…and this is a 
Go, squid, go!
Category: Cephalopods • Gadgets
Posted on: December 12, 2006 2:02 PM, by PZ Myers
We can learn from nature:
Inspired by the sleek and efficient propulsion of squid, jellyfish and other cephalopods, a University of Colorado at Boulder researcher has designed a new generation of compact vortex generators that could make it easier for scientists to maneuver and dock underwater vehicles at low speeds and with greater precision.
In addition, the technology — seemingly inspired by the plots of two classic sci-fi films — may soon allow doctors to guide tiny capsules with jet thrusters through the human digestive tract, enabling them to diagnose disease and dispense medications.
(The two films, by the way, are Fantastic Voyage and Inner Space; I think only the former classifies as an SF classic.)
While the details are awfully thin, there are more pictures and movies online. Hint—don't waste your time with the mpgs, they only show the titles; you'll have to watch the ugly wmv files.
Comments
Yep, "Inner Space" was a crappy rip-off of Asimov's "Fantastic Voyage" which is relegated to late-night showings on TBS.
Posted by: Milo Johnson | December 12, 2006 2:05 PM
"Squid, jellyfish and other cephalopods"? How's you let that one go by without comment?
Posted by: Steve LaBonne | December 12, 2006 2:11 PM
Eh. Engineers.
(Now I'm going to be shot, aren't I?)
Posted by: PZ Myers | December 12, 2006 2:22 PM
It's not really Asimov's Fantastic Voyage. He wrote the novel based on the screenplay, but because he could write faster than Hollywood could film, the book came out first. To my knowledge, it is the only novelization to be still in print forty years after the movie was released.
Posted by: Blake Stacey | December 12, 2006 2:24 PM
oh, man...when those antibodies start swarming on Raquel Welch...hoo.
Formative.
Posted by: CCP | December 12, 2006 2:27 PM
I think baby boomers like PZ fail to understand the affection that Gen X types have for the cheesy SF films of our childhood and teenage years. Granted, after seeing "Fantastic Voyage" I can see how "Inner Space" is a rip-off of it, but they seem about equal in enjoyment value.
Posted by: Jonathan Badger | December 12, 2006 2:30 PM
Blake:
What about 2001?
Posted by: Rey Fox | December 12, 2006 2:37 PM
...of squid, jellyfish and other cephalopods...
It counts as a double-negative, so eliminating itself. Jellyfish have neither heads (cephalo-) or feet (-pods), so the word "jellyfish" can safely be ignored in the sentence.
OK, I have a question about squid propulsion: do they pull water into the mantle cavity through the same opening that they expell the water out through? Or do they have a flow-through system? This question was probably answered in one of the undergrad Invertebrate Zoology courses I took years ago, but I forgot most of my cephalopod anatomy.
Posted by: TheBrummell | December 12, 2006 2:40 PM
Arthur C. Clarke and Stanley Kubrick worked together on 2001: A Space Odyssey. IIRC, Clarke wrote several drafts of the novel during the film's production, sometimes revising material after seeing the rushes and rough cuts of the movie.
Posted by: Blake Stacey | December 12, 2006 2:46 PM
Is that a drawing of a cephalopod backing into the vortex created by piano keys being attached to six guitar tuning pegs? Fascinating! What will they think of next?
Posted by: pough | December 12, 2006 3:06 PM
I don't know why you'd like Fantastic Voyage, PZ. It's pretty anti-atheist. (Spoiler warning.) The atheist character played by Donald Pleasance is castigated for believing in evolution, and at the climax, he turns out to be the bad guy/saboteur.
Posted by: Martin Wagner | December 12, 2006 3:11 PM
Raquel Welch in a zippered jumpsuit getting swarmed by giant antibodies and you paid attention to the bald guy?
Posted by: CCP | December 12, 2006 3:30 PM
I'm with CCP on this one.
Posted by: Blake Stacey | December 12, 2006 3:37 PM
I don't see how the picture relates to the story. Why is the poor squid being run through a roller press? :-(
Posted by: chaos_engineer | December 12, 2006 4:07 PM
Granted, after seeing "Fantastic Voyage" I can see how "Inner Space" is a rip-off of it, but they seem about equal in enjoyment value.
"Fantastic Voyage", on the other hand, had absolutely no songs by Rod Stewart in the entire flick.
Posted by: Phoenician in a time of Romans | December 12, 2006 4:19 PM
The octopus shows the way to move. Have more than one gait. Take advantage of local terrain. Stretch. Oh, and bend. Bending beats the hell out of breaking.
Posted by: Crudely Wrott | December 12, 2006 9:53 PM
OK, I have a question about squid propulsion: do they pull water into the mantle cavity through the same opening that they expell the water out through?
no, they pull water in from the area around the edge of the mantle, and expell it from the siphon.
http://encarta.msn.com/media_461553803/Generalized_Anatomy_of_a_Squid.html
Posted by: Ichthyic | December 12, 2006 10:06 PM
I don't know why they bothered to save the guy they traveled in though. Developing antibodies against Raquel Welch must be considered an unacceptable complication for any medical procedure.
Do they use Helmholtz resonators to produce pulsation with a minimum of mowing parts? At any rate, microactuators are exciting technology to watch.
Posted by: Torbjörn Larsson | December 12, 2006 10:16 PM
Still, it should count as a novelization of the movie, and one that is still in print...38 years after the movie was released.
Posted by: Rey Fox | December 13, 2006 2:08 AM
Asimov also wrote a sequel, Fantastic Voyage II, where he explains in an introduction or something the bit about the screenplay of its predecessor
Posted by: Keith Douglas | December 15, 2006 12:02 PM