Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

OK, am I right in thinking that in the fluff, Space Marines become Chaos Marines, mutate and grow stronger?

If that's so, it doesn't make sense... Biologically, mutations are largely random and due to the 2nd law of thermodynamics, useless mutations have a higher entropy than beneficial mutations. This means that statistically a marine is likely to become weaker, much like exposure to radiation normally gives you cancer, rather than super-powers.

The gods have plans for them, so why would they try to harm them? (They do, of course, but these are represented by chaos spawn) They aren't genetic mutations, per se. They're just physical mutations, afaik.

I agree with you though. Spawn and enhanced warriors are the best examples of 'bad' mutations, although in actuality, most marines who 'warp' probably suffer some handicap, or die altogether. The former isn't a mutation, the more I think about it.

not all Chaos marines mutate though. And , in the case of Iron Warriors, mutations are often amputated and replaced with cybernetics.

Fair enough.

I just find that, being a biologist ruins a lot of all the fluff for me, because of the physical impossibilities that exist. This makes it (for example) impossible for me to watch vampire or zombie films without thinking, "this is bs".

The Iron Warriors thing makes sense, removing it as though you would a tumour.

"Mutation" is probably the wrong word in this case. "Metamorphosis" would be a better term. That's the case in a lot of fiction, though. When you talk about mutation in a comic book or sci-fi novel, it usually bears little resemblance to the real-world phenomenon.

smithy12262 wrote:OK, am I right in thinking that in the fluff, Space Marines become Chaos Marines, mutate and grow stronger?

If that's so, it doesn't make sense... Biologically, mutations are largely random and due to the 2nd law of thermodynamics, useless mutations have a higher entropy than beneficial mutations. This means that statistically a marine is likely to become weaker, much like exposure to radiation normally gives you cancer, rather than super-powers.

A- Mutation is not linked to the 2nd law of thermodynamics (ironically the 2nd law is often sited by creationist to disprove Darwin and evolution)
B - This is science fantasy, not science. Chaos mutations are not classic biological mutation, they are caused by the warp. Chaos space marines are the chosen of the Chaos gods and it is the gods that give the gift of mutation. But not all mutations are benoficial, spawn are a good example.

Chaos doesn't fallow the laws of nature, and certain mutations are deliberately placed on the marines.

I agree with whats been said before. Chaos does not seem to be bound by physical laws. Regardless of whether or not the mechanism behind chaos marines getting mutations is biologically based, it seems evident that the chaos gods are guiding the mutation.

the chaos gods give these gifts to protect not to get them killed the skin is as tough as the armour.

I think the guys are on the right track here, it is not the case that these mutations are as a result of some genetic modification caused by natural factors, the chaos gods simply say 'well done old chap! have an extra head!' and voila! because they are gods, it works!

*grabs smithy12262 by the collar*
*slap*stop*slap*letting*slap*reality*slap*ruin*slap*fluff!*slap*

Fine!! You can all ruin my reasonable science with the good old God(s, and Chaos ones at that) did it, argument!
No wonder it's called fluff, it's vague and well, fluffy.

smithy12262 wrote:
A- Mutation is not linked to the 2nd law of thermodynamics (ironically the 2nd law is often sited by creationist to disprove Darwin and evolution)

I'd argue the opposite, 2nd law is about the trend of entropy, things going from ordered (less entropy) to disordered (more entropy). Something functional, like an eye is extremely well ordered and a mutation (being random) will most likely make it less ordered and well designed and more likely make you blind. But yeah, the creationist irony does amuse It's not random, there's a driving force called selection pressure! *head explodes*

@ Legien_Zero

Oww..Oww..Oww..Oww..Oww.Oww.

smithy12262 wrote:

smithy12262 wrote:
A- Mutation is not linked to the 2nd law of thermodynamics (ironically the 2nd law is often sited by creationist to disprove Darwin and evolution)

I'd argue the opposite, 2nd law is about the trend of entropy, things going from ordered (less entropy) to disordered (more entropy). Something functional, like an eye is extremely well ordered and a mutation (being random) will most likely make it less ordered and well designed and more likely make you blind. But yeah, the creationist irony does amuse It's not random, there's a driving force called selection pressure! *head explodes*

This is a misunderstanding of mutation, the eye (in all its forms) was created by mutation, with a useful mutation passed on as the bearer is able to have more offspring. The eye is not a single unit, it is not ordered or designed. A mutation does not cause something to be less ordered it just makes it different, entropy is about energy not genetics.

