What is your biggest science pet peeve in movies?

[wumpus]

On 12/5/2016 at 3:53 AM, p1t1o said:

Wasn't starship troopers a metaphor for Vietnam? Ie: sending soldiers with what is thought of as top-of-the-range equipment (fancy rifles and various equipment, troop dropships, tactics etc.) which turned out to be woefully inappropriate for the type of warfare the enemy is forcing you to engage (jungle warfare, guerilla tactics, close-quarters etc).

Also, whilst I actually quite like the film, this was funny

"Acting" lol!

Robert A. Heinlein was in the middle of writing Stranger in a Strange Land when Ike suspended nuclear testing (wiki claims some group demanded unilateral ending of testing and that was enough.  My memory was that RAH said that Ike agreed to a joint suspension, and the the USSR broke it first with even dirtier bombs).  In any event it was ~1958 and Viet Nam would not make for strong booksales.  Starship Troopers was specifically made as pro-military anti-USSR propaganda.  To RAH's surprise and delight, while it remained controversial it kept selling, and selling, and selling.

RAH was an Annapolis grad and presumably career naval officer who was kicked out on a medical disability before Pearl Harbor.  Sometime afterwards, Joe Haldeman was drafted into Viet Nam (they wouldn't let an atheist claim conscientious objection, not sure if that stuck him with the medic MOS).  I think at one point he was the only survivor in his squad and has enough shrapnel still in him that he set off airport security well before 9/11.  Joe rewrote Starship Troopers in 1974 as the Forever War, which was a complete remake specifically as Viet Nam.

From what I've heard, the movie of the same name might as well be based on Forever War.

[My favorite exam question from college: describe RAH's [Glory Road was on the reading list] influence on Forever War.  Sure, there was the "derive Newton's gravity equation assuming circular orbits", but the first one let me point out how much of Starship Trooper's serial numbers were still showing before contrasting Glory Road to Forever War.]

Edited December 6, 2016 by wumpus
spell it Haldeman

[Jonfliesgoats]

Aliens is supposed to be about Vietnam according to some experts.  

Another science peeve from the films, the Martian atmosphere is too thin to knock over a rocket in a wind storm. Also in the same movie, the Martian atmosphere is thick enough to blow big things over and break stuff, but it's thin enough to launch a vehicle with plastic sheeting protecting it from aerodynamic stresses.

[Mitchz95]

4 hours ago, Jonfliesgoats said:

but it's thin enough to launch a vehicle with plastic sheeting protecting it from aerodynamic stresses.

Thin enough to *attempt* it. Didn't really work out in the end.

[RedDwarfIV]

6 hours ago, Jonfliesgoats said:

Another science peeve from the films, the Martian atmosphere is too thin to knock over a rocket in a wind storm. Also in the same movie, the Martian atmosphere is thick enough to blow big things over and break stuff, but it's thin enough to launch a vehicle with plastic sheeting protecting it from aerodynamic stresses.

The author knew exactly what he was doing. Its a case of without the dust storm, there is no story.

Personally I'd have preferred that the dust storm was a problem for the reason stated at the beginning of the book - that the MAV was a spacecraft, and that too much dust would destroy its delicate systems. This would give them a time limit to abort the mission in, without the unrealistic thing of it tipping over.

Of course, then you've got to work out how Watney gets left behind without having a communications antenna sticking through him, and for that matter, how the communications antenna broke in the first place.

[p1t1o]

11 hours ago, wumpus said:

<sniiiip>

Ah the Forever War yes you're right that was it.

***

So, I just re-watched Prometheus.

Personally I quite like it, but we all know it has some nice flaws to pore over and I have them fresh in my mind

 

Remember the bit where Charlize THeron is crushed by the rolling spaceship whilst the whole audience roared "RUN SIDEWAYS YOU CRETIN!!"

But who remembers exactly *how* stupid and close it was?

In the scene, Noomi and Charlize are on the ground together watching the spaceship crash. It impacts somewhat to their front and as they watch it start to topple, they run away. 

At this point they are side by side and run off together in the same direction. They are running within arms reach of each other.

Then Noomi faceplants into the ground and Charlize keep going.

On the ground Noomi looks back and see the ship almost on top of her....and rolls like 3 or 4 times sideways (say 3 metres?) and the ship grinds safely past.

20seconds later it grinds over Charlize, game over.

At ANY point in the run (and they run for a good 30-45 seconds), changing direction for like 5 seconds would have saved Charlize.

 

On the other hand though...the ship then tips over sideways *obviously* directly on top of Noomi, but its ok because it hits a rock 2ft higher than the surrounding terrain and doesnt crush her *eyerolls for everyone*.

***

Some other highlights:

That guy, what is he the most metal geologist in the world?

Why'd they put Guy Ritchie in old-age make up instead of just using an old person?

Cool spaceship but those are some big/powerful "ion drives"... (Plus the classic lack of any propellant, the interior of the craft must be almost entirely living quarters