For lack of a better grouping title. Tightbeamed messages between Aldin and Remus Shepherd that took place during late May through mid-June, 1998 concerning nanites. The last reply from Remus is (will) not (be) responded to until mid to late July.
First posted to alt.devilbunnies during late May-June, 1998.
© by Scott Bernier and
Remus Shepherd
First HTML-ized by Scott Bernier 14 July, 1998.
| Tightbeam to Dr Remus [LONG]--May 28, 1998 |
|---|
| Remus' Reply--June 7, 1998 |
| Aldin's reply to Remus--June 8, 1998 |
| Remus' Second Reply--June 13, 1998 |
Thu May 28, 1998
*****BUNNYSTUMPER DELUXE™ TWO-WAY TIGHTBEAM*****
Remus,
I apologize for taking so long to get back to you. Over the past several weeks, I've taken the time to carefully go over all our past tests and have enclosed extensive, thorough reports on the experiment and all data. This is a very long message and the enclosed data may take a week or more of your time to go over.
The nanites Rabbit designed breakdown into 'harmless' protein strains which are then used by the host body. According to Rabbit's tutorial programs, these nanites are susceptible to an electromagnetic field. A weak field shuts them off/puts them on pause and a moderate field will erase the nanites' programming, putting them into a neutral, do-nothing state. I now speculate that if I had read through this more carefully, I may have avoided the accident altogether by erasing the initial programming and then attempting to reprogram them rather then my failed attempt to overwrite their original programming.
I am hesitant to fully test this theory, though, for obvious reasons. However, in a few lab tests I have conducted, these nanites do shut-down when exposed to a week electromagnetic field. Shutting down the field and sending a signal to the nanites turns them back on.
To address some other parts of your last reply to me:
[The Namakata nanites restructuring DNA]
> Well, your report said that when the saboteur gave Mustard an injection >of squirrel hormones and DNA, the nanites changed their behavior. It went >from a local to systemic effect, altering his entire body...and it used the >squirrel DNA as a template. It could be as simple as "Continually search for >DNA instructions -> Make changes necessary"...or it might be something more >subtle, that captured and transcribed the squirrel DNA as a side effect.
It appears, and I use the term loosely, that my programming overwrite was insufficient to make the nanites ignore their original programming. It appears they would have simple not worked at all within Mustard's body, *IF* his bloodstream had not been contaminated with squirrel DNA. (alasflick) There is no way to prove or disprove this now.
I've been able to reproduce the accident in computer simulation, using a batch of Rabbit's nanites without my program overwrite. A copy of the simulation is enclosed along with the rest of the data detailed below. I have also run the simulation using other DNA patterns. In the simulations, Mustard changes into a squirrel. So would Major Blake if exposed in the same way with squirrel contamination present. Strangely, in these simulations, the nanites did nothing to human tissue, even when contaminted with squirrel DNA.
Last week, using tissue samples provided by Mustard, I was able to duplicate the accident on the samples after placing these nanites on the samples and sending the activation command. Major Blake was also kind enough to provide a tissue sample. However, in the case of Blake's sample, nothing happened, even after I had contaminated the tissue with squirrel blood. (perhapsflick) It has to do with Blake being a convert rather then a pure bunny. In both cases the nanites broke down into protein strains (after changing Mustard's sample to squirrel tissue and after 'giving-up' in the case of Blake's sample). I have not been able to convince any of the Lumberjack Fudds in the region to provide a tissue sample to back-up the other computer model findings.
The fact that the simulations and actual tests do not completely match (Blake case) shows how complicated this problem is with Rabbit's nanites. I wish I had some pure bun samples, for now I wonder if the accident has to do with Mustard directly rather then the squirrel DNA contamination, especailly when Mustard is already part squirrel and there is no way to actually simulate the original accident since tissue samples from Mustard are already contaminated. The Blake samples may have been of little help since he's a convert and that may be why nothing happened to those samples. So who knows if these nanites were simply doing a search for a specific DNA pattern (squirrel) and altering all others to comply or as you put it, 'something more subtle'.
(howeverflick) It is my conclusion from this research, that if reexposed, Mustard would complete conversion into a squirrel. (gigglechitter) But I doubt he'd be willing to test that for me anytime soon.
