Notices
Results 1 to 40 of 40
Like Tree24Likes
  • 1 Post By Ascended
  • 2 Post By Dywyddyr
  • 3 Post By pineapples
  • 2 Post By jocular
  • 1 Post By LuciDreaming
  • 1 Post By Neverfly
  • 2 Post By Dywyddyr
  • 1 Post By jrmonroe
  • 3 Post By KALSTER
  • 1 Post By parag29081973
  • 2 Post By billvon

Thread: NASA points to the 168 mistakes that led to Armageddon

  1. #1 NASA points to the 168 mistakes that led to Armageddon 
    Ascended Member Ascended's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Norfolk
    Posts
    3,455
    I was driving home the other day listening to the radio and more than a little suprised to hear that NASA is using the film Amageddon as a training video.
    This is apparently so in accurate that NASA has new recruits watch and then try and figure out of of the scientifci mistakes.
    Now most of us would probarbly think we could pick out more than a few, but!, there are 168 mistakes to spot, now I'm not even sure the film last that many minutes.

    I just wonder why film makers can't actually put more real actual science into films, then people can really learn things that are true, instead of spending the next X numbers of years having to unlearn things that clearly arn't.


    danhanegan likes this.
    “The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts.”

    Bertrand Russell
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Genius Duck Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    12,030
    Because, generally, people aren't interested in learning things from a film: they want to be entertained.
    If they put real science into films then, due to the general ignorance of the public, they'd have to make longer films - ones in which the non-scientific noob in the team has it explained to him in detail exactly why things are happening the way they do (so that the audience will understand instead of sitting there going "WTF?! How does that work?")
    I remember the appreciation expressed when Babylon 5 first came out - ships moving in a "Newtonian manner". SF geeks AND NASA stated that they were glad someone finally bothered to show it. And then in later episodes we were subject to squadrons of Star Furies peeling off and manoeuvring like WWII fighters a la Star Wars...


    If Hollywood can't even get history correct when doing historical films (and the technical details of equipment used) and no one 1 cares then what chance something as "esoteric" as science?

    1 Sauf, naturellement, we geeks. I've lost count of the number of conversations I've had about how "good" a war film was with non-geeks, due to technical inaccuracies. The response is usually "does it matter?". But, apparently, it's a different matter altogether when I propose a film about, say, the 1966 World Cup, wherein Sooty scores the winning goal in the famous final match between Bogota and Narnia (the Narnian tean having Catherine the Great in goal).


    Ascended and LuciDreaming like this.
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Senior pineapples's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Ireland someplace
    Posts
    363
    The only scientifically accurate space movie I can think of is the fake moon landings
    Lynx_Fox, Neverfly and Dywyddyr like this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,771
    As a lifelong fancier and user of firearms, I find it particularly appaling to see the invariable showers of sparks produced when bullets hit vehicles or other objects. Additionally, the various scenes in which an explosion throws a vehicle ten feet into the air, the actual device causing that being too tiny to detect visually, are quite ridiculous as well. jocular
    Ascended and Neverfly like this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Theatre Whore babe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Resident of Big Island of Hawai'i since 2003, and Mainland relocated to the Bay Area.
    Posts
    13,226
    Quote Originally Posted by jocular View Post
    As a lifelong fancier and user of firearms, I find it particularly appaling to see the invariable showers of sparks produced when bullets hit vehicles or other objects. Additionally, the various scenes in which an explosion throws a vehicle ten feet into the air, the actual device causing that being too tiny to detect visually, are quite ridiculous as well. jocular
    Jocular, my husband really doesn't like to watch any movie with a lot of "special effects". .................he finds it unrealistic for the reasons you stated.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Masters Degree LuciDreaming's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Cambridgeshire
    Posts
    656
    I guess it wouldn't really matter how accurate they are as long as people understand its fiction. Trouble is some of it still finds its way into popular culture and gets crystallised as a truth. The thing is we get our sense of how the world works by what we see and who we talk to in every day life - there must be plenty of people out there who have only ever watched films and never read books and mix with like-minded people (I can think of a few off the top of my head) so if they never see anything to refute the story the film is telling how would they know if its right or wrong?
    "And we should consider every day lost on which we have not danced at least once. And we should call every truth false which was not accompanied by at least one laugh" Nietzsche.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Genius Duck Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    12,030
    Quote Originally Posted by LuciDreaming View Post
    I guess it wouldn't really matter how accurate they are as long as people understand its fiction.
    But surely the problem is that, despite people realising the plot is fiction, they assume the details are factual.
    Example - an ex of mine was (is still?) a huge fan of CSI and I happened to be there when one episode solved a case where the vital clue was oil.
    "Of course! We should have noticed earlier - the oil! Oil is heavier than water so it should have been at the bottom of the glass..." Or something like that. (This was 3 in 1 or similar - household lubricating oil).
    "WTF??" was my reaction. "Oil floats - especially light machine oil".
    "If oil floated then they wouldn't have said it sinks, and it wouldn't have been a clue. The writers know what they're doing, you must be wrong".