Well, to state this, "mutation" barely have a single thing to do with science, though I'm sure almost anything is related to science...

Tzeentch would be the Chaos God who hands out his beautiful mutations like candy. Basically, the warp bends and twists reality, to the point where the laws of science do not apply, and Daemons and their respective Gods give a big middle finger to every single thing that we believe is right, while turning it upside down, and vomiting it into space.

That being said, Chaos Mutations are given to a worthy subject as a "gift" from the God. In all essence, the God invests a tiny fraction of his energy into giving one of his followers some oddball ability or mutant arm/limb.

BluntmanDC wrote:
This is a misunderstanding of mutation, the eye (in all its forms) was created by mutation, with a useful mutation passed on as the bearer is able to have more offspring. The eye is not a single unit, it is not ordered or designed. A mutation does not cause something to be less ordered it just makes it different, entropy is about energy not genetics.

With all due respect, I don't think you understood my point, I don't mean to patronise; it's just I have a degree in this.
The vast majority of mutations are deleterous, with a tiny fraction being beneficial as you stated. But selection pressure has made those which exhibit as useful function continue, and while some mutations will improve it, 99.9999% will remove/reduce it's effectiveness by changing it's structure, which is not so much designed as chosen.

And yes, while I understand entropy is based on energy, it then has connotations for life and evolution. If you wish to argue this point, first go on to iplayer, and watch episode 3 of that science series with Prof. Brian Cox.

Even the mutation time doesn't make sense. these mutations happen withon seconds, so where does the mass come from so suddenly? There's no way to grow something that fast.

The second law of thermodynamics only applies in closed systems of energy. Even within the earth's ecosystem the sun provides an unlimited amount of energy being pumped into the system - ie the second law of thermodynamics cannot be applied to biology.


Edit: Spelling.

Mr Nobody wrote:Even the mutation time doesn't make sense. these mutations happen withon seconds, so where does the mass come from so suddenly? There's no way to grow something that fast.

That's my problem with this kinda thing, the Resident Evil series especially, although in this case I daresay the fluffers will go with the "warp time isn't real time".


Lime: You are right of course, which is why the argument isn't without assumptions. However, you can use thermodynamics for Biology, but you have to be careful. Again, I'd recommend that program, but you can't watch bbc iplayer outside the UK, can you?

smithy12262 wrote:

BluntmanDC wrote:
This is a misunderstanding of mutation, the eye (in all its forms) was created by mutation, with a useful mutation passed on as the bearer is able to have more offspring. The eye is not a single unit, it is not ordered or designed. A mutation does not cause something to be less ordered it just makes it different, entropy is about energy not genetics.

With all due respect, I don't think you understood my point, I don't mean to patronise; it's just I have a degree in this.
The vast majority of mutations are deleterous, with a tiny fraction being beneficial as you stated. But selection pressure has made those which exhibit as useful function continue, and while some mutations will improve it, 99.9999% will remove/reduce it's effectiveness by changing it's structure, which is not so much designed as chosen.

And yes, while I understand entropy is based on energy, it then has connotations for life and evolution. If you wish to argue this point, first go on to iplayer, and watch episode 3 of that science series with Prof. Brian Cox.

Also no offence but i have a degree in chemistry, entropy is based on closed systems with energy. It has nothing to do with evolution or mutation, especially as Earth is not a closed system.

