Page 1 of 1

Would you wear A Still Suit?

PostPosted: Mon Aug 16, 2004 1:42 am
by mrdude
So the Question is, would you wear one? Why, why not?




(hopefully you have read Dune by frank Herbert and know what I am talking about)

Oh and as for my answer, of corse I would, it's just so darn cool! (if this thread actually does anything but collect dust I'll actually talk more about the subject)

PostPosted: Mon Aug 16, 2004 11:21 am
by Darb
A still suit would be horrifically uncomfortable ... just think about how nasty it'd feel wearing a full-body condom, with a catheter up your willie, and a tube up your sphincter, with balloons under your heels to pump fluid. Ugh. Think about having to squat in order to defecate into a sphincter catheter. Ugh. Think of all the problems with clogged pores, skin infections, rashes, body odor, etc. Double Ugh. No, make that quadruple ugh.

So yes, I'd wear one - but only for a short time, and only if my life absolutely depended on it for survival ... otherwise forget about it. Nothing 'cool' about it. Quite the opposite.

PostPosted: Mon Aug 16, 2004 11:34 am
by KiltanneN
I would wear one if I absolutely needed to survive in a place as dry as Arrakis, But I am not so sure such a place exists here on Earth ...

The Arabs managed to survive throughout history in mostly desert areas without them - but it would be interesting to see if a stillsuit could actually improve quality of life in such an area...

kilt

edit: corrected some confusing words

PostPosted: Tue Aug 17, 2004 12:11 am
by bob k. mando
the still suit is an interesting concept ... but i don't remember that herbert ever dealt with the new problem he creates, temperature regulation of the body.

no sweat evaporation = no cooling of the body to speak of + insulation factor of the stillsuit itself means that you would virtually be required to install a refrigeration unit in the stupid things or you'd steam yourself to death in all that water you were recycling.... ooopsie. :smash:

PostPosted: Tue Aug 17, 2004 2:13 pm
by Aunflin
bob k. mando wrote:the still suit is an interesting concept ... but i don't remember that herbert ever dealt with the new problem he creates, temperature regulation of the body.

no sweat evaporation = no cooling of the body to speak of + insulation factor of the stillsuit itself means that you would virtually be required to install a refrigeration unit in the stupid things or you'd steam yourself to death in all that water you were recycling.... ooopsie. :smash:


Hehe. I never thought of it that way, BKM. But you're right. What use is it to remain hydrated if you're gonna boil to death anyway? :roll:

And I agree with Brad, I don't think wearing a still suit would be a comfortable prospect in the least bit. I'd only wear one in the direst of circumstances (such as being transported to a Hellishly dry world such as Arrakis) and only if I didn't get cooked to a nice even tenderness in the process. Otherwise, I would dress like a Bedouin and trust my luck--with an ample supply of water on hand, of course. :)

PostPosted: Tue Aug 17, 2004 2:30 pm
by jweb
I don't recall Herbert ever mentioning heat exchange in the book either. However, remember that deserts are blisteringly hot during the day, but also freezing cold at night. Provided that one could find a way to absorb body and environmental heat during the day into some form of efficient thermal storage within the suit, the stored heat could be used to keep the wearer warm during the night, with any excess bled off into a convenient heat sink (like the rock wall/floor of a cave) while sleeping. I don't know how this would be done, but it seems doable. Considering that we already know how to build palm-size engines that can efficiently convert body heat into usable kinetic energy, the technological advances made by the time of the book could probably handle the rest.

PostPosted: Wed Aug 18, 2004 6:31 pm
by Aunflin
I think it would be more interesting to have the "sand trout" skin (or whatever it was called...?) that Leto acquired in The Children of Dune, though I'd pass on eventually becoming a gigantic god-like sandworm…:roll:

PostPosted: Wed Aug 18, 2004 6:35 pm
by Darb
Yes, it was a touching tragedy to slowly become non-human over several thousand years (as well as the paternal shepherd/gardener of mankind itself), only to eventually fall in love and be unable to consummate. Herbert did a good job with that.

Classic fallen, reborn and transfigured diety motif there too ... classic Joseph Campbell theme.