    so if they never see anything to refute the story the film is telling how would they know if its right or wrong?
    You mean... it's possible Luke didn't really kill the Death Star single-handedly?
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Forum Masters Degree LuciDreaming's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Cambridgeshire
    Posts
    656
    Quote Originally Posted by Dywyddyr View Post
    so if they never see anything to refute the story the film is telling how would they know if its right or wrong?
    You mean... it's possible Luke didn't really kill the Death Star single-handedly?
    I know people who think the scene in Sunshine where they go from one space craft to another without a suit is possible, who think neutrino's could microwave the earth. When it sounds like plausible science people tend to just believe it and nearly everyone I know who watches CSI thinks they can get away with the perfect crime or be a criminologist....... scary dudes.

    No sorry - the Death Star exploded as a result of rhubarb chutney fermenting in the fridge. Luke's presence was merely coincidental.
    babe likes this.
    "And we should consider every day lost on which we have not danced at least once. And we should call every truth false which was not accompanied by at least one laugh" Nietzsche.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    Quote Originally Posted by LuciDreaming View Post
    I know people who think the scene in Sunshine where they go from one space craft to another without a suit is possible,
    It is possible. One would need to clear out their lungs of air, but it can be done. What is not going to happen, however, is the Insta-Freeze depicted in the film.
    Ascended likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Genius Duck Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    12,030
    New Scientist Space Blog: How long can you survive in the vacuum of space? - New Scientist

    Asimov (or, er, maybe Clarke 1) pointed out that short-term vacuum survival is possible, in an SF story way back in the 60s/ 70s.

    1 Yes I know I shouldn't confuse Arthur with Isaac, but I can't remember which story it was, and I was reading a LOT of both in those days. I'm damned sure it wasn't Mike Moorcock though, if that's any help).
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    Heh...
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Genius Duck Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    12,030
    I got 1 minute 11 seconds.
    Which is rather hard (given the absence of any nearby launch facility) to check.

    On the other hand I took another quiz from that page which says I can take 22 5-year olds in fight, so tomorrow I'm going down to the local primaray school to see how the quiz algorithm compares to reality.
    I'll let you know how accurate it is later on.
    Neverfly and PhDemon like this.
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Theatre Whore babe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Resident of Big Island of Hawai'i since 2003, and Mainland relocated to the Bay Area.
    Posts
    13,226
    Quote Originally Posted by Dywyddyr View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by LuciDreaming View Post
    I guess it wouldn't really matter how accurate they are as long as people understand its fiction.
    But surely the problem is that, despite people realising the plot is fiction, they assume the details are factual.
    Example - an ex of mine was (is still?) a huge fan of CSI and I happened to be there when one episode solved a case where the vital clue was oil.
    "Of course! We should have noticed earlier - the oil! Oil is heavier than water so it should have been at the bottom of the glass..." Or something like that. (This was 3 in 1 or similar - household lubricating oil).
    "WTF??" was my reaction. "Oil floats - especially light machine oil".
    "If oil floated then they wouldn't have said it sinks, and it wouldn't have been a clue. The writers know what they're doing, you must be wrong".