[Kralk and the War of Four]
>> He's a Fourier, what do you expect. (shudderflick) And to think I was >> almost dragged into that group at one time. Glad I got better. > > <blink> Aldin! I didn't know you had a destructive streak in you. ;)
(drooptail) My first mate, Sally, was a Fourier, Remus. It's a long sad story and this isn't the time or place to talk about it in detail. Suffice it that I may have had a destructive streak at the time as blinded as I had been in love. Spirit, I had even promised her I would meet with Cheshire (shudderflick). I'm just thankful I got over that, but I don't know if I'll ever fully get over the loss of her, especially since I don't even know if she's really dead or not.
> Yes...that's always been the major problem. :/ Part of me wants to let >Kralk experiment, and try to apply any usable parts of his research to >saner purposes. But the rest of me knows that that's unethical. <:)
With most fools, if you give them enough rope, they'll hang themselves. Unfortunately, in this case, the 'fool' would also hang all the witnesses and everyone in the parking lot and the building next door and...you get the idea. It scares me to think what Kralk would do if he got apawhold on the nanotech tutorials or any of the other research files here at Namakata.
Now if Kralk were to relocate to the middle of a waste land, hundreds of miles from the nearest life.... };3
> How is Mustard doing? And what therapies are you considering next?
He's mastered control over the tail and can fluff at will without having to concentrate. He is now fluent in squirrel (complete with tailflicks) in addition to bun and English and can switch among them with ease. He's as fully recovered as he can be until we can find a way to reverse the partial conversion. There are no further therapies we can give him at this time, but he will probably have to undergo therapy to get use to movement all over again if we succeed in reversing the partial conversion.
Mustards just anxious to be a bunny again, though he's requested to keep the squirrel tail for now, if possible. (amusedflick) It seems he's forgiven the saboteur, Mapletip, and the two of them are now a happy couple, as strange as that may sound. They've already agreed that when the opportunity arises, they plan to adopt. I have already alerted the forest patrols to keep an eye and ear out for wild abandoned/orphaned young.
As I told you several weeks ago, we will be starting from scratch with the nanites. (howeverflick) There have been a few setbacks and the first three batches had to be destroyed. (sighflick) I estimate it will be at least another two weeks before we can start testing a new batch of nanites for possible use in reversing Mustard's partial conversion.
I very deeply wish you could be present to witness the experiment when the time comes. (howeverflick) I know you are very busy with that 'Sekrit Plan' (tm). But maybe you could make time that day to sit and watch if we set-up a televideo conference between Namakata and NoCO on the day of the experiment. In the least, I'd appreciate it if you and/or your colleague go over my final calculations before the experiment is conducted when the time comes.
(alasflick) This whole episode has put me on a sidetrack away from the original goal. And I'll need new volunteer subjects for the nanodoc tests. Perhaps, I could design the nanites and provide training to field Fudd medical personnel with instructions to test them as a last resort on the battlefield--when the Fudd test subject would otherwise die without testing the nanodocs. Of course, the test results wouldn't be obtained in a controlled environment, but that might be for the best, since those would be the sort of conditions the nanodocs would eventually be used in. (enthusiasticflick)
Personally, I think it would be easier then trying to obtain more devilbunny 'volunteers'. I know we got real lucky with Mustard. The next bun may not be so...cooperative. Not to mention that if I were to start experimenting on non-willing subjects, there would be several questions raised on ethics, even if it is 'just' a devilbunny. What do you think?
Aldin
Enclosures
*****END ENCRYPTED TIGHTBEAM*****
Sun Jun 07, 1998
From: Remus Shepherd
*****BUNNYSTUMPER DELUXE*#153; TWO-WAY TIGHTBEAM*****
Aldin Busheytail
> Remus, > I apologize for taking so long to get back to you. Over the past several weeks, > I've taken the time to carefully go over all our past tests and have enclosed > extensive, thorough reports on the experiment and all data.
No problem. I've been busy myself. :)
> I've been able to reproduce the accident in computer simulation, using a batch of > Rabbit's nanites without my program overwrite. The program is enclosed along > with the rest of the data detailed below. I have also ran the simulation using > other DNA patterns. (shudderflick) It appears the results would have been nearly > the same in the case of a human with squirrel DNA present in the blood stream.
Er, I respect computer simulations...but I don't always trust them in problems as complex as this. There's just no substitute for actually mixing the chemicals together. :)
> >> He's a Fourier, what do you expect. (shudderflick) And to think I was > >> almost dragged into that group at one time. Glad I got better. > >
Ahh. Okay. Forgive me, then.