PostPosted: Wed Aug 18, 2004 7:30 pm
by Aunflin
A tragedy indeed. However, I think it would be much worse to suffer Duncan Idaho's fate: to basically be reborn time and time again...

PostPosted: Wed Aug 18, 2004 7:50 pm
by Darb
How many were there before me ? :hot2:

How did I die ? :hot2:

PostPosted: Wed Sep 22, 2004 12:57 pm
by lhaughlhann
wearing a full-body condom, with a catheter up your willie, and a tube up your sphincter, with balloons under your heels to pump fluid. Ugh.
:clap: Brad

What an interesting concept, i wonder what Frank herbert would've thought if he heard that? Anyway, i think i'd have to agree with you though, although if i were on Arrakis, im sure i'd be able to tolerate it since it would be saving my life somewhat.

Kiltannen is right, about here on earth though, the Arabs seemed to have got it down.

PostPosted: Wed Sep 22, 2004 1:02 pm
by Darb
I'm sure the author would have wanted to bitchslap me for that response, for the audacity of kicking his suspension-of-disbelief squarely in the nads with the steel-tipped boot of stark reality. :lol:

Once again, it's good to have you aboard - this sub-fora has languished a bit, for lack of discussion activity.

It's not for lack of people who's read the books though ... it's mostly been due to a paucity of good questions. :wink:

PostPosted: Sat Feb 26, 2005 12:47 am
by Kenneth
I beleive that I would test one, to see how it would effect your overall proformance. I would go to the largest and dryest desert int eh world and live there for about a moneth or so and see how it works.

PostPosted: Sat Feb 26, 2005 2:10 pm
by KiltanneN
Kenneth wrote:I beleive that I would test one, to see how it would effect your overall proformance.


Good idea - I would suggest doing the same with the type of clothing the Arabic people wear when living their nomadic life - and with both tests starting with a fixed amount of water and staying with that [but do it with some level of supervision - if you die of [theoretical] thirst we would miss your posts at the IBDoF]

PostPosted: Sat Feb 26, 2005 11:11 pm
by Kenneth
lol, fine I will, after I try a gilli suit

PostPosted: Wed Nov 30, 2005 12:34 am
by SciFiEnthusiast
It is interesting to test this in the desert(if it existed), but to answer the orginal question:

NO, there is at this time an abundance of water on the world and no need to worry for its conservation yet.

As to whose fate was worse: Leto II's or Idaho's? You must remember that he was not "reborn time and time again..." as Aunflin stated. Each ghola was a unique identity and had only been reborn once. He was also born in a strange world in which all of his world had changed and his entire society was dead, he was the ultimate alien amongst a land of foreigners. Leto's sacrifice cannot be ignored however--to have an unending life in endless "pearls of awareness". This consciousness is the ultimate torture, that of never being allowed to die or take action. Over time his consciousness would devolve into that of just a passive sentient "pearl" to be lost in the infinity of space perpetually.

Thus, I believe that it is truly Leto II whose sacrifice was greater.

PostPosted: Mon Feb 06, 2006 9:56 pm
by Dragonfly
:wink: Hmmmm.... Wear one or die..... I'd wear one, no matter how uncomfortable. But I would have a hard time drinking my own body fluids over and over again.

PostPosted: Sun Jun 25, 2006 1:20 am
by CodeBlower
Brad wrote:I'm sure the author would have wanted to bitchslap me for that response, for the audacity of kicking his suspension-of-disbelief squarely in the nads with the steel-tipped boot of stark reality. :lol:


Actually, I don't think your "flowery" description :wink: of the stillsuit's construction or working would differ all that much from Herbert's.

I believe he designed the suit to be as uncomfortable as you described -- but worn out of requirement due to the fact that you were trying to survive on a planet with almost no global moisture.

Testing the suit here, on Earth, while an interesting thought, is rather pointless because we have lots of moisture available -- not just globally, but in almost every part of the globe.

When the basis of your economy is water, allowing any moisture to escape would be the equivalent of tossing money to the ground with every step.