    so if they never see anything to refute the story the film is telling how would they know if its right or wrong?
    You mean... it's possible Luke didn't really kill the Death Star single-handedly?
    Oh heavens, I shan't sleep.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Theatre Whore babe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Resident of Big Island of Hawai'i since 2003, and Mainland relocated to the Bay Area.
    Posts
    13,226
    Quote Originally Posted by Dywyddyr View Post
    New Scientist Space Blog: How long can you survive in the vacuum of space? - New Scientist

    Asimov (or, er, maybe Clarke 1) pointed out that short-term vacuum survival is possible, in an SF story way back in the 60s/ 70s.

    1 Yes I know I shouldn't confuse Arthur with Isaac, but I can't remember which story it was, and I was reading a LOT of both in those days. I'm damned sure it wasn't Mike Moorcock though, if that's any help).
    48 seconds.....
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Forum Professor jrmonroe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,444
    You may be happy to know that The Professor on "Gilligan's Island" may have had some redeeming qualities. We can only hope.

    Before accepting the role of [Professor] Roy Hinkley, the actor [Russell Johnson] made Gilligan's Island producer Sherwood Schwartz promise him that when he made scientific statements they would be accurate.
    I have read that he merely asked that the science that he did or talked about on the show was as accurate as possible. Too bad he was never able to fix the hole in the boat.
    babe likes this.
    Grief is the price we pay for love. (CM Parkes) Our postillion has been struck by lightning. (Unknown) War is always the choice of the chosen who will not have to fight. (Bono) The years tell much what the days never knew. (RW Emerson) Reality is not always probable, or likely. (JL Borges)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Forum Masters Degree LuciDreaming's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Cambridgeshire
    Posts
    656
    1 minute 29 secs.... Who'd have thought..... :-) It does state you would lose consciousness after 15 secs though so really its game over after 15 secs..... so I still think they could not get themselves from one spaceship to another alive.
    "And we should consider every day lost on which we have not danced at least once. And we should call every truth false which was not accompanied by at least one laugh" Nietzsche.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Administrator KALSTER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    8,245
    Quote Originally Posted by PhDemon View Post
    1 min 29 for me, plus I could beat up 26 90-yr olds, I could feed 15 cannibals and my "Caffeine Test" result is "extremely high - a vibrating crack-head". What a weird website


    Last edited by KALSTER; July 21st, 2013 at 03:33 PM.
    Disclaimer: I do not declare myself to be an expert on ANY subject. If I state something as fact that is obviously wrong, please don't hesitate to correct me. I welcome such corrections in an attempt to be as truthful and accurate as possible.

    "Gullibility kills" - Carl Sagan
    "All people know the same truth. Our lives consist of how we chose to distort it." - Harry Block
    "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Genius Duck Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    12,030
    I only scored 130 clicks, way past over-caffeinated 1 and into "jittery".
    On the other hand, due to a lack of cash, and therefore coffee, I've only had ONE coffee today 2.

    1 I have my doubts whether "over-caffeinated" is a meaningful term in any real sense.
    2 As opposed to my usual 10-12 12-oz mugs per day.
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Administrator KALSTER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    8,245
    I actually watched Armageddon again just the other day. I was grimacing throughout.


    I guess one has to be able to suspend disbelief in order to enjoy some movies, but sometimes it just get's overwhelming. One of the worst was "The Core", with Hillary Swank. Absolutely terrible nonsense.

