bundt said:
>Sorry, this is long.<
AlaskaSteven replies:
No worries, mate. Always interesting to read whatever others are thinking about LOST, especially if it is in comment and critique of my own pet theory-of-the-moment, and besides, I figure folks can always skip over comments, threads, and particular posters they find “too long” -if there is such a thing- or to be tedious in some other way.

bundt said:
>I think if it moved in time then it didn't move much because the Locke in the coffin was not that much older than he is now.<
AlaskaSteven replies:
An interesting notion ...but if Locke taps into the same secret or is granted the same boon as Richard Alpert then Locke could have been hundreds of real-elapsed-time years old by the moment his body ends dead up in the casket. Such as, for example, if Locke heads back to ancient where-ever, builds a civilization while serving as some sort of ageless high priest to a putative quasi-god-king, and then jumps back to LOST’s time-present to die and his body be laying in the casket. After all, LOCKE: "It's not an island. It's a place where miracles happen."

bundt said:
>I don't know how much you pay attention to details on the show, but I saw waves, concentric circles moving in towards the site where the Island was. So matter was there one minute, gone the next. As far as a tsunami, I'm not sure it would have to be that massive. The Island may be small enough that the waves created by the disappearance and appearance of that amount of matter would get absorbed into the Pacific's standard waves.<
AlaskaSteven replies:
These are very good points. Please do allow, though, the possibility of another interpretation or impression. I did think I glimpsed inward moving concentric circles of a sort of rippling lighter and darker color as seen from the perspective of the helicopter just after the island moved, but the question which immediately popped up in my mind was to wonder whether this was a distortion of light versus of the water. I’ve seen a similar effect when looking through polarized filters at the same time as wearing polarized lenses, especially if the polarizations do not match and one or the other of the polarizers or the object being viewed beyond (or any/all of the elements in that system) are moving relative to the others. Examples: turn a bicycle upside down in strong oblique-angle sunlight and crank the spoked wheel up to a very high RPM then observe while wearing polarized sunglasses; at some speeds and angles the effect of the spinning spoked wheel looks somewhat similar, especially if you interpose a diffraction grating between your polarized-sunglass-wearing eyes and the spinning wheel and then rotate the diffraction grating as the wheel spins. As for the lack of a visably apparent tsunami wave, actually, in very deep water monster tsunami waves do not look like much- it is only when they come ashore their magnitude is immediately obvious ...and yet even so you have a very good point. While most of the Pacific is very deep there are some fairly shallow areas, too, and if the mass of the island was “skimmed” off just below sealevel rather than being removed from the base of the seamont the visible portion sits atop, then it _could_ be physically removed and transplanted somewhere else without this being an event equivalent to a massive and conspicuous seismic catastrophe. The island of Hawaii is the biggest mountain on Earth if measured from the floor of the ocean; bigger than Mt. Everest. Water rushing into such a suddenly-empty cavity would not go unnoticed elsewhere, but if just the very tip of an island rooted in shallows were removed.....

bundt said:
>Really? On this show? We have time travel, smoke monsters, some kind of weird field around the island, teleportation, an Island that can prevent Michael from killing himself, etc. but you don't think moving the Island is likely, despite the fact that they've been saying "move the Island" for several weeks now. And again, how much effort would it take to physically move an island to a different brane? Why is one unlikely, but the other seems doable to you? This is the part I don't get about your thinking. Why would it be easier to move it to another dimension than to move it within the same dimension. Also, there has never been any reference to other dimensions on the show. Time travel and teleportation were both hinted at quite a bit before they were introduced used.<
AlaskaSteven replies:
Well, yes on time travel (which might actually be accomplished via a mechanism of jumping back and forth between different branes which are out of phase relative to each other with respect to date and rate of timelapse) and yes on a smoke monster (or are you actually deliberately advancing a theory of smoke monsters, plural? An interesting thought, if so), and likewise on teleportation but I do not think the island fiddled the probabilities to prevent Michael from killing himself and etc. The fiddling of probabilities to influence outcomes I think is much more likely a function of either an active intelligence with an agenda, such as Jacob (and the Whispers?), a working-out of dharma, or some interaction of the two instead of being a static property of the island per se. Even so, within the context of a science fiction framework, the reason I think it unlikely the island is actually physically picked up and moved through space and then splashed or thunked back down again somewhere else is this mechanism has seemed too conspicuous and discordantly disruptive by contrast with all the subtlety and stealth with which so much else in LOST is accomplished. To me it seems much easier (as a plausible SciFi explanation) and more elegant to move the island to another dimension (or brane) than to move it within the same dimension because such a shift could be accomplished in tidy form by someone simply flipping a switch on a powerful device (as by Ben turning the Dharma Wheel) whereas just about no matter which location an entire island the size of Oahu is moved to, especially if seamont and all, a whole bunch of logical complications could (and probably would) be attendant. It just seems way more simple to me for it to shift planes or branes or dimensions than to be physically carted off elsewhere on the same planet Earth, especially if the whole point is to keep the island secret (and maybe preserve the ecology, too).

