Thread: Mission Impossible!

Ever saw a movie that has (physically) impossible events or based on wrong concepts?

It would probably easier to list the ones that actually do follow the laws of physics.

But if I had to choose only one offender, it would have to be the movie about the earth's core solidifying (I forget the name of the flick) and the efforts to drill down in a boring machine to re-ignite it.

Yep, probably around 90% of movies.

Originally Posted by scientik

Ever saw a movie that has (physically) impossible events or based on wrong concepts?

1. Star Wars - just how do we hear the sound of the spaceships in a vacuum.
2. Any SciFi film featuring an asteroid belt. Asteroids in an asteroid belt are almost as rare as a fossil collection in a creationists living room.
3. All films with cars, trucks, etc which explode on impact.
4. All films in which the hero catches the falling heroine, who appears briefly to have come under the gravitational influence of Eros, accelerating at around 200cms/sec/sec.
5. Any film in which a politician tells the truth.

The movie I was thinking about was called "The Core"

http://imdb.com/title/tt0298814/plotsummary

Mary Poppins.

Well if you say Mary Poppins I could say Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings, War of the Worlds, etc.

If you were in a 3 * 3 room hugging the wall opposing an airlock that opened into space, would you expect to get sucked into space when it opened(violently). I was watching Atlantis last night and the thought crossed my mind. I mean if you were standing in the doorway of the opening hatch sure but hugging the opposing wall?

Space is a vacuum. So space = vacuum cleaner. You = dust. Vacuum cleaner + dust = dust violently taken into vacuum cleaner.

fantasy movies, or ones that involve magic are allowed to break such laws. I mean it's magic, get an imagination...

Originally Posted by The P-manator

Space is a vacuum. So space = vacuum cleaner. You = dust. Vacuum cleaner + dust = dust violently taken into vacuum cleaner.

Not entirely! Dust is sucked up by a vacuum because the variation in pressure causes air to flow and the air travelling around the particle causes air friction wich creates movement. The question wasn't wether or not movement would be created. The question was if you were hugging the opposing wall would the air friction over your mass created by the pressure variation equal enough force to send you violently flying out the open hatch. Note I did say if you were standing in the doorway it probably would be sufficient. Also note a heavy object like a penny stuck to a tiled floor will often not get sucked up. Also note there is a continuous flow of air here on earth as opposed to space were it would be limited to the air in that room(I did say 3 * 3). Once that air is gone it's over, how much pressure could be developed(intriguing point, future hatch safety features limit room size to prevent flying persons).

Hmm... interesting how the essential questions in life always have to do with aerodynamics. :-D


Let's see. Standing at (or hugging) the wall opposite to the opening would actually be a pretty good position. That's the point in the room that feels the least air flow. Simply speaking: The worst point would be standing right in the doorway, because you may get a good grip on the door frame, but you also have to hold against ALL of the air in the room escaping within seconds or less. Moreover, the air speed will be at a maximum in the door opening, and friction would probably fry you, even if you could hold on. Standing clutched at the opposite wall (and having some grip on it) you'll actually be relatively safe... as long as you're wearing some sort of astronaut suit, of course. Once all the air is out, the pressure inside the room is equal to the outside (zero in a vaccum), so no more trouble (other than surviving without much oxygen supply).

fantasy movies, or ones that involve magic are allowed to break such laws. I mean it's magic, get an imagination...

Mostly, yes. But modeling of physics also has an aesthetic aspect. It just looks neither good nor realistic, when Legolas jumps around on trolls and oliphants in a way that would only make sense if he were absolutely weightless. When inertia or other essential physics aspects are neglected or badly modeled, the animation just looks awkward, at least to the educated eye. Few people would realize how unrealistic the motion of huge dinosaurs in movies like Jurassic Park are, but that's just because our eyes haven't been calibrated for creatures of that mass.


Watching some of those old Godzilla or King Kong movies from the 60's you wonder how people could have ever been satisfied with such horribly modeled motions. Again, that's just hindsight speaking. People at the time weren't spoiled with a lot of exposure to more realistic looking animations of fantasy creatures, so their brains accepted as reality whatever was shown to them. I am positive that audiences are on a higher level today, but even so... twenty years from now we will look back and wonder how we could ever swallow the nonsense fed to our eyes in any of the movies shown today.

Most movies tend to dumb stories down because the majority of people are scientifically illiterate. One of the few sucessful movies that avoided this was Contact. Even though there were aliens in the movie they weren't your typical Hollywood "little green men".

1. Star Wars - just how do we hear the sound of the spaceships in a vacuum.

Geogre Lucas' early love of Hot Rods sure shows up in the sounds his spacecraft make.

[quote="M"]

Mostly, yes. But modeling of physics also has an aesthetic aspect. It just looks neither good nor realistic, when Legolas jumps around on trolls and oliphants in a way that would only make sense if he were absolutely weightless.

Unless you're like Goku and you have near unlimited jumping power in your legs and anti gravity energy flows through you!!!!!!!!!

Originally Posted by The P-manator

Well if you say Mary Poppins I could say Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings, War of the Worlds, etc.

war of the worlds could be true. You don't know that its not.

war of the worlds could be true. You don't know that its not.

so could Mary Poppins.... and Santa Claus. :-D

That's not the question. Fiction or not, fantasy or not, each movie includes elements that are within our experience, or extrapolations of our experience. The question is, if those familiar and extrapolated elements are represented in a physically reasonable way.