    Then again, I love programs and movies like Star Trek, Superman and Iron Man (apparently Pacific Rim is awesome! (don't use "awesome" easily)). I do appreciate though when a movie at least attempts to depict science that is slightly more plausible. While still being far from perfect, I even appreciated the sciency bits in Jason X.

    If someone had the cojones, money, insight and talent to make a proper Culture movie (Iain M Banks books), I'd lose my mind.
    Disclaimer: I do not declare myself to be an expert on ANY subject. If I state something as fact that is obviously wrong, please don't hesitate to correct me. I welcome such corrections in an attempt to be as truthful and accurate as possible.

    "Gullibility kills" - Carl Sagan
    "All people know the same truth. Our lives consist of how we chose to distort it." - Harry Block
    "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    Genius Duck Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    12,030
    Quote Originally Posted by KALSTER View Post
    (apparently Pacific Rim is awesome! (don't use "awesome" easily))
    There's a lovely meme popping up on Facebook that this film will be retitled for British release: Robots Twatting Monsters.
    Oh, if only...

    If someone had the cojones, money, insight and talent to make a proper Culture movie (Iain M Banks books), I'd lose my mind.
    I just had an orgasm at that thought.
    Player of Games was optioned, but fell through.
    You'll have to make do with this.
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,416
    One minute 23 seconds.

    --
    not sure how NASA thinks dissing a popular sci-fi helps them garnish support....another example of their habitual PR failure
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22  
    Administrator KALSTER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    8,245
    Quote Originally Posted by Dywyddyr View Post
    If someone had the cojones, money, insight and talent to make a proper Culture movie (Iain M Banks books), I'd lose my mind.
    I just had an orgasm at that thought.
    Player of Games was optioned, but fell through.
    You'll have to make do with this.
    Player of Games; man I can just imagine. But I'd be terrified that they'd just morph it into just another stupid action/CGI extravaganza.

    They would need to do a hell of a job to pull off a decent movie. That fan made film just wet my taste buds. They'd have to make a very long movie to get enough nuance into it.

    If you never read any Asimov, then "I, Robot" might have been a good movie. But owning the actual "I, Robot" compilation and having read a huge stack of Asimov, I was very pissed off indeed with what they did with it. They could have made a brilliant piece of scifi, but instead went for the money. Just imagine a true rendition of Susan Calvin, maybe R Daneel, maybe even Powell and Donovan could have been in there somewhere.

    As bad as "I, Robot" was, "Bicentennial Man" was much worse! I wanted to strangle Robin Williams. I nearly threw up when he said "Kiss me!".


    Movies like Star trek are good and well (and very entertaining), but when will they make a proper large budget, intelligent science fiction? When was the last time they did that?
    Disclaimer: I do not declare myself to be an expert on ANY subject. If I state something as fact that is obviously wrong, please don't hesitate to correct me. I welcome such corrections in an attempt to be as truthful and accurate as possible.

    "Gullibility kills" - Carl Sagan
    "All people know the same truth. Our lives consist of how we chose to distort it." - Harry Block
    "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #23  
    Theatre Whore babe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Resident of Big Island of Hawai'i since 2003, and Mainland relocated to the Bay Area.
    Posts
    13,226
    Quote Originally Posted by LuciDreaming View Post
    1 minute 29 secs.... Who'd have thought..... :-) It does state you would lose consciousness after 15 secs though so really its game over after 15 secs..... so I still think they could not get themselves from one spaceship to another alive.
    Dang girl, then I only had 33 seconds in reality!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #24  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    I disagree with NASA. 168 mistakes? I count only one - making the film in the first place.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  26. #25  
    Theatre Whore babe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Resident of Big Island of Hawai'i since 2003, and Mainland relocated to the Bay Area.
    Posts
    13,226
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    I disagree with NASA. 168 mistakes? I count only one - making the film in the first place.
    I think they forgot like 25 more however....so they cut the film short!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  27. #26  
    Forum Junior
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    282
    Pretty much all science fiction movies are riddled with bad science, but a few are good enough to generate a willing suspension of disbelief. Terminator, The Abyss, and Minority Report do it for me. All these films were groundbreaking in their own way, the interesting ideas presented distracted me from the more ludicrous gaps.