But then again, they did have those stupid huge potted plants buried in the sand in some beach scenes, plants with no tattered leaves and of species which Could Not Possibly have been growing in the salty and windy intertidal, so perhaps I am just over-thinking this one.

By the way, the most appealing or elegant reason I’ve noticed so far in support for the island to actually physically be moved from one spot in the ocean to another is someone’s (leo’s? I apologize that I do not remember exactly whose nifty idea this was) suggestion that the Black Rock ended up so far inland because the island apparated in underneath it. I’d be entirely happy to suspend disbelief and be totally wrong about the island not moving physically just in order to see this happen if the reactions of the captain, crew, and captive cargo of slaves at that exact instant and in the aftermath were well and accurately portrayed. This could be epic!

bundt said:
>Ben is a resourceful man and a brilliant seers of possible outcomes. The existence of the passports and money only means that he foresaw a time when he would need to get off the Island and would need an alternate identity. It does not mean that he used them necessarily. If he did leave the Island, he could have been using the submarine, which was a short walk from his house.<
AlaskaSteven replies:
How likely is it that a creature like Ben would have such a wonderful toy and not play with it? Ben, endure long and cramped submarine voyages replete with smelling Friendly Tom’s odorous farts, when he did not have to? The part of me which is kindred to Ben strongly suspects that I’d be playing with my wonderful ability, frequently, and luxuriantly, were I he. Moreover, Ben has identified himself as Jacob’s agent and Jacob appears to have an agenda needing business to be conducted on his behalf by someone who does not completely lose it if a flashlight is turned on. I’ll upgrade my lunch bet to a dinner bet that not only does Ben have all those excellent aliases and stage props ready to hand but that he has been using them, frequently, for a long time. The way Ben handled himself in Tunisia was akin to Lawrence of Arabia after crossing the desert with his boys; such heroes do not step forth fully formed from the void -they develop over time through the tests and trials of actual experience. I’ll bet that was not Ben’s first trip abroad in mufti via his own personal wormhole, or I’ll owe you a friendly dinner.

bundt said:
>The hieroglyphics we don't really know enough about to make the assumption that they have anything to do with wormholes (or even that there *are* wormholes). Recall there were similar hieroglyphics in the timer in the Swan station. Does that mean there was a wormhole there as well? It's possible, but we can't assume anything with as little data as we have. I think it is fair to guess that the hieroglyphics tie many of these things together, but that doesn't mean they all have to do with wormholes, or even with the same things. I mean, the Egyptians used hieroglyphics on their tombs, does that mean all their hieroglyphics are about death?<
AlaskaSteven replies:
Touché! You count coupe with this tap. All good solid points.

bundt said:
>Also, we don't know that there was only one prior culture that inhabited the Island. Maybe there was one that created the smoke monster and the wheel, but another built the statue. Maybe not, but we really don't have enough info yet to make assumptions.<
AlaskaSteven replies:
Hmm, if I suggested somewhere I think there was only one prior culture inhabiting the island then this was accidental and a misrepresentation of my view. It seems probable to me (another way of saying “I assume”) there have been at least thirteen cultures on the island so far, probably more. To wit, those cultures arising from, carried, and embodied by:
-The original builders of the Four-Toed-Foot Statue, makers of the oldest hieroglyphics, and creators of Smokey (who, as bundt astutely observes, may or may not have all been the same folks.... though I suspect they were).
-The Black Rock’s captain, crew, and slave cargo.
-The ageless Richard Alpert and his spooky crew with living bodies.
-The Whispers.
-DHARMA Initiative (polar bears and bunnies included)
-Ben’s Regime, post-DHARMA, after Ben’s ascendancy and with the ruthless and/or hapless new crew members Ben imports (example: Juliette) and mixes with Alpert’s pre-existing crew, some among the latter of whom may have remained incognito out in the jungle rather than becoming New Otherton townies.
-The Hatch mini-culture (Desmond and his predecessor).
-LOSTies at the beach and caverns.
-LOSTIES in the tail section.
-Reunited LOSTie survivors.
-LOSTIES mixed with Widmor’s Minions and assorted mixed Minions roaming about on their lonesome.
-Jacob the bodiless and eternal inside his mysterious movable circle of ash.
-Adam and Eve.
If one is a “lumper” then it is just one island culture which changes over time as different peoples influence it; if one is a “splitter” then there have been all sorts of distinct cultures both large and small on the island.