> If you happen to find time to see Amy, tell her that her brother-in-spirit is > doing fine these days and misses her. Ask her about our common bonds > if you want to get to know our combined background a bit more.
I'll do that.
> I very deeply wish you could be present to witness the experiment. > (howeverflick) I know you are very busy with that 'Sekrit Plan'™.
> But maybe you could make time that day to sit and watch if we set-up a > televideo conference between Namakata and NoCO on the day of the experiment. > In the least, I'd appreciate it if you and/or your colleague go over my > finally calculations before the experiment is conducted.
I don't see why I couldn't do either of those. Not sure that CeeCee will be able to help, though. Basic training has kept her...occupied.
> (alasflick) This whole episode has put me on a sidetrack away from the > original goal. And I'll need new volunteer subjects for the nanodoc tests. > Perhaps, I could design the nanites and provide training to field Fudd > medical personnel with instructions to test them as a last resort on the > battlefield--when the Fudd test subject would otherwise die without testing > the nanodocs. Of course, the test results wouldn't be obtained in a controlled > environment, but that might be for the best, since those would be the sort of > conditions the nanodocs would eventually be used in. (enthusiasticflick)
I think that's a bad idea, myself, Aldin. :/ The Fudds I know have had conversations about 'deathbed conversions'. It's always been possible for a dying soldier to get a bite from an infected bunny, and hope that the conversion process heals their wounds as it changes them. The consensus seems to be that they'd much rather die.
If there's any chance of this stuff turning someone into a rabbit, I don't think you'll see any Fudd volunteers for it, Aldin. Even from the mortally wounded.
> Personally, I think it would be easier then trying to obtain more devilbunny > 'volunteers'. I know we got real lucky with Mustard. The next bun may not be > so...cooperative. Not to mention that if I were to start experimenting on non- >willing subjects, there would be several questions raised on ethics, even if it is > 'just' a devilbunny. What do you think?
I think you're missing an obvious solution, Aldin. What about first designing a nano-doc formula for squirrels?
Squirrels are a little more likely, I think, to volunteer as a test subject for such a thing. And you might have some data from the experimental healing metabolism that you had temporarily that might help you design the nanites better. And if you get a working nano-doc, without side effects, for squirrels...well, then Fudds might be more willing to trust a human formula. :)
... ... Remus Shepherd (remus@netcom.com)
*****END ENCRYPTED TIGHTBEAM*****
Mon Jun 8, 1998
From: Aldin Busheytail
*****BUNNYSTUMPER DELUXE (TM) TWO-WAY TIGHTBEAM*****
Remus wrote:
>Aldin Busheytail wrote:
[Computer simulations on the nanites that partially converted Mustard]
> Er, I respect computer simulations...but I don't always trust them >in problems as complex as this. There's just no substitute for actually >mixing the chemicals together. :)
(agreeflick) But I doubt there are any volunteers out there who'd want to help me confirm those simulations. Not to mention I'm not in the least bit interested in converting humans into squirrels, even if the tests confirmed the simulations. My gut instinct says it wouldn't work, period.
>> I very deeply wish you could be present to witness the experiment. >> (howeverflick) I know you are very busy with that 'Sekrit Plan' (tm). > >I can neither admit nor deny that. <:)
I didn't expect you to one way or the other. (gigglechitter) But earlier you did admit you are busy. It doesn't matter what is keeping you busy, for it's none of my business.
>> But maybe you could make time that day to sit and watch if we set-up a >> televideo conference between Namakata and NoCO on the day of the >> experiment. In the least, I'd appreciate it if you and/or your colleague go >> over my finally calculations before the experiment is conducted. > > I don't see why I couldn't do either of those. Not sure that CeeCee >will be able to help, though. Basic training has kept her...occupied.
I understand, Remus, and thanks again for your help in this matter.
[Nanodocs--Fudd field research subjects instead of buns?]
> I think that's a bad idea, myself, Aldin. :/ The Fudds I know have >had conversations about 'deathbed conversions'. It's always been possible >for a dying soldier to get a bite from an infected bunny, and hope that >the conversion process heals their wounds as it changes them. The consensus >seems to be that they'd much rather die.
I understand and have met several such Fudds, Remus. Blake had such a living will that had been ignored at the time of his accident. I can't vouch for the Major, but I think one of the main reasons he's still alive is because he has a family to support.
