING, everything in fact being things that were in scifi classics that came before (Herbert, Azimov, etc.).

So my personal impression is that Lucas highly inspired himself, forging SW from the best of each classic scifi that existed before, trying to make it popular by making it less "for intellectuals": everything with less details, less theoric thinking, puting the effects without showing all the causes, more action/special effects, passing faster on each thing (less details... unlike Lynch's Dune sometimes), etc.

Basically, it's the SAME PROCESS as Matrix, which in fact regrouped alot of things that were written (forming the "power-ideas" that is the core of Matrix) in a popular format (modern stuff like Internet, action...).

[SpiceGuid]

Yes, sword and blades are preferred than guns because they enforce personal value, as well as Roman-like infantry and a myriad of other similarities that set a grandiose ambiance (grandiose music is also an attribute of power).

My point is that ambience is superficial at end.

SW in five words is not swords, infantry, emperor, jedi and music but something more simple "be the force with you", Nike made it even simpler in three words "just do it".

On the contrary Dune is not spice, shields, emperor, sardaukars, worms and KH but something more complex.

The message and audience are undoubtly not the same, as long as similarities affect only the ambience i will consider them as superficial.

Also rearranging well-known elements in a new format for new audience is not invention, yet it is an accomplishment of its own. Bringing something old (democracy is a great example) to the masses implies great effort and insistence.

MATRIX and LOTR are not new ideas either.

However shaping these ideas in a popular format is an important event if not a revolution.

I remember one day i said to a friend:

relativity is not a new idea because E=MC2 is actually the same equation as E=MV2 already found by Newton.

His answer was:

yes, it's the same equation, but relativity is not in the equation.

[TMA_1]

Read mahdi's blurb about the connections in the articles section of Dune2k. It is really informative.

They are indeed pretty substancial. I myself would be kinda upset if I had good reason to see somebody took my intellectual works, the problem is I dont have many works to be guarded of.lol

[Mahdi]

Read mahdi's blurb about the connections in the articles section of Dune2k. It is really informative.

They are indeed pretty substancial. I myself would be kinda upset if I had good reason to see somebody took my intellectual works, the problem is I dont have many works to be guarded of.lol

I wrote a script which, somehow, ended up getting a round of aplause at Canadian Blood Services...

I still don't know how they even got a hold of a copy...

I found out from a friend who heard it from a friend (who might have been the one to hand over a script, although I don't know how he would have gotten a copy of it).

Sometimes I find the world confusing....

Back on topic, I always beelived the most damning peice of evidence that Star Wars is based on Dune is that the studio Lucas submitted it to rejected it like 15 times becasue they were afraid of being sued by Herbert for copyright infringment. Eventually they had to brgn a different writer on to re-write it enough so that they beleived they were safe from legal actions. Although, if the rumours are true, ultimatly the only reason they avoided that was because Frank Herbert, in his own words, "met his fate."

[TMA_1]

thats really intresting, (and weird that a blood center gave a dune related paper a round of applause...lol) Seems that there is more than meets the eye. I think I am going to look into it more myself.

Also I hope that somehow a miracle will happen and that the full uncut version of david lynch's Dune appears...

[Mahdi]

Dune? The script had nothing to do with Dune. Not everythign does, you know ;)

[TMA_1]

wha? Arrakis not real? Paul not an emperor of the known universe? what kind of alternate world are you living in??! ;)

[Duncan_ghola]

anyone read rat race?

[nemafakei]

"relativity is not a new idea because E=MC2 is actually the same equation as E=MV2"

Not quite: E=mc² where the c ALWAYS refers to the speed of light is not the same as KE=½mv². Moreover, you seem to be ignoring the entire question of the introduction of the γ-factor as regards the curvature of space.

Relativity is a whole different way of thinking, at a very different level. Some of Dune does think on a different level. Reducing all of relativity to one flashy quotable equation that makes you seem intelligent is like reducing Dune to Star Wars.

[Mahdi]

wha? Arrakis not real? Paul not an emperor of the known universe? what kind of alternate world are you living in??! ;)

The scary thing is I've met (and been threatened by) people who wouldn't ahve concluded that message with a smiley face....

[TMA_1]

hmm... quite odd.

[SpiceGuid]

"relativity is not a new idea because E=MC2 is actually the same equation as E=MV2"

Not quite: E=mc² where the c ALWAYS refers to the speed of light is not the same as KE=½mv². Moreover, you seem to be ignoring the entire question of the introduction of the ?-factor as regards the curvature of space.

About ignoring curvature of space.

It goes better when saying than not: of course my friend was right, relativity theory is not in the equation, so relativity is a new idea (however illustrated with an old relation between E, M and V).

About E=mc² and E=½mv² relations:

* ½ is a constant (an artifact of the unit system)

* obviously energy, mass and speed are connected the same way in both equations

* c is constant speed, but does that change the applicability? no, that does not change anything when applying the relation, you can still compute one value when you know the other two values.

Relativity is a whole different way of thinking, at a very different level. Some of Dune does think on a different level. Reducing all of relativity to one flashy quotable equation that makes you seem intelligent is like reducing Dune to Star Wars.

Relativity is not identifiable to Newton mechanics (even if relations are similar).

SW and Dune are not identifiable to each other (even if some elements are similar).

That was the theme of my post, but seems like you have read it a bit too fast (or my expression is clumsy).

SW in five words is not swords, infantry, emperor, jedi and music but something more simple "be the force with you", Nike made it even simpler in three words "just do it".

On the contrary Dune is not spice, shields, emperor, sardaukars, worms and KH but something more complex.

Seems clear enough to me. SW is simple glorified individual exploits. Dune is complex politics, history, religion, philosophy, linguistics, psychology, moral, behaviorism and more that embrace both time and space. Hence the comparison with relativity.

[SpiceGuid]

To report the whole story i also said to my friend:

"P=RI² is equally identical to E=mc² and E=½mv²"

Then my friend stopped me:

"Now it goes way too far for me"

Sure he's right (he's always right), nevertheless:

* obviously P implies some "energy"

* obviously R implies some "matter"

* obviously I implies some "move"

If you consider the components from a "quality" point of view rather than a unit-system point of view, the conclusion is straightforward: that can't be coincidence, there is one and only relation between energy, matter and move.

[nemafakei]

Sorry about the offtopic stuff. I'd put ti in another thread, but I'll not be here for long.

"If you consider the components from a "quality" point of view rather than a unit-system point of view, the conclusion is straightforward: that can't be coincidence, there is one and only relation between energy, matter and move."

I followed you before, but now you've lost me.

Why is there need to recourse to the dubiousness of equating reistance with matter?

P= E/t

R= V/I = Et/Q²

I= Q/t

I²R = Q²/t² × Et/Q² = E/t = P

The equation is by definition true anyway: it's not coincidence, and can only be viewed it as such if you ignored what the actual terms meant, which would be taking it out of its context, which defies the point of such quasi-philosophical physics anyway.

Try this one (quantum version of KE) then:

KE=(h²/8ml²)n²