Interstellar

Garyvdh said:
If you can figure that poster out WITHOUT having seen the movie I will give you a medal! :D
Click to expand...

If you can figure it out AFTER seeing the movie you deserve a medal... What a convoluted mess, if you need the timeline of interstellar explained you need your head checked it's perfectly simple. Also cooper station is too far back in that timeline anyway
 
^^ How can it be convoluted and perfectly simple? :p

That poster has me keen to see the movie now :D
 
Watched it, while the plot was interesting the acting was sub par, it was to drawn out. Some scenes you could not even make out what Cooper was saying. I give it a 5/10. Massive hype over nothing. Pity I'm a big Nolan fan.
 
Saw the movie last night... was expecting a lot (Inception is one of my all-time favourite movies) and walked out disappointed. Not a bad movie but not living up to the hype. I'd give it a 6/10.
I predicted the origin of the gravity anomalies (i.e. who "they" are) halfway through the movie it was so obvious.

The messed up science just got under my skin, enough to destroy my suspension of disbelief. I did a quick search on the internet and, to my relief, others have picked up on the same things that irked me.
For example: (1) They need a multi-stage rocket to leave earth's gravity-well but the same craft can just fly off a high-G (1.3) world like a plane. (2) To get a time-dilation anywhere near what they experienced on the planet (around 60,000 times) you'd have to be skimming the edge of a black hole.

Won't buy this on blu-ray when it comes out :(
 
1) to be fair that's easily explained by the fact that the craft would have been quite easily capable to fly off earth like a plane but they didn't want to use it's fancy power/fuel source when an old fashioned rocket could do the job. Also a multi stage rocket looks cooler than space refueling.
2) they were fairly damn close to the black hole, a really really big black hole too..

Only "science" that threw me out was the power of luuuuurv and that the time dilation had a definite boundary.
 
ScottulusMaximus said:
1) to be fair that's easily explained by the fact that the craft would have been quite easily capable to fly off earth like a plane but they didn't want to use it's fancy power/fuel source when an old fashioned rocket could do the job. Also a multi stage rocket looks cooler than space refueling.
2) they were fairly damn close to the black hole, a really really big black hole too..

Only "science" that threw me out was the power of luuuuurv and that the time dilation had a definite boundary.
Click to expand...

1) So they use a multi-stage rocket that's several times bigger than the craft so it doesn't use it's own fuel? Why not just give it a bigger tank? Or shoot up fuel-tanks separately? But, yeah, I agree: it was cooler to do it that way :)
2) I'm talking about Miller's World. It was orbiting the black-hole, not skimming its surface.

Don't even get me started on the stupid idea of establishing humanities last, best hope on a planet orbiting a black hole. If it's not the tidal forces or intense radiation then the eventual collapse into the black hole will destroy your colony.

Where did the sunlight come from? As I understood, Gargantua was the remains of a collapsed star that still had a halo of high-energy particles around it (which will eventually get sucked up). Hardly enough to illuminate the way it did.

FYI: This site has some interesting numbers Wrong Science in Interstellar
 
HorusZA said:
Where did the sunlight come from? As I understood, Gargantua was the remains of a collapsed star that still had a halo of high-energy particles around it (which will eventually get sucked up). Hardly enough to illuminate the way it did.
Click to expand...

Sunlight? Or do you just mean light?

There was a huge star in the system. They showed it the moment they went through the wormhole.
 
HorusZA said:
SNIP
Click to expand...

1) Yes. What power did it use? Could they make enough of the fuel? Just saying there's lots of "in world" explanations for that, the actual reason is that a multi stage rocket looks ****ing cool and the convolution required to have the rockets on the other planets would've been mind boggling.
2) that link you provide shows that Millers planet was indeed skimming the black hole, ignoring the fact the planet could never exist the science after that is fairly solid... Except for the border of time dilation of course.

Well yes, but beggars can't be choosers and maybe the future humans only worked out all the timey-wimey stuff because of the black hole... So had to rescue humanity there.

And as above there's a big ass sun there.

