Has
this ever happened to you? While you are
enjoying a relaxing picnic in the New Mexican desert, your lunch is overrun by
ants: not ordinary ants, but
12-foot-tall behemoths, dripping saliva from their jaws and chittering
wildly. You pull your Browning automatic
rifle out from underneath the picnic blanket and empty an entire magazine into
the nearest ant, but it doesn’t even flinch.
Instead, it crushes you between its pincers. Then the ants eat all of your potato salad.
This scenario played out countless times in 1950s
science fiction films. The populace ran screaming from giant ants,
enormous reptiles of various kinds, and even a 50-foot woman. One of the first of these films was Them, in 1954, in which radiation from
the New Mexican atomic bomb tests causes ants to mutate to an enormous
size. Them contains many of the iconic elements of the “giant creature”
films (radiation-induced mutations, skeptical authorities, elderly
scientist-father with beautiful scientist-daughter), and it holds up
surprisingly well. Who can resist a film
in which James Arness and James Whitmore share the screen with Fess Parker and the young Leonard Nimoy? Parker got his big break in this movie -- Walt Disney saw it himself and decided to cast Parker as Davy Crockett. And Nimoy appears with a thick New York accent! If you haven't seen Them, you should definitely rent it. Or better yet, buy it, so you can watch it over and over and over....
You might suspect something is wrong with the idea of giant creatures just
by looking at the shapes of animals of various sizes. Insects have spindly legs, little more than
toothpicks, to support their weight. Dogs and cats have much larger limbs in proportion to their size, while
humans’ are even bigger. By the time you
get to elephants, you find legs that look like tree trunks. So there is clearly something odd going on
there.
Things get even more weird if you look inside. Insects don’t have lungs like larger animals,
but instead take in oxygen through openings called spiracles. The oxygen is then conveyed throughout the
body inside a network of tubes. Your
lungs, in comparison, form an amazingly convoluted network – if you could
stretch them out flat, they would cover half a tennis court.
The principle at work here is called the “square-cube
law,” and it has to do with the way that volumes and areas change when you
increase the size of something. As
an animal gets bigger and bigger, its volume and weight go up as the cube of
its length, but its surface area goes up only like the square. Why does this
matter? Because most of the requirements
of the animal, such as food and oxygen, scale as the volume of the animal,
while many of the things that enable it to survive depend on its surface
area. So in most cases, being smaller
makes life easier, and large animals are constantly striving to avoid the
bottleneck of having too small a surface area for their volume.
Take the
size of limbs. When an animal stands
upright, its ability to support its weight depends on the cross-sectional area
of its legs, which scales like the square of its length. But its weight is proportional to the volume
of the animal, which scales as the cube of its length. This means that smaller animals, like
insects, can get by with spindly legs, while elephants need legs as wide as
tree trunks.
The square-cube law is an even bigger problem for internal organs. Respiration and digestion both depend on surface areas. The amount of oxygen you can absorb is
limited by the surface area of your lungs, and your ability to absorb nutrients
depends on the surface area of your intestines. That's why your lungs and intestines are
both incredibly convoluted organs. Not only do your lungs have the surface area of a tennis
court, but your small intestine coils back
and forth inside your body – it’s more than 20 feet long! But that’s only half the story. At the microscopic level, the surface of the
small intestine is composed of tiny finger-like projections that increase the
effective area enormously – making it even bigger than the surface area of the lungs.
Many of your
other internal organs strain against the limit imposed by the square-cube law,
doing their best to maximize their surface areas. Your kidneys consist of a convoluted system
of cells to extract waste, and even your brain has a folded structure that
helps increase the surface area of the outside layer of the brain (the cortex).
Any smaller
creature suddenly magnified in size would find itself ill-suited to its new
dimensions. Giant ants would not only
collapse under their own weight, but would suffocate from lack of oxygen (and
eventually starve from being unable to absorb enough nutrients). Giant bees would never be able to fly, since
the surface area of their wings would not increase sufficiently to keep pace
with their new weight. And the 50-foot
woman? – forget about it.
Giant
creatures have afflicted mostly film and television, where they thrive in
carefree ignorance of the constraints on their existence. Novels and short stories usually adhere more
closely to scientific accuracy and have generally avoided such creatures. One clever exception is “giAnts,” by Edward
Bryant. In this story, a reporter tracks
down a scientist who has been working on a secret project to combat a
dangerously mutated race of army ants. The scientist is haunted by the death of his wife, who was killed by a
nest of fire ants, and he dreams of the giant ants from Them. The reporter finally
gets him to divulge the nature of the secret project: a mutagen will be released on the army ants
that will cause them to grow to enormous size, at which point they will die
from the effects of the square-cube law. The story illustrates the fictional possibilities of taking the square-cube
law seriously, rather than (as in many films) ignoring it entirely.
6 comments:
Very interesting :)
And what would happen the other way around, if a large animal is shrunk (like in the upcoming movie Antman)?
I guess that the limbs and organs would be unnecessarily big and costly for such little weight, but it wouldn't be as bad a scenario as for the giant ant, would it?
A very good question. This is the plot of "Surface Tension" by James Blish, Fantastic Voyage (the movie), and The Incredible Shrinking Man. I'll talk about this in a future post - there are some interesting physics issues that it raises.
but this is one more big creature of course Godzilla ;-)
The eighties movie Honey I Shrunk the Kids also comes to mind, which also featured "giant" ants, if I remember correctly, but only proportionally to the extremely shrunken kids.
l'll be looking forward to that post :)
Oh, and sorry for the anonymity. I'm commenting from my cell phone and having trouble logging in.
Cheers,
Federico
Regarding Godzilla -- of course the Japanese were the masters of the giant monster movie. These obviously grew out of the anxieties that developed in the wake of being the only country to suffer an attack with nuclear weapons. "Them" is explicitly tied to nuclear fears - it takes place in New Mexico - the site of the very first nuclear test.
nice
Post a Comment