> If there's any chance of this stuff turning someone into a rabbit, I >don't think you'll see any Fudd volunteers for it, Aldin. Even from the >mortally wounded.
I don't see any chance involved. Especially if I'm starting with fresh nanites and programming. (besidesflick) there was no chance of that with the nanites I had used on Mustard. Now a Fudd suddenly developing a craving for walnuts on the other paw... };3 Don't worry, I wouldn't want to put anyone at risk. I'll just have to find some other way to develop and test these nanodocs.
> I think you're missing an obvious solution, Aldin. What about first >designing a nano-doc formula for squirrels?
(pause....contemplateflick...continues to listen)
> Squirrels are a little more likely, I think, to volunteer as a test >subject for such a thing. And you might have some data from the >experimental healing metabolism that you had temporarily that might help >you design the nanites better. And if you get a working nano-doc, without >side effects, for squirrels...well, then Fudds might be more willing >to trust a human formula. :)
I'll seriously consider this, Remus. (howeverflick) few squirrels around here get the kind of injuries Fudds incur on the battlefield. Being a much smaller species, we have a much higher fatality rate in those kind of situations. Especially when you take our size compared to an average devilbunny into consideration. Picture pitting a group of Fudds against devilbunnies that are seven feet tall not counting their ears with appropriately sized claws and fangs.
I'm not about to start asking squirrels here to injure themselves. So, I guess if I go this route, my progress will be dependant on the number of injuries around here, which are fairly minimal. One of the things I emphasize to my students is caution when in the lab. An injury occurs once in a while among the scout groups but those have all been minor--scratches, bruises, lost tailtips, etc.
Aldin
*****END ENCRYPTED TIGHTBEAM*****
Sat Jun 13, 1998
From: Remus Shepherd
*****BUNNYSTUMPER DELUXE™ TWO-WAY TIGHTBEAM*****
Aldin Busheytail wrote:
> [Computer simulations on the nanites that partially converted Mustard] > > Er, I respect computer simulations...but I don't always trust them > >in problems as complex as this. There's just no substitute for actually > >mixing the chemicals together. :) > (agreeflick) But I doubt there are any volunteers out there who'd want to help me > confirm those simulations. Not to mention I'm not in the least bit interested in > converting humans into squirrels, even if the tests confirmed the simulations. > My gut instinct says it wouldn't work, period.
Primates and lapines are actually fairly closely related. I suspect that converting a primate to a squirrel (rodent) would be more difficult and more prone to fatality. :/
> [Nanodocs--Fudd field research subjects instead of buns?] > > If there's any chance of this stuff turning someone into a rabbit, I > >don't think you'll see any Fudd volunteers for it, Aldin. Even from the > >mortally wounded. > I don't see any chance involved. Especially if I'm starting with fresh nanites and > programming. (besidesflick) there was no chance of that with the nanites I had > used on Mustard. Now a Fudd suddenly developing a craving for walnuts on the > other paw... };3 Don't worry, I wouldn't want to put anyone at risk. I'll just have to > find some other way to develop and test these nanodocs.
Well, fresh nanites or not, they're still based on old devilbunny formulas, aren't they? Are you sure the skeletal, base structure of the nanites isn't HLV?
> > I think you're missing an obvious solution, Aldin. What about first > >designing a nano-doc formula for squirrels? > I'll seriously consider this, Remus. (howeverflick) few squirrels around here > get the kind of injuries Fudds incur on the battlefield. Being a much smaller > species, we have a much higher fatality rate in those kind of situations. Especially > when you take our size compared to an average devilbunny into consideration. > Picture pitting a group of Fudds against devilbunnies that are seven feet tall not > counting their ears with appropriately sized claws and fangs. > I'm not about to start asking squirrels here to injure themselves. So, I guess if I > go this route, my progress will be dependant on the number of injuries around > here, which are fairly minimal. One of the things I emphasize to my students is > caution when in the lab. An injury occurs once in a while among the scout groups > but those have all been minor--scratches, bruises, lost tailtips, etc.
Research can be slow if it depends upon fate. :/ But if you get ready to treat injuries that might happen, you'll have a backup treatment for emergencies. Even if it doesn't work, if the subjects are willing, it'd be nice to have a last resort when conventional medicines fail...
... ... Remus Shepherd
*****END ENCRYPTED TIGHTBEAM*****
End