By the way, how might the writers resolve the potential dilemma (paradox) of both the ageless Richard Alpert and Adam & Eve being present on the island at the same time? My calculations suggest (another way of saying “I assume”) Adam & Eve were on the island long before the LOSTies and long after the Black Rock, but perhaps not before Richard Alpert, ...yet Mr. "Be Here Now" Alpert has given no flicker of indication he recognizes Adam & Eve among the LOSTies.

bundt said:
>Basically, I think you make assumptions based on other assumptions and you tend to deviate from what we actually know.<
Alaska Steven replies:
bundt is too kind. Actually, I think I’d say it more like “You make up outrageously wild speculations based on prior lunatic ravings and tend to deviate heretically from that which we actually know regarding this delightful fantasy world.” Now, this latter description I think fits better! ...This is just me having fun opining idly about a science fiction plotline, nothing serious a’tal in my estimate.

bundt said:
>Recall, in the USA Today thing, the producers graded your theory high for creativity, but low for accuracy.<
Alaska Steven replies:
Actually, having been thusly prompted to go back and check, I find in the record while Lindelof and Cuse did issue grades for creativity versus accuracy on two theories...

Theory: Putting on the dog
Grade: Lindelof, C; Cuse, A-minus for amusement factor, D for accuracy

Theory: Very bad dads
Grade: Cuse, D for accuracy, A for originality; Lindelof, D for accuracy, A-plus-plus for originality

...with regard to my theory they both issued one and the same grade (an A-), outright, with some comments:

Theory: The diabolical experiment
Grade: Cuse and Lindelof, both A-minus

Cuse: "First of all, any theory that contains the words 'a diabolically powerful experiment goes very wrong,' I love. That's the foundation of 100 great science-fiction stories."

Lindelof: "It's a wildly imaginative theory. … This is a great theory because it's time-travel-related and it's saying Aaron is Jacob. … There were people earlier this season who were thinking that Harold Perrineau (Michael) was playing a grown-up version of (son) Walt. People keep going to this place. It's sort of a great Rod Serling Twilight Zone device - a future version of yourself comes back and warns a younger version of yourself not to do something or to do something. But we're not dealing in paradox (on Lost). We really limit ourselves.

"And we like it because it's very character-based. Whereas many of these theories don't even mention any of the characters, this one mentions Abbadon, Jack, Kate, Locke, Aaron and Charlie. It's nice to have the focus on our characters."

Cuse: "The fluidity of space-time is something which is very much on the right track in this theory. Even if some of the specifics are not quite right, there's a lot of free thinking in this theory."

Lindelof: "It's not exactly the most accurate theory in the world. But there is a lot of supporting evidence, a lot of thought. Obviously, this person watches the show very closely."

I'd further offer that their saying "It's not exactly the most accurate theory in the world" is not, at all, the same as their saying "This theory is inaccurate," -especially in combo with an unqualified double A- when they _did_ break out separate grades of high creativity and low accuracy on two other theories. Every single detail in my theory offering could be completely accurate except for one 'lil tidbit and "It's not exactly the most accurate theory in the world" would still truthfully fit if they wanted to dress their statement in some camouflage. For the record, though, I totally doubt I've nearly nailed it, especially since they also noted something very special about the Dharma Chameleon theory.

bundt said:
>You are not required to be accurate, of course, and you are welcome to your own theories, but if you post them here, I may have to challenge them occasionally.<
AlaskaSteven replies:
Excellent! Thanks for this; I enjoy the discussion when there is an idle moment for such. My experience is we grow not when we are always accurate but when we discover our inaccuracies. That is, if I am always accurate then how boring would that be? Discovery and the growth of learning stem as much or more from exercising imagination in divergent thinking ...and so risking an increased vulnerability to error. Who learns to be a chess master by winning every move? It is the losses which teach. Tossing up ideas and seeing them shot down by insightful others pointing out overlooked or misinterpreted facts is all sorts of fun, as long as one does not become ego-involved with being “right” equaling being in some way better. I just hope if someone finds they are annoyed by my imagination leaping about like a bunnyrabbit being chased by Victor then they will simply skip over my posts rather than choosing to read them (and in so doing allowing themselves to become irked by a different style of thinking or way of being).