Popular Mechanics on the science of Lost

Large Hadron Collider compared to dharma initiative logo

Above right: Large Hadron Collider Left: a Dharma Initiative logo

This Popular Mechanics article on “debunking” the science of Lost does little debunking and much fawning and speculating.

Michio Kaku, author of Physics of the Impossible, thinks the Lost creators are using cutting-edge science to lay the groundwork for a transversible wormhole to another point in space and time—a trip foreshadowed in an off-season video about the so-called Orchid station, which Lindelhof and Cuse promised would be a key to the next few episodes. “They’re amping up the energy to the point where space and time begin to tear, and the fabric begins to rip,” Kaku tells PM. “When the fabric of space and time begin to rip, things that we consider impossible become possible again.”

Full Story: Popular Mechanics (via Daily Grail)

See also: More LOST physics in Popular Mechanics.


  1. “things that we consider impossible become possible again…”

    I agree, I also agree with Dr. Raj Baldev who writes:

    “ … the scientists are fully aware that it is not a project without a grave risk to the life of the Earth.”

    (Dr. Raj Baldev is Director of the Indira Gandhi Center for Atomic Research)


  2. A recent blog sums up the arguments fairly well I think

    [User] wrote:… I can’t even begin to explain why. This is patently ridiculous that someone would be “anti-safety”

    Let me help explain. On another forum I posted the following in response to a safety argument:

    [user] wrote:


    Thus, the currently accepted “safety net“ can be described as having 4 levels:
    (i) the miniholes may fail to appear;
    (ii) the overwhelming majority will leave the earth immediately;
    (iii) all will evaporate;
    (iv) if not, a long period of linear growth – “1 quark per week eaten“ – lets them be
    pussycats since it will take at least a million years before they “eat the earth“ [3,4].

    What if there’s a level (v)?

    The problem is we don’t know the answer to any of the questions above, they are not safety net, they are simply unknowns.

    (i) miniholes may appear at a rate of 1 per second as CERN predicted;
    (ii) one stable mbh could accrete [destroy] the planet, and most multi-proton mbhs might have velocities too slow to escape Earth;
    (iii) evaporation may be a myth as Professor Belinski argues;
    (iv) linear growth may be myth as Dr. Rossler argues;

    Recall the management argument before the last launch of the shuttle Challenger “What risk? 300% safety margin, launch!”


  3. Now everyone is talking about the American economy and eclections, nice to read something different. Eugene

  4. strongzz Thanks for another informative blog. Where else could I get that kind of info written in such an ideal way? I’ve a project that I’m just now working on, and I’ve been on the look out for such info.

Comments are closed.

© 2024 Technoccult

Theme by Anders NorénUp ↑