    I do think one way to avoid letting silly ideas creep in is to avoid explaining things. Gene Roddenberry is said to have often repeated the mantra "never explain anything". Unfortunately some screenplay writers, knowing full well bad science is going to appear in their work, will try to explain it away with technobabble that is even sillier than what they are trying to explain away.

    Ultimately, the problem is that movies are made to make money and the movie industry sees the most important consideration as appealing to the widest audience possible. Only a tiny fraction of potential ticket buyers actually notices or cares that the science makes no sense. I do have some hope that independent producers will be able to establish a market of more intelligent films made on small budgets. Shane Carruth's Primer would be an example.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  28. #27  
    Theatre Whore babe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Resident of Big Island of Hawai'i since 2003, and Mainland relocated to the Bay Area.
    Posts
    13,226
    Quote Originally Posted by danhanegan View Post
    Pretty much all science fiction movies are riddled with bad science, but a few are good enough to generate a willing suspension of disbelief. Terminator, The Abyss, and Minority Report do it for me. All these films were groundbreaking in their own way, the interesting ideas presented distracted me from the more ludicrous gaps.

    I do think one way to avoid letting silly ideas creep in is to avoid explaining things. Gene Roddenberry is said to have often repeated the mantra "never explain anything". Unfortunately some screenplay writers, knowing full well bad science is going to appear in their work, will try to explain it away with technobabble that is even sillier than what they are trying to explain away.

    Ultimately, the problem is that movies are made to make money and the movie industry sees the most important consideration as appealing to the widest audience possible. Only a tiny fraction of potential ticket buyers actually notices or cares that the science makes no sense. I do have some hope that independent producers will be able to establish a market of more intelligent films made on small budgets. Shane Carruth's Primer would be an example.
    Good luck on that one! No offense intended.

    They will give the populace what they wish!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  29. #28  
    Forum Junior
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    200
    Atleast the movie Armageddon shows we are technologically advanced to some extent.
    babe likes this.
    believer in ahimsa
    Reply With Quote  
     

  30. #29  
    ▼▼ dn ʎɐʍ sıɥʇ ▼▼ RedPanda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,737
    Quote Originally Posted by parag29081973 View Post
    Atleast the movie Armageddon shows we are technologically advanced to some extent.
    When we first made fire, we were technologically advanced to some extent.
    SayBigWords.com/say/3FC

    "And, behold, I come quickly;" Revelation 22:12

    "Religions are like sausages. When you know how they are made, you no longer want them."
    Reply With Quote  
     

  31. #30  
    Administrator KALSTER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    8,245
    Quote Originally Posted by parag29081973 View Post
    Atleast the movie Armageddon shows we are technologically advanced to some extent.
    Enough to make movies, yep. None of those craft actually exist and many of the features they exhibit in the movie are bogus as well.
    Disclaimer: I do not declare myself to be an expert on ANY subject. If I state something as fact that is obviously wrong, please don't hesitate to correct me. I welcome such corrections in an attempt to be as truthful and accurate as possible.

    "Gullibility kills" - Carl Sagan
    "All people know the same truth. Our lives consist of how we chose to distort it." - Harry Block
    "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle
    Reply With Quote  
     

  32. #31  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    2,229
    Quote Originally Posted by LuciDreaming View Post
    I know people who think the scene in Sunshine where they go from one space craft to another without a suit is possible
    ?? It is. It would not be pleasant but it would be survivable. (And there were a great many other mistakes in that movie, so I'm certainly not saying it was very accurate.)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  33. #32  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    2,229
    Quote Originally Posted by Ascended View Post
    I was driving home the other day listening to the radio and more than a little suprised to hear that NASA is using the film Amageddon as a training video.
    This is apparently so in accurate that NASA has new recruits watch and then try and figure out of of the scientifci mistakes.
    I saw that movie and thought it was the usual "written by a liberal arts major" movie. I was suprised to hear the film had technical advisors. They must have been idiots, right? But I looked them up and they Gerry Griffin (Director of the Johnson Space Center) and Dave White (astronaut.)