A mutation in a genetic code does not decrease its effectiveness, it still works, it may reduce the effectiveness of the biological system it is in. A piece of genetic code that mutates into a cancer causing code is actually more 'effective' as it reproduces more of itself. also which science series with Prof. Brian Cox are you on about he has had a few (all very good).

BluntmanDC wrote:
Also no offence but i have a degree in chemistry, entropy is based on closed systems with energy. It has nothing to do with evolution or mutation, especially as Earth is not a closed system.

A mutation in a genetic code does not decrease its effectiveness, it still works, it may reduce the effectiveness of the biological system it is in. A piece of genetic code that mutates into a cancer causing code is actually more 'effective' as it reproduces more of itself. also which science series with Prof. Brian Cox are you on about he has had a few (all very good).

The latest series, it's on iplayer now. Have a look, well worth watching. Quite possible that my chemistry is flawed, but it is based on what he said, in the last 5 minutes of the 3rd programme.

Depending on which gene is mutated and indeed how the protein structures are changed, it is quite possible that the structure completely fails in it's process. But I must insist that your cancer argument is wrong, because if said cancer grew over the nerves or blood vessels, it could then block them. There are a series of complicated regulatory processes which stops cells from getting carried away, with cancer being the definition of the lack of regulation.

smithy12262 wrote:

BluntmanDC wrote:
Also no offence but i have a degree in chemistry, entropy is based on closed systems with energy. It has nothing to do with evolution or mutation, especially as Earth is not a closed system.

A mutation in a genetic code does not decrease its effectiveness, it still works, it may reduce the effectiveness of the biological system it is in. A piece of genetic code that mutates into a cancer causing code is actually more 'effective' as it reproduces more of itself. also which science series with Prof. Brian Cox are you on about he has had a few (all very good).

The latest series, it's on iplayer now. Have a look, well worth watching. Quite possible that my chemistry is flawed, but it is based on what he said, in the last 5 minutes of the 3rd programme.

Depending on which gene is mutated and indeed how the protein structures are changed, it is quite possible that the structure completely fails in it's process. But I must insist that your cancer argument is wrong, because if said cancer grew over the nerves or blood vessels, it could then block them. There are a series of complicated regulatory processes which stops cells from getting carried away, with cancer being the definition of the lack of regulation.

Well that's not true, seeing as cancerous areas induce new blood vessels to feed them (their is a new detection method that uses this to screen women for breast cancer).

The second law of thermodynamics does not work in this case as a living being is not a closed system, seeing as we breath, eat, sweat, etc

Anyway, GW call the gifts of chaos mutations as they are not normal, this doesn't mean the gifts follow the scientific theory of mutation. This is science fantasy afterall

BluntmanDC wrote:

Well that's not true, seeing as cancerous areas induce new blood vessels to feed them (their is a new detection method that uses this to screen women for breast cancer).

Well that in itself is true, it has little relevance. These cells do not aid in the function of the affected area. You way on go on about it, is as if you perceive cancer as beneficial.
Structure and function are severely restricted, pathways are blocked and effectiveness reduced. One of many examples, being lungs. If your lungs have tumours in them you can't breathe. But by your definition having lots of cancerous cells make it better.

I am willing to concede on the thermodynamics front, but Brian Cox still argues otherwise. But I must insist your knowledge of biology is lacking.

smithy12262 wrote:

BluntmanDC wrote:

Well that's not true, seeing as cancerous areas induce new blood vessels to feed them (their is a new detection method that uses this to screen women for breast cancer).

Well that in itself is true, it has little relevance. These cells do not aid in the function of the affected area. You way on go on about it, is as if you perceive cancer as beneficial.
Structure and function are severely restricted, pathways are blocked and effectiveness reduced. One of many examples, being lungs. If your lungs have tumours in them you can't breathe. But by your definition having lots of cancerous cells make it better.

