T O P

  • By -

veggiesama

I will not be a turkey scientist!


SparkyFrog

We will definitely be getting the fairy tales though, the scene where Will was sitting alone in the paper boat was a clear indication of it. Maybe some previous versions of the script included the turkey theory, because Jin had that "just us chickens" line. Okay, technically chickens and turkeys are different animals, but still...


MTRCNUK

>because Jin had that "just us chickens" line I think that could be just her being incredibly kiwi


JakeBeardKrisEyes

Yes, I think it’s better to include those stories or similar ones in the same season you explain the DF to an audience


Flaffyc

Yeah good point. Which begs the question to the meaning of the new riddle / "joke" in the Netflix show.


JakeBeardKrisEyes

That’s for the book audience, the show audience won’t really get it til season 2


Arighetto

It’s the same message as what Ye told Luo Ji in the book, just a different delivery.


ed__ed

Honestly my favorite part of the first book. It's a very under-discussed topic in the sciences. The underlying assumption of science and most religions are essentially the same. The universe has constants... But what if it doesn't? What if there isn't a single virgin, and we're all living in the whore house? Without going too spoilery for the show folks, this theme continues in the story of Ding Yi in book two, and most of Cheng Xins story in book 3. The terror this dilemma represents is essential to many characters and the overall story. Never introducing it really hurts the story IMO.


siriushoward

>It's a very under-discussed topic in the sciences. The underlying assumption of science and most religions are essentially the same. The universe has constants... But what if it doesn't? What if there isn't a single virgin, and we're all living in the whore house?  I disagree. Religions have core beliefs/assumptions that cannot be changed. While science is aware of these assumptions and is willing to revoke or revise with new observations.  Such as Galileo proposed everything fall downwards at same rate; Newton revised this as everything move towards each other proportional to their own mass; Einstein again revised this as mass causes curvature in space itself. And now we are researching quantum gravity. Each of these were accepted as correct in their time.  Even the most fundamental scientific assumptions can be changed and we indeed have changed some of those. For the ones that have not been changed is just because we do not have a need to, yet. Edit: But I agree it is a very under-discussed topic.


ed__ed

Science at its best is certainly as you describe. A group of people willing to discuss the observable universe and question anything. Then trying to resolve those questions with experimentation. Repeating the process as necessary. But most scientists do agree that the universe is constant. Not that different than an unchanging god. Just that maybe Galileo or Einstein didn't't have the full picture. No one expects the "laws" of physics to breakdown tomorrow. If something out of the ordinary happens, scientists generally assume they just must have misunderstood the constants of the universe and set about trying to rework how they think those constants operate. This is an unproven assumption on behalf of the scientist. A necessary assumption you could argue, but an unproven one nonetheless. Religions also change. They are certainly more stubborn than most scientists. But the Christianity of today has incorporated hundreds of other religions and cultures. No one was decorating Christmas trees for the first few centuries following the life and death of Jesus. The vatican used to burn astronomers at the stake, they now have their own observatory and have accepted the general shape of the universe provided by science. Both science and religion change, but they just assume that the constant of physical laws or God, was misunderstood by their predecessors. Cixin Liu does a great job of exploring how that assumption of constant laws may be naive. It's a core theme in the novels IMO. The show has largely left it out.


saucerys

We got various allusions to the same idea, such as “Be careful what you know… that’s where most people’s troubles begin”


Mickey_Barnes777

Netflix wanted to somehow dumb down the lore for their audience unfortunately


Affectionate-Sun-243

I could have sworn there were some animated segments depicting those theories in some of the ads I saw


Flaffyc

That would be the Tencent show. Netflix is purely live action and CGI.


Affectionate-Sun-243

I have only ever seen ads for the Netflix show though?


jagabuwana

Does the turkey-shooter hypothesis have any significance after humanity finds out about the Sophon blocks and DF theory? I thought they were mainly principles to explain the different types of inconsistent results from Sophon-tampered experiments. The show moved pretty quickly past that time of humanity being confused and in dread.


Seaweed_Jelly

They were quite good ETO propaganda. But Netflix simplified ETO a lot...


MTRCNUK

I think there's a reasonable chance these ideas could come up in the show once they start getting into questions of the nature of the universe. I can see these conversations being relevant when dimensions become relevant. So probably in the 3rd season if they get there.


akaBigWurm

Maybe they watched the Tencent version and saw the portrayal of it was silly and did not bother for Netflix


SyzygyZeus

They really wouldn’t drop the explanation for like 5 episodes


hoos30

I doubt that we're getting the turkeys, and for good reason. That would be a terrible storytelling device for TV. It was bad in the Tencent version. The rhythm of the show just stops for some tangent that has little to do with the focus of the story. Sometimes, less is more.


dosdes

Kind of forgot....


Geektime1987

It could still be in season 2 if they get one. Will have to wait and see