Sci-fi - Reality bytes

Gort! Klaatu Barada nicto! These are the words that halted the impending carnage about to be unleashed on the people of Earth by the giant robot Gort in The Day the Earth Stood Still. This 1951 film sent its audiences home happy, safe in the knowledge that it was only a film; pure escapism. There's no such thing as aliens or giant, intelligent robots.

Yet 50 years on, there is more computer technology in many mid-range family saloon cars than there was on board the Apollo series space rockets.

We have PCs, mobile phones, universal translators in embryonic form, robots that operate on humans and communications systems that in the 1950s would have been considered figments of a writer's imagination. If we consider what today's sci-fi films ask us to believe, what is this brave new world going to look like in another 50 years?

Author Isaac Asimov once said: "Modern science fiction is the only form of literature that consistently considers the nature of the changes that face us, the possible consequences and the possible solutions." The reason science fiction films and programmes seem to have a knack for predicting the future is because the genre usually contains elements of plausibility. The storyline revolves around some known scientific facts, inventions, technologies and possibilities. It also hinges, to a great extent, on society's views, fears and hopes.

So back in the 1950s, in the Cold War era when humanity feared it was about to self destruct, movie-goers faced Gort, which was based around technology and social mores they could believe in. If they had been confronted with the humanoid C3PO from Star Wars, the android Ash from Alien or the killer robots from The Terminator films, the infancy of the computer technology of 50 years ago would have made this intelligent, sentient artificial life completely unbelievable. As Arthur C Clarke said: "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."

As science has moved on, so has science fiction. All script writers have ever done since the early days of film and television is push forward the boundaries of science. To an extent they also predict rapid changes, not only in technology but also in the way it affects society and our everyday lives.

Computer technology forms the basis of many of the changes to our lives nowadays, even if it is not used directly. Gort seems as silly to us as it did to audiences in the 1950s, but for a different reason. We have already seen the beginnings of intelligent machine life and Gort is frankly not sophisticated enough.

Films and TV programmes routinely take robotics research a step further, but suddenly what was fiction is now fact. Take the case of one episode of the X-Files. Agent Fox Mulder came across what he thought was a cockroach, only it wasn't; it was a tiny robot used for surveillance. Is this unconvincing?

Researchers at Georgia Tech University in the US and many others are developing tiny robots which will probably take insect form, once some aerodynamic conundrums have been overcome. The plan is to have swarms of these machines to carry out surveillance tasks. Forerunners of this type of robot were recently used in the aftermath of the attacks on the World Trade Center in New York. Tiny, remote-controlled robots bristling with lights, video cameras and sensors were sent in to search for victims in places human rescuers couldn't reach.

The ultimate goal is to create a race of intelligent artificial life. But will they be androids like the replicants in Blade Runner or last year's sci-fi blockbuster AI, or will they be cyborgs like the character played by Arnold Schwarzenegger in The Terminator? If you think neither is plausible in the short term, think again.

Send in the clones

For androids, we can look at the progress of projects such as Kismet, the brainchild of researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

The technology to build this expressive, anthropomorphic robot is still in its infancy and doesn't have humanoid form. Kismet is still nothing more than a complex computer with specific add-ons, including vision and voice-recognition software, although it does have neat eyebrows that can wiggle up and down to convey emotion. In fact, it bears an uncanny resemblance to the robot Johnny 5 which found consciousness in the 1986 film Short Circuit.

Almost everything else needed for this life form is in research or development. Not only are computers being programmed to learn from experience (although they haven't cracked true artificial intelligence yet) but scientists are also developing what are known as smart materials such as shape memory alloys that can remember different shapes. Artificial skin is no longer science fiction but science fact. Vision, voice, biometrics and sensor technologies are in use every day. Making them look human is the easy bit.

The body shop

Ian Pearson, a scientist with BTexact and one of the UK's leading futurologists, says: "Machines will probably surpass overall human intellectual capability by 2010 and have an emotional feel just like people. At some point they will develop genuine self-awareness and consciousness and we will have to negotiate their rights."

Others may disagree but most only argue about the timescale. Mr Pearson does agree that some things are implausible. On The Terminator, he says: "We hope that robots will have a pleasant relationship with us because the least feasible part of The Terminator is that the people would win." His guess is that intelligent machines will arrive within the next 20 years, with the first intelligent robotic pets on sale by 2005.

The concept can be taken in another direction. We may think computers are already an integral part of our lives but films show us we could be computer-controlled in rather more subtle ways. One scenario common to films and TV is rather than remaining a separate entity, computers become a part of us. When parts wear out you could become a pick 'n' mix between cloned human and robotic body parts.

This cyborg concept started off simply with The Six Million Dollar Man in the 1970s but has been taken quite a few steps further. As in Robocop, operations to aid or replace parts with mechanical devices are already routine so ladies, in the future we could make sure our bums never do "look big in that" again.

People could also become smarter. In the title role of the movie Johnny Mnemonic, Keanu Reeves couriers information by uploading data to his brain from a computer. It can be downloaded later onto another location. Since the brain is an information processor and experts say we can probably only increase our intelligence by between 25 and 50 per cent, the idea to upgrade the brain's capability for storing information by using plug-in, PC-style chips to store and process more information is a seductive one.

Scientists have been experimenting with chip implants for hearing and recently for motor and sight restoration. Implanting a computer chip to upgrade human memory isn't so far-fetched. Scientists have already taken the nerve cells from leeches and connected them to computers. We just need the means to upload or download this information.