I am willing to concede on the thermodynamics front, but Brian Cox still argues otherwise. But I must insist your knowledge of biology is lacking.

cancer is in no way beneficial to the system it is in (as someone who has seen the effects of it i really don't like cancer), but you are saying that a mutation is less effective. a cancer cell coding peice of DNA is more effective that is why it grows and grows and spreads, it is more effective and out competes. you are misunderstanding the use of the word effective. Anyway human examples don't really work seeing as the effectiveness of natural selection has deminished significantly.

I'm also having trouble with your Dr Brian Cox reference seeing as the episode you quoted is about gravity, and i would also take the word of a genetic biologist or evolutionary biologist over a particle physicist.

*sigh*

I believe the argument has moved rather off-topic.
At any rate 1) I wasn't referring to the DNA locus being more effective, I was referring to the structure it codes.
2) And yes, a cancer cell with accelerated growth with be beneficial on a uni-cellular level, but not to a particular organism.

As for the Cox reference, it could well be the second one. Either way, I'd recommend watching them all. It's pitched at a level slightly above idiots, so it makes a change from the usual stuff.

It's Chaos.


the mutations are directed and controlled(albiet by capricious beings that might just lose interest or destroy the individual) and can't be though of in any sort of Biological sense.


the mutations are stable and often useful, but some are just astetically pleasing(or not pleasing depending on the viewpoint)

To start with, it's fantasy, that's all that has to be said on this matter, if you don't like it then I'm sorry that someone removed you fun gland and you have to be so pedantic you can't enjoy abit of light entertainment. Secondly I find it rather arrogant to point out how "well educacted" you are yet get so much wrong.

Chip on your shoulder much?

I just made a point from my understanding, though it would seem my particle physics isn't up to scratch and I acknowledged that.

It's not arrogant to say you're in part, knowledgeable on a certain area. Besides, there's a lot of discussion about the credibility of science fiction writing, may as well make it as realistic as possible. And the process of doing so is half of the fun.

Go troll elsewhere.

yes, the point of it being science fiction is so that we can justify our fantesies in a scientific way.

The thing is smithy, you seem to have no problem in assuming you have intellectual superiority over people, simply because you have a low level degree in a low level science. And that, quite frankly pisses me off. Also, you could have asked a question regarding any part of 40k but you went for the one you felt was easiest to disprove, hoping to flex your muscles amongst peers (and in doing so made yourself look like a fool by incorrectly trying to apply the second law of thermodynamics to biology). Which again, quite frankly, pisses me off. This thread was never meant to be a discussion, it was started for the sole purpose of giving you chance to be a smart arse. All I ask, is that if you want to get all "intellectual", leave your ego at the door.

And no, 40k is not science fiction, it is science fantasy, there is a distinct difference.

I would say that the 'mutations' of chaos have nothing to do with genetics anyway, the chaos god crafts the mutation onto the marine and as it is not genetic in the way that it can't be passed on.

bagley wrote:The thing is smithy, you seem to have no problem in assuming you have intellectual superiority over people, simply because you have a low level degree in a low level science. And that, quite frankly pisses me off. Also, you could have asked a question regarding any part of 40k but you went for the one you felt was easiest to disprove, hoping to flex your muscles amongst peers (and in doing so made yourself look like a fool by incorrectly trying to apply the second law of thermodynamics to biology). Which again, quite frankly, pisses me off. This thread was never meant to be a discussion, it was started for the sole purpose of giving you chance to be a smart arse. All I ask, is that if you want to get all "intellectual", leave your ego at the door.

And no, 40k is not science fiction, it is science fantasy, there is a distinct difference.

Seriously, troll elsewhere.
Why are you getting pissed off, and why are you so bothered about it?

The second law has some potential to be applied, but it's not bulletproof (the holes in which have already been described) - I'm going to go ahead and assume that you don't really know anything of the subject. Don't be bitter about your education and especially don't make assumptions as to mine.
We're just trying to have a discussion about this science fiction/fantasy (dependent on whether or not your going to be pedantic).[youtube]


But yeah, it would appear the consensus is that the mutations aren't genetic. So that makes sense.