    So how, I wonder, did they still get it so wrong? I can only imagine the conversations between the screenwriters and the advisors:

    "So we're going to have these space shuttles take off to land on the asteroid and . . ."
    "OK, I assume these aren't the space shuttle as in the space transportation system vehicle."
    "Well, they are, just modified."
    "There's no way an STS launch can do that."
    "Well, uh, OK, we'll have them pick up liquid oxygen at a Russian space station."
    "The on-orbit engines don't use liquid oxygen, and besides you'd still need fuel - oxygen is an oxidizer, not a fuel."
    "This would be great! They could dock and then we could have the space station blow up from an explosion when the fuel leaks out or something."
    "Oxygen is NOT A FUEL! You could just dump it and . . . "
    "And then they could do a slingshot thing around the moon!"
    "That's - actually plausible. By using a gravity assist trajectory, you could increase your available delta V."
    "It would be great on camera too. We could have the crew being crushed by the huge G-forces you get near the Moon."
    "What? No, the moon only has about half the gravity the the Earth does, and besides, in a free flight trajectory they wouldn't feel anything."
    "Yeah, well, that's not too interesting, so we'll have the explosions and crushing acceleration."
    (sigh) "OK, what else? What about the rovers?"
    "Oh, they will be great! We're going to give them rocket engines AND machine guns. Can machine guns fire in space?"
    "Yes, they can, and that's actually not a bad idea. You could have a scene where they are out of fuel and use the reaction from firing the guns to get them back to the ship. It actually works!"
    "Well, no, we'd have them be trapped in the cargo hold, then they'd use the machine guns to blow a hole in the side of the ship to escape."
    "So they'd blow the cargo hold to bits and then the reaction would drive them backwards through the wall?"
    "No, they'd drive forwards, of course. It looks stupid to back up."
    "So they would use rockets or something to escape?"
    "No, they'd have tank treads. I think that works better than rockets."
    "OK. I give up. Do whatever you want. I get paid anyway, right?"
    KALSTER and RedPanda like this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  34. #33  
    Genius Duck Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    12,030
    And don't forget to have a scene where one character suffers from that much-documented ailment "space dementia".
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  35. #34  
    Moderator Moderator Cogito Ergo Sum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    2,519
    Quote Originally Posted by billvon View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by LuciDreaming View Post
    I know people who think the scene in Sunshine where they go from one space craft to another without a suit is possible
    ?? It is. It would not be pleasant but it would be survivable. (And there were a great many other mistakes in that movie, so I'm certainly not saying it was very accurate.)

    True, but the scene where the crew sits down and watches Mercury transit the Sun, compensates (in my opinion) for the mistakes.
    "The only safe rule is to dispute only with those of your acquaintance of whom you know that they possess sufficient intelligence and self-respect not to advance absurdities; to appeal to reason and not to authority, and to listen to reason and yield to it; and, finally, to be willing to accept reason even from an opponent, and to be just enough to bear being proved to be in the wrong."