This will probably be carried out with nanotechnology; robots smaller than blood cells that will travel through capillaries to deposit nanochips in our bodies, for example. Ultimately, Mr Pearson believes we will be able to link directly to computers rather than rely on pre-programmed chips.

We could live hundreds of years, if not forever. Mr Pearson believes brain chips to store our memories will be available, if not for us then for future generations. "My daughter was born in 1994," he says. "By the time her natural life span is over, in all likelihood, she will be able to have her mind stored as a backup on a computer network and then downloaded into an android or cyborg body." According to Mr Pearson, even the distinct human qualities that separate us from machines may be present in artificial life in 40 to 60 years' time.

Since we are born flesh and blood, we need doctors. In films, doctors can either be human, android or even holographic. In real life, they will consult computers for advice before making any important decisions about treatment. Computers will use diagnostic tools to draw on global research and offer expert opinion, which few human doctors will dare to ignore. Remote surgery will soon be a regular routine.

The plausibility of this scenario developing is high. 'Telemedicine' is already practised by medical robots that carry out delicate surgical procedures overlooked by experienced human consultants. Even virtual reality has a part to play in today's modern medicine, so the timescale for the above scenario is probably 10 to 30 years.

Mind over matter

How we amuse ourselves is also changing thanks to computer games and software. Soon, however, the internet and computer will make virtual reality a doddle. As in Total Recall or Red Dwarf, recreation or holidays could be a case of turn on, tune in and drop out of reality. For those who want to stay in control, maybe robot characters such as those in WestWorld will take our cares away in perhaps 20 to 40 years' time.

In our new, longer lives, there will be troubles ahead. Criminal behaviour would turn this brave new world on its head with the opportunity to alter personalities or wipe out memories. One of the most powerful films built around this concept is Total Recall, made in 1990. Arnold Schwarzenegger has the memories of his previous life deleted and a new identity programmed for him.

For those who find mind-altering programs which can totally remove your past a bit far-fetched, consider virtual reality techniques, subliminal messages, chip implants and mind-altering drugs; suddenly, the idea doesn't seem so far-fetched. A computer program is already being used by authorities in the US to see if a suspect is lying and has helped to clear one murder suspect. The Farwell Brain Fingerprinting System works on the premise that the brain never forgets images and gives out an electrical pulse to recognised pictures.

US firm Digital Angel has developed the Verichip, an implantable chip that can monitor physiological changes as well as location. The internet certainly has plenty of conspiracy sites accusing governments of developing technology to brainwash us. Naturally, if they are, they are keeping them pretty much under wraps, but as the infamous Nazi doctor Joseph Mengele is reputed to have said: "The more we do to you, the less you seem to believe we are doing it." The timescale for thought and emotion control devices, forecasts Mr Pearson, is around 30 years.

Is science fiction about predicting the future? The genre can be a catalyst for development. In fact, the European Space Agency considers it so important that it is running a project, the ITSF Study, to review past and present sci-fi literature, artwork and films. The aim is to work with writers and film-makers to identify and assess innovative technologies and concepts which could possibly be developed further for space applications.

However, if the thought of the above scenarios horrifies you, don't blame the messenger. In an interview, Arthur C Clarke said: "We science fiction writers never attempt to predict. In fact, it's the exact opposite. As my friend Ray Bradbury once said: 'We do this not to predict the future but to prevent it.'"

WHEN ART IMITATES LIFE

Film directors and screenwriters are the people who bring ideas to life on screen, but have you ever wondered how and where they find inspiration for their ideas? We asked film director and writer Stephen Gallagher, who started his TV career with Doctor Who and moved on to other futuristic series such as Chimera, Oktober and Bugs, and he told us that a pint or two in the pub works wonders.

Much of what purports to be future science in films and TV is just fantasy dressed up in scientific wrappers. The more intelligent and informed the thought, the more grounded the fiction tends to be. Mr Gallagher explains that he sees technology from the author's point of view.

"I first imagine scenarios out of an informed layman's knowledge and reading. I get inspiring mental images and then dig for the meanings and connections behind them. Then with the basic idea half-formed, I read further and consult people who know significantly more about the relevant subjects than I do.

"I'm fortunate in that I've got some very well-informed friends who like nothing better than to bat an idea around in the pub, measuring it against reality and suggesting ingenious solutions to the problems my ignorance may have thrown up. If it's something beyond them, I'll seek out a relevant and sympathetic expert. Then I have to decide what I'll use and what I won't."

However, not every project is writer-driven. Mr Gallagher explains that sometimes a producer will start with a concept, hire advisors and consultants to explore the possibilities inherent in the concept, and only then hire a writer to make a comprehensible story out of the material.

But he warns that accurate science can equate to a dull movie. "Look at Destination Moon - accurate science, dull movie. Then look at Forbidden Planet from the same era. Talking robots, monsters - it's a timeless classic," he says.

"Science is about what is. Art has to be about what might be. The challenge is to make the 'might be' believable."

Mr Gallagher also points out that writers have another hurdle to overcome. Scientific certainty is on shifting ground. "When I was researching Chimera for TV in the late 1980s, I was assured by one geneticist that animal cloning was unlikely ever to be achieved. If it was, it certainly wouldn't be for 50 years." Try telling that to Dolly the sheep.

So Mr Gallagher is of the opinion that if it sounds like a great story, go ahead and write it. "Let the pedants go hang," he says.