Also:

over-and-over-and-over-again.jpg

Explained.
/thread ;)
 
ScottulusMaximus said:
1) Yes. What power did it use? Could they make enough of the fuel? Just saying there's lots of "in world" explanations for that, the actual reason is that a multi stage rocket looks ****ing cool and the convolution required to have the rockets on the other planets would've been mind boggling.
2) that link you provide shows that Millers planet was indeed skimming the black hole, ignoring the fact the planet could never exist the science after that is fairly solid... Except for the border of time dilation of course.

Well yes, but beggars can't be choosers and maybe the future humans only worked out all the timey-wimey stuff because of the black hole... So had to rescue humanity there.

And as above there's a big ass sun there.

Also:

View attachment 170175

Explained.
/thread ;)
Click to expand...

From reddit:
On several forums I've seen moviegoers poking & prodding at "plot holes" and "science errors" in Interstellar. While some are legitimate criticisms, the vast majority have fairly simple explanations. In this post I hope to correct some misconceptions about Miller's world, which seems to be getting the brunt of the criticism. The following is based on information provided in chapter 17 of Kip Thorne's The Science of Interstellar.

General premise: Miller's world is a roughly Earth-size planet orbiting the supermassive black hole Gargantua. The planet orbits so close that time passes ~61,000x slower on its surface compared to the outside universe due to gravitational time dilation. The surface is covered in a global ocean, and any given point is inundated by skyscraper-size waves every hour or so (local time).
Q1: Why doesn't the planet get sucked into the black hole if it's so close?

A: Contrary to popular belief, it is perfectly possible to safely orbit a black hole. Only when an object gets extremely close (roughly when distance to the event horizon < diameter of the event horizon) does the extreme curvature of spacetime prevent stable orbits from existing. But Miller's world is extremely close to Gargantua, so what's holding it there? While Gargantua does have extreme gravity, another property of the singularity can help counteract it in some cases – its spin. When enough mass spins fast enough, it can actually “drag” the spacetime around it in a spinning motion. Gargantua is 100 million times heavier than the Sun and spins at 99.8% of lightspeed, so this effect is significant. It turns out, when you run the math, that there is an orbit just outside the event horizon where gravity and centrifugal effects balance out, and Miller’s world can reside. The orbit is also stable: any perturbation pushing the planet slightly closer or further away will cause an opposing reaction force, keeping the planet in its orbit.
Q2: Wouldn't the planet be torn to shreds from intense tidal forces?

A: This might stem from a misconception of what tidal forces actually are. Right now, as you’re sitting in front of your computer, your feet are slightly closer to Earth’s center than your head. That means there’s actually a difference in gravity between the two, which manifests as a force working to stretch you vertically – a tidal force. Of course, Earth’s gravity is weak enough that you’ll never actually notice. But go near a black hole with much more intense gravity, and the effect can be very significant, enough to rip your body apart before you get anywhere near the event horizon. So how does Miller’s world stay in one piece if it’s so close? Counter-intuitively, it’s because Gargantua is so massive: tidal forces around a black hole decrease as the black hole gets larger. Remember, a tidal force comes about because gravity has a different strength on two sides of an object. Gargantua’s event horizon is as wide as Earth’s orbit around the Sun. Compared to that, the width of Miller’s world is absolutely puny. When you run the math, you find that the tidal forces experienced by Miller’s world would be enough to slightly deform the planet into an egg-shape, but not enough to rip it apart; it’ll stay in one piece.

Q3: Why do clocks tick slower there? And why did the crew age slower?
A: One of the consequences of Special & General Relativity is that time and space are not absolute, independent things. They are intertwined into one 4D entity – spacetime – and can be stretched and warped. The warping of time is referred to as “time dilation,” and can occur when A) two objects are travelling incredibly fast relative to each other and/or B) an object is in an extreme gravity field. Both of these effects noticeably affect Miller’s world: it’s zipping around Gargantua at nearly 50% lightspeed in its orbit, and is very deep in the black hole’s extreme gravity well. The cumulative effect of these two facts is that time itself runs slower on Miller’s world relative to the rest of the universe: 1 hour on the planet equals 7 years on Earth. Such extreme dilation is possible due to Gargantua’s immense mass and proportionally immense gravity. Note that this isn’t just something that affects clocks. It affects any physical process that involves time, including all the molecular interactions in your body that keep you alive and cause you to age. Literally everything runs slower on the planet – but you wouldn’t notice, because your thoughts and cognitive processes would have slowed by the same amount. To you, the outside universe would be running fast, and to anyone far away from the black hole, they would see you running in slow motion.

Q4: What's making those waves?
A: There are a few theories making the rounds; what follows is Kip Thorne’s theory, which I personally think explains them best. Recall that although they don’t rip it apart, tidal forces from Gargantua are enough to distort Miller’s world into more of an egg-shape than a sphere. Due to its now-slightly-elongated shape, the planet will have a preferred orientation relative to the black hole, with its long axis perpendicular to the event horizon. It will be tidally locked: one side will always face Gargantua, and the other will always face away. Tidal forces act to maintain this stable orientation – any slight rotation away from it will cause a reaction force acting to push it back. Here’s where the waves come in. If Miller’s world were just barely not tidally locked (had a slight residual spin), it would instead oscillate slightly back and forth like a pendulum around its most stable orientation. These periodic oscillations would make the planetary ocean slosh back and forth, and could create massive waves like those seen in the film.

Q5: How did the Ranger reach the planet at all if it’s spinning around Gargantua at half of lightspeed?
A: Supermassive black holes tend to gather a lot of smaller bodies (stars, planets, debris, etc.) in their orbital space. Gargantua doesn’t just have 3 planets, there’s loads of other stuff orbiting it. Cooper references this at one point when he says “I could slingshot around that neutron star to slow down.” By using carefully calculated gravitational slingshots around small high-gravity objects like neutron stars and mini-black-holes, the Ranger could have gotten from Endurance’s parking orbit high above Gargantua down to Miller’s world without using the engines much. Plus, since the Ranger & crew will be in freefall during the slingshots, they won’t feel any G-forces despite the tremendous accelerations they’ll be undergoing.
Click to expand...
http://www.reddit.com/r/interstellar/comments/2mt73w/faq_millers_world_spoilers/

More sciency: (unfortunately original blog is down)
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:diPTFORhxy0J:ikjyotsinghkohli24.wordpress.com/2014/11/07/on-the-science-of-interstellar/+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=za

The only unrealistic thing that happened w.r.t Miller's planet is the fact that they didn't see the giant waves from orbit.
 
I'll post my rating and mini-review here again

Interstellar 9.5/10

Finaly got time . . . no, MADE time to watch this. What a masterpiece of cinematography! How could anyone be bored watching this movie. Loved every minute of it. I was literally on the edge of my seat during certain scenes.

I'm not going to mention the scientific accuracies or inaccuracies because it has been discusssed indepth already. That aside I enjoyed every minute of the movie. I didn't even feel that long.

The only negative I have about the movie is Anne Hathaway. Her character irritated the shyte out of me, but thats probably because I can't stand Anne Hathaway as an actor.
 
RazedInBlack said:
I'll post my rating and mini-review here again

Interstellar 9.5/10

Finaly got time . . . no, MADE time to watch this. What a masterpiece of cinematography! How could anyone be bored watching this movie. Loved every minute of it. I was literally on the edge of my seat during certain scenes.

I'm not going to mention the scientific accuracies or inaccuracies because it has been discusssed indepth already. That aside I enjoyed every minute of the movie. I didn't even feel that long.

The only negative I have about the movie is Anne Hathaway. Her character irritated the shyte out of me, but thats probably because I can't stand Anne Hathaway as an actor.
Click to expand...

Well said, I also loved it. What a ride!!!

I just can't believe that people come out of a movie talking about the science :wtf:
 
How did that black guy survive for 23 years alone waiting for Cooper to return?

Did he put himself to sleep. If not the movie didn't address the psychological effects of extreme solitude?
 
Just saw it this afternoon, brilliant movie loved every moment.

First time in about 3 years I actually went to a proper cinema :D

To the guys complaining about the science .. it's entertainment not a degree is astrophysics. We watch movies about dragons & aliens too, no need to get the caclulators out to check if the height & length of Bruce Lee's flying kick was actually physically possible or not.

I found the plot clear & believable till the end, the only (slight) irritation is having missed a few lines due to too loud music.
 
WaxLyrical said:
How did that black guy survive for 23 years alone waiting for Cooper to return?

Did he put himself to sleep. If not the movie didn't address the psychological effects of extreme solitude?
Click to expand...

He mentioned the putting himself to sleep part, but also that he didn't want to die in a dream state.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X