    ~ Arthur Schopenhauer, The Art of Being Right: 38 Ways to Win an Argument (1831), Stratagem XXXVIII.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  36. #35  
    ▼▼ dn ʎɐʍ sıɥʇ ▼▼ RedPanda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,737
    Quote Originally Posted by Dywyddyr View Post
    And don't forget to have a scene where one character suffers from that much-documented ailment "space dementia".
    The correct term, if you don't mind, is "Space Madness" - and it is VERY real.
    Here is a fly-on-the-wall documentary showing what can happen to even the most normal of people:
    Panarama Special: Space madness
    SayBigWords.com/say/3FC

    "And, behold, I come quickly;" Revelation 22:12

    "Religions are like sausages. When you know how they are made, you no longer want them."
    Reply With Quote  
     

  37. #36  
    Forum Ph.D. merumario's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    nigeria
    Posts
    844
    They do what they want and they do not care if they are misinterpreting science and its a problem#
    "I am sorry for making this letter longer than usual.I actually lacked the time to make it shorter."###
    Reply With Quote  
     

  38. #37  
    Theatre Whore babe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Resident of Big Island of Hawai'i since 2003, and Mainland relocated to the Bay Area.
    Posts
    13,226
    Quote Originally Posted by merumario View Post
    They do what they want and they do not care if they are misinterpreting science and its a problem#

    IF it is fiction, and people take it as fact, it is the person taking it as fact that is at fault, IMHO.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  39. #38  
    Forum Ph.D. merumario's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    nigeria
    Posts
    844
    Quote Originally Posted by babe View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by merumario View Post
    They do what they want and they do not care if they are misinterpreting science and its a problem#

    IF it is fiction, and people take it as fact, it is the person taking it as fact that is at fault, IMHO.
    I doubt that those that has far too limited knowledge can be able to distinguish from sci-fi and what's in the mainstream#

    And even those that are wanting to be scientist might get the ideas they already know fragmented,and one of the reason is fallacy#
    "I am sorry for making this letter longer than usual.I actually lacked the time to make it shorter."###
    Reply With Quote  
     

  40. #39  
    Theatre Whore babe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Resident of Big Island of Hawai'i since 2003, and Mainland relocated to the Bay Area.
    Posts
    13,226
    Quote Originally Posted by merumario View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by babe View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by merumario View Post
    They do what they want and they do not care if they are misinterpreting science and its a problem#

    IF it is fiction, and people take it as fact, it is the person taking it as fact that is at fault, IMHO.
    I doubt that those that has far too limited knowledge can be able to distinguish from sci-fi and what's in the mainstream#

    And even those that are wanting to be scientist might get the ideas they already know fragmented,and one of the reason is fallacy#
    Here, is where I believe the term "common sense" comes in.

    It is a movie.
    It is fiction.
    Some things are relatively true, but bottom line.

    It is a movie.
    It is fiction.
    Treat it as such.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  41. #40  
    Forum Ph.D. merumario's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    nigeria
    Posts
    844
    Quote Originally Posted by babe View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by merumario View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by babe View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by merumario View Post
    They do what they want and they do not care if they are misinterpreting science and its a problem#

    IF it is fiction, and people take it as fact, it is the person taking it as fact that is at fault, IMHO.
    I doubt that those that has far too limited knowledge can be able to distinguish from sci-fi and what's in the mainstream#

    And even those that are wanting to be scientist might get the ideas they already know fragmented,and one of the reason is fallacy#
    Here, is where I believe the term "common sense" comes in.

    It is a movie.
    It is fiction.
    Some things are relatively true, but bottom line.

    It is a movie.
    It is fiction.
    Treat it as such.
    Considerable#
    "I am sorry for making this letter longer than usual.I actually lacked the time to make it shorter."###
    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. TV mistakes
    By william in forum Criminology and Forensic Science
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: May 6th, 2009, 04:11 PM
  2. Mistakes?
    By EV33 in forum Mathematics
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: July 1st, 2008, 09:56 AM
  3. Basic mistakes
    By jacketate in forum Mathematics
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: January 19th, 2008, 03:00 PM
  4. Basic mistakes
    By jacketate in forum Biology
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: January 16th, 2008, 05:04 PM
  5. Regarding boiling points and melting points
    By chMartin1 in forum Chemistry
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: April 6th, 2007, 07:37 PM
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •