Skip to main content

star wars - How does a sarlacc gain any energy if it keeps victims alive for a thousand years?


When eaten by a sarlacc, according to C-3PO,



In his belly, you will find a new definition of pain and suffering, as you are slowly digested over a thousand years.




I imagine that keeping a victim alive for a thousand years takes much more energy than is available to the sarlacc from the body of the victim. Thus, keeping victims alive for so long would seem to be a net loss of energy for the sarlacc.


Is there a canon answer to resolve this conundrum? Did the sarlacc have another energy source (for example, ability to harvest sunlight)?



Answer



The very short answer is that the Sarlacc gains energy from digesting non-sentient creatures (womp rats, eopies and so forth) and then uses that energy to torture its sentient victims, gaining a measure of telepathic enjoyment from their agony.


In fact, it likes their pain so much that it expends energy in keeping them alive so that it can keep torturing them almost indefinitely.



The mature Sarlacc, however, does have mobile tentacles and legs but has adapted its legs as anchor roots. Scientists currently believe the Sarlacc is an animal, much like sponges and anemones are animals. Because it lives in the middle of the desert, the Sarlacc does not feed often, but because of its highly efficient digestive system, it doesn't need to. Its body preserves food for incredibly long periods of time, digesting it slowly and storing it until the Sarlacc needs nourishment. Unfortunately, the victim often remains alive for much of the time, in part sustained by the Sarlacc's internal nutrients.


One of the prevailing rumors about the Sarlacc is that the creature is mildly telepathic and actually gains knowledge and sentience from victims as it consumes them, sometimes over thousands of years, depending on the species of the meal. Some data Senior Anthropologist Hoole secured from the bounty hunter Boba Fett have confirmed this.


Fett's helmet recorder was running, apparently, during a period in which he was trapped inside the creature. When I sat down to study the tape, I was horrified. Not only was it clear to me that the Sarlacc was sentient, but it enjoyed torturing those it was digesting. Fett's actions and responses plainly indicated that the creature manipulated the thoughts of its victims, and even kept their intelligence stored in its memories so it could savor their pain at another time.



The recordings also showed a more anemonelike physical structure than most scientists have believed, and the secretion of some digestive enzyme that might be the cause of their hallucinogenic power over their victims. This theory was supported by the fact that Fett could plainly be seen reacting to stimuli that were not there.


The New Essential Guide to Alien Species



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

harry potter - Did Dolores Umbridge Have Any Association with Voldemort (or Death Eaters) before His Return?

I noticed that Dolores Umbridge was born during the first Wizarding War, so it's very likely she wasn't a Death Eater then (but she is pretty evil -- who knows?). After that Voldemort was not around in a way that could affect many people, and most wouldn't know he was planning to rise again. During that time, and up through Voldemort's return (in Goblet of Fire ), did Umbridge have any connection with the Death Eaters or with Voldemort? Was she doing what she did on her own, or was it because of an association with Voldemort or his allies? Answer Dolores Umbridge was definitely not a good person. However, as Sirius points out, "the world isn't split into good people and Death Eaters". Remember that he also says that he doesn't believe Umbridge to be a Death Eater, but that she's evil enough (or something like that). I think there are two strong reasons to believe that: Umbridge was proud to do everything according to the law, except when she trie...

What is the etymology of Doctor Who?

I recently decided to watch Doctor Who, and started viewing the 2005 version. I have the first two episodes from the first season, and I can't help but wonder what is the etymology of the name "Doctor Who"? And why does the protagonist call himself "the Doctor" (or is it "the doctor")? Answer In the very first episode of Doctor Who (way back in 1963), the Doctor has a granddaughter going by the name "Susan Foreman", and the junkyard where the TARDIS is has the sign "I.M. Foreman". Barbara, who becomes one of the Doctor's companions, calls him "Doctor Foreman" (probably assuming that is his name given his relationship to Susan), and Ian (another early companion) does the same in the second episode, to which the Doctor says: Eh? Doctor who? What's he talking about? "Foreman" is most likely selected as a convenient surname for Susan to use because it happened to be on display near where the TARDIS landed....

story identification - Animation: floating island, flying pests

At least 20 years ago I watched a short animated film which stuck in my mind. The whole thing was wordless, possibly European, and I'm pretty sure I didn't imagine it... It featured a flying island which was inhabited by some creatures who (in my memory) reminded me of the Moomins. The island was frequently bothered by large winged animals who swooped around, although I don't think they did any actual damage. At the end one of the moomin creatures suddenly gets a weird feeling, feels forced to climb to the top of the island and then plunges down a shaft right through the centre - only to emerge at the bottom as one of the flyers. Answer Skywhales from 1983. The story begins with a man warning the tribe of approaching skywhales. The drummers then warn everybody of the hunt as everyone get prepared to set "sail". Except one man is found in his home sleeping as the noise wake him up. He then gets ready and is about to take his weapon as he hesitates then decides ...