Talk:Protodermis

Reference

That link that was put there for reference about the Organic Protodermis is not good. It links to a post of a user and not an answer from Greg. --Boidoh (talk) 00:43, 8 August 2014 (CEST)

I've put in the correct link, but is this really needed? Organic doesn't have to mean "natural." Organic in the sense of lacking artificial influence from chemicals is an even more recent definition than "containing carbon" (which isn't a full definition anyway because not all carbon compounds are organic). In the sense that organic protodermis is organic, it is organic in that it makes up the organs. It is protodermis relating to the organs: organic protodermis. ζox• ^Histories

But, you know, real life physics don't apply in BIONICLE, as per usual. --Boidoh (talk) 17:07, 8 August 2014 (CEST)

PNA

Greg said it was "up to you" regarding whether or not we "can" call the protodermis DNA equivalent PNA. (Source) His response just doesn't seem definitive to me--I'm getting more of the feeling he meant "yes, you, the poster, can call it PNA if you want to" instead of "yes, it's definitively called PNA." I've removed the info for now per our somewhat-unwritten rules on the matter. Thoughts? -- Morris the Mata Nui Cow (talk) 06:51, 21 November 2014 (CET)

Unlike the Turaga Lhikan thing (mrgrgr) this is most definitely a "you can call it that if you want", not "this is what it is". Nucleic acid has no presence in BIONICLE, and it's a Pandora's Box I don't think anybody wants to open. -- Dorek _Talk 08:57, 21 November 2014 (CET)

Well, obviously someone wants to open it, otherwise they wouldn't have asked. :P But I agree -- this is one of those details that the majority of the fanbase doesn't consider interesting or relevant, and it's on such a (literally) microscopic scale that it doesn't affect the story one whit. --Angel Bob (talk) 15:27, 21 November 2014 (CET)

People have been trying to compare Matoran and Toa to white and red blood cells (an interesting analogy that Greg refuted quite often) for the past six years, but that doesn't mean blood is in the story =P. -- Dorek _Talk 16:58, 21 November 2014 (CET)

I'm gonna fall on the 'no' side of things. I always personally thought they had nanomachines that repair organic damage instead of any traditional healing processes; nothing in the story contradicts that, and if it was this or traditional healing aided by 'PNA' it would change nothing. Since it has no impact on the story, since it opens up far, far too many possibly contradictory questions about biology, and since Greg was mostly noncommittal, I think it should stay off the page. --Master of the Rahkshi ^{Ask, and ye shall receive. Eventually.} 19:12, 21 November 2014 (CET)

Since we all agree on this, is this discussion necessary any longer? :P --Angel Bob (talk) 21:58, 21 November 2014 (CET)

Protodermis purification process

How come the page does not have any specifics of the purification process, as outlined in the BIONICLE Encyclopedia? Also, there is no information on the protodermis separation tank on BS01. --Lukas Exemplar (talk) 12:11, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Protodermis - molecule or element? A showdown of tiers of canonicity and possible vote on the future of this page

I see that it's recently been added to this page that protodermis a chemical/atomic element, however that is from a quote from 2016 and the quote about it being a molecule (I.E. having "a molecular structure" is from 2006. However I'd still say that's definite confirmation of it being a molecule. Should we not use this information instead, going by the tiers of canonicity? The post from 2016 doesn't really sound like a retcon but a forgetcon. He also said a tiny few times throughout the years that he didn't know whether it was molecule or atomic element, although this only happened after 2006 and that initial answer and mostly through 2014-2016-ish on the LMBs. Then he said once in 2016 that it was a molecule but also stated in the same post slightly before that it was an element. Below I've compiled a summary of the different quote sources that has the biggest relevancy to this predicament in chronological order.

Overview of the different quotes that have the biggest relevancy in this question/problem:

2006: https://greg.thegreatarchives.com/2003-2008/page172#post6844

Q: As you've seen, there's the theory on the seperation of organic and biomechanic life on the Bionicle planet. I brought up the concept of water, then realised that the Bionicle universe is different from our own. In what way though? Is it more of a fantasy world? Or a science-fiction? I mean this in the way of atomic structure, like would protodermis have a molecular stucture? Or is it more magical, for a lack of a better term. And would any of this be relevent to the seperation?

A: Protodermis does have a molecular structure, yes. While I do think you could call this a science fantasy, I don't plan to introduce magic into the story. From a BIONICLE perspective, magic is just science you don't understand yet

Example of forgetcons:

In 2014 https://greg.thegreatarchives.com/2013-2017/page362#post10523333-line6,11

"5) Is protodermis an element (like aluminum) or a molecule (like titanium carbide)?

5) Again, don't know."

In 2016: https://greg.thegreatarchives.com/2013-2017/page856#post14228720-line8-9,14-15,18-19 - which also happens to be the source used on this page for calling it an "atomic element."

"1. Would Human scientists consider protodermis to be a seperate element on the periodic table if they knew of its existence?

1) Yes. Like the transuranic elements, protodermis is an element artificially produced."

2. Most organic life is "carbon based". Given that protodermis is an element, do you think that Matoran would be considered to be "protodermis based" life, or, are they more of a mix of protodermis based and carbon based life? (According to weird science fiction of course XD).

2) Hmmm. The first thing that popped into my head in what are protodermis molecules made up of?"

End of summary.

It may also be an atomic element that simply prefers to bind with others of thier own kind, akin to H2O (water) in our own universe. But I do believe most evidence points towards it definitively being a molecule rather than an element, as Greg outright said "Protodermis does have a molecular structure, yes" and not something like "Yes, it can have a molecular structure." But what do you think?

I call for a vote on this, either on here or on AFC. Lukas Exemplar (talk) 11:22, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

As already discussed elsewhere, Protodermis being an element and having a molecular structure do not contradict. I went ahead and added the 2006 quote. Dag (talk) 14:10, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Was Motlen Protodermis suggested to be the plasma state of Protodermis?

In 2012, Michele1996 added this info, presumably as "data from the original page". Shortly after, Master Inika deleted it because of its speculative nature and that it "doesn't make sense" (like everything is crystal clear with Protodermis :p). At the moment, I haven't found any citation on the OGD archive or wayback machine to back it up. Does anyone know if it has a relevant source or is it just a fanon theory? Can we access the Protodermis "original page"? Du7734 23:57, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

The original page was archived, and it does have that information about plasma but still uncited. It would be best to leave it off the page until the source for it is found. Dag (talk) 01:27, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

Since Greg himself said that plasma is superheated, ionized gas in bionicle, I highly doubt that molten protodermis fits the description.--Surel (Talk) 04:47, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

Not to mention, "Suggested", suggested by whom? The narrator or a character in universe? That doesn't make much sense. Suggested to Greg? That would categorically not belong on the wiki. ~ Wolk (talk) 10:36, 11 May 2022 (UTC)