Either way, I'd wear it. :)

PostPosted: Sun Jun 25, 2006 6:54 am
by mccormack44
Since I agree with the majority — I would wear one to survive, but only for as long as necessary — my only reason for posting is to add a female voice to what seems to be a male discussion.

Sue

PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2007 12:51 am
by Dr_Toxicophilous
If I was on Arakis of course but they sound damn uncomfortable.

PostPosted: Fri Oct 17, 2008 5:14 pm
by Omphalos
"Feces and urine are processed in the thigh pouches." Sign me up for that! :thumb:

Re:

PostPosted: Sun Sep 26, 2010 3:22 am
by rpschmitz
SciFiEnthusiast wrote:It is interesting to test this in the desert(if it existed), but to answer the orginal question:

NO, there is at this time an abundance of water on the world and no need to worry for its conservation yet.

As to whose fate was worse: Leto II's or Idaho's? You must remember that he was not "reborn time and time again..." as Aunflin stated. Each ghola was a unique identity and had only been reborn once. He was also born in a strange world in which all of his world had changed and his entire society was dead, he was the ultimate alien amongst a land of foreigners. Leto's sacrifice cannot be ignored however--to have an unending life in endless "pearls of awareness". This consciousness is the ultimate torture, that of never being allowed to die or take action. Over time his consciousness would devolve into that of just a passive sentient "pearl" to be lost in the infinity of space perpetually.

Thus, I believe that it is truly Leto II whose sacrifice was greater.



Why was I incorrect?

If you're cloned or "gholam-ed" what's the difference???? :?

It seems like pretty much the same idea to me.

I really LOVE the Dune books....

Re: Re:

PostPosted: Sun Sep 26, 2010 4:24 pm
by Omphalos
rpschmitz wrote:
SciFiEnthusiast wrote:It is interesting to test this in the desert(if it existed), but to answer the orginal question:

NO, there is at this time an abundance of water on the world and no need to worry for its conservation yet.

As to whose fate was worse: Leto II's or Idaho's? You must remember that he was not "reborn time and time again..." as Aunflin stated. Each ghola was a unique identity and had only been reborn once. He was also born in a strange world in which all of his world had changed and his entire society was dead, he was the ultimate alien amongst a land of foreigners. Leto's sacrifice cannot be ignored however--to have an unending life in endless "pearls of awareness". This consciousness is the ultimate torture, that of never being allowed to die or take action. Over time his consciousness would devolve into that of just a passive sentient "pearl" to be lost in the infinity of space perpetually.

Thus, I believe that it is truly Leto II whose sacrifice was greater.



Why was I incorrect?

If you're cloned or "gholam-ed" what's the difference???? :?

It seems like pretty much the same idea to me.

I really LOVE the Dune books....


Clones are duplicates made from genetic material. Gholas are dead flesh repaired and reanimated. As Herbert went on in the books gholas in fact became clones, though they were still called gholas. Both clones and gholas could be awakened to past lives

the pearls of awareness were not sentient.

Re: Would you wear A Still Suit?

PostPosted: Wed Oct 06, 2010 10:38 pm
by rpschmitz
I guess I got a little confused...

...but ghola's and clones still seem like the same thing (different name) to me... :roll:

If you take DNA from a living or dead body and re-grow it to maturity...and your experiment is successfull--what's the difference?

Yes, in Dune, it is the inherent memories in the genes...but if they're still the same genes..whether dead, close to dead, or dying...What's the difference?

BTW

What do you think of Paul of Dune? I just read it a month ago and sorta liked it......?

Re: Would you wear A Still Suit?

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 6:18 pm
by Omphalos
Its been a while since I was by, so sorry for the late reply.

If you read the second book Herbert says that the BT took Idaho's body and fixed a head wound and sent him back. There is more there, but it essentially says that they repaired a dead body and reanimated it. In the later books they are preparing and sending out "serial gholas," which suggests that they are making new bodies from the cells of the originals.

It is all open to argument (of which there is a LOT out there), but the way I read it, that is what is happening. I'll admit you have to read between the lines though.

As for Paul of Dune, absolute trash, IMHO, unworthy of being recycled into toilet paper. But read whatever floats your boat and don't pay attention to people who naysay; Read whatever you like.