Talk:The Ninth Configuration

The problem with the debate on this page, if the two works are related,and the debate about the time, completely fail to consider The Exorcist was published in 1971, two years before the movie was released, and early enough for the astronaut to be a character in both books, even if movies don't address the connection. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:3C8:4280:4DC0:CC38:DF21:8A8:81D6 (talk) 18:42, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

"Protein molecules of the ninth configuration?"

I copied this from the Reference Desk cause it might be useful here. Recury 02:13, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

In the movie The Ninth Configuration, a character says:

"In order for life to have appeared spontaneously on earth, there first had to be hundreds of millions of protein molecules of the ninth configuration. But given the size of the planet Earth, do you know how long it would have taken for just one of these protein molecules to appear entirely by chance? Roughly ten to the two hundred and forty-third power billions of years. And I find that far, far more fantastic than simply believing in God."

So I have a couple questions. What exactly is a protein molecule of the ninth configuration? Do we have any articles that talk about these kinds of proteins specifically? And does anyone know if what the character claims has been proven/disproven/discounted since then (the book the movie is based on was written in 1978)? Recury 19:56, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

I have no clue what the character in the movie is talking about, but you might be interested in the article Origin of life. --Allen 20:28, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

I have never heard of a protein molecule of the ninth configuration. I am thinking this figure comes from the 9 human essential amino acids. Also, the figure cited I would think is not very reliable ("the kind that you make up, not look up"). Besides, it wouldn't take that long for a few atoms to hook up in the right way—that's 10²⁵¹ years. That's several orders of magnitude greater than the estimated lifespan of the universe. Heh. — [Mac Davis](talk) (SUPERDESK|Help me improve)20:31, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Probably fictional. Peter Grey 20:33, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

It might be useful to look at what the Intellegent Design folks have to say about this. This is a film, and the purpose of films are to entertain, although they can have the effect of provoking thought. I always ask people who calculate these odds exactly how did they do these calculations. How do you compute the odds of something when you do not know what the conditions are. What are the odds of rolling dice and coming up seven? What are the chances of throwing a peice of metal in water and having it catch fire? What are the chances of a planet existing with an oxygen atmosphere? How do you calculate these odds without knowing the conditions?

You don't, because of the randomity, the ignorance. I tried to keep from saying the number was bullshit, but I guess it is evident. — [Mac Davis](talk) (SUPERDESK|Help me improve)21:21, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

thats mostly bollocks (nineth configuration??) wrapped around an actual nugget of truth, the Levinthal paradox. Xcomradex 21:37, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Having read the essential amino acids and Levinthal paradox articles, it seems pretty likely to me he is applying the Levinthal paradox to essential amino acids to make his argument for ID. If my memory of the film is right, he does mention that the amount of time it would take is longer than the lifespan of the universe, which I guess is the point of the argument. Which "configuration" is supposed to be ninth out of nine is beyond me. Recury 22:07, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

which, as mentioned in the levinthal paradox article, is a pretty weak argument. Xcomradex 22:51, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

In addition to the other flaws already mentioned, limiting the places where life could possibly evolve in the universe to just Earth is also wrong. Life could evolve anywhere in the universe with the proper conditions. Had it evolved somewhere else, instead of on Earth, we would be on that planet and the silly ID folks there would then limit their calcs to that planet, and not include Earth as potential site for life to evolve. StuRat 23:51, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Unsourced personal essay

This has been flagged for over a year, is still written as a personal essay, and is still completely unsourced. Moving it here until someone can "fix" it.

==Connection to The Exorcist series==

William Peter Blatty once referred to The Ninth Configuration as the true sequel to The Exorcist, and has stated that he intended the character of Captain Cutshaw to be the same astronaut whom a sleepwalking Regan in The Exorcist warns, "You're going to die up there." In The Ninth Configuration, Cutshaw mentions a fear of dying in space that is almost certainly a reference to Regan's line in the previous film. However, the characters were played by different actors, and the astronaut in The Exorcist is not given a name onscreen or by the credits.

Although The Ninth Configuration is quite dissimilar to The Exorcist in terms of story and tone, both films feature theological discussions between their respective characters which address questions of faith, the mystery of goodness vs evil, and the existence of God and the Devil. The motif of a saint's medallion as a symbol of faith appears in both The Exorcist and The Ninth Configuration; also of interest is the fact that some dialogue from Blatty's discarded, first-draft screenplay for The Exorcist was re-used in The Ninth Configuration.

From the original Exorcist screenplay:

Chris MacNeil: If you're asking if I believe in the devil, the answer is yes - yeah, that I believe. The devil keeps doing commercials.
Father Dyer: But if all the evil in the world makes you think that there might be a devil - then how do you account for all of the good?

From the final version of The Ninth Configuration:

Captain Cutshaw: I believe in the Devil alright. And you know why? Because the prick keeps doing commercials!

and

Colonel Kane: You're convinced that God is dead because there's evil in the world.

Captain Cutshaw: Correct.

Colonel Kane: Then why don't you think He's alive because of the goodness in the world?

Several cast members from The Ninth Configuration would go on to appear in 1990's The Exorcist III (written and directed by William Peter Blatty): Jason Miller, Ed Flanders, Scott Wilson and George DiCenzo; also, Nicol Williamson, who was originally cast in The Ninth Configuration, appears in Exorcist III.

If we're now allowing free-wheeling supposition like this, I'd like to add my tuppence that the only "connection to The Exorcist series" is that both were written by the same man. 12.233.146.130 (talk) 23:07, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

~~the timing doesn't work either. In the NINTH movie, the castle is for soldiers who are there to see if they are really crazy or just faking to get out of the Vietnam war. The narration says this movie takes place during the end of that war. The U.S. involvement in that war ended in January, 1973. So the NINTH movie takes place before January 1973, most likely 1972. THE EXORCIST movie was released in December 1973, and, according to EXORCIST 3, took place in 1975. So Reagan told the nameless astronaut he'd die up there (which he didn't, by the way) in 1975, after the war was over. So how could the astronaut go to the castle asylum during the war after that? He couldn't. So it's 2 different astronauts. Abbythecat~~

"Supernatural horror film"

Obviously I watched the wrong The Ninth Configuration. There's nothing remotely supernatural about this film, and it's not a horror film either, even if that point is perhaps slightly more debatable.2A02:C7F:7401:8700:A5E6:A31E:6B11:B1A0 (talk) 11:03, 31 January 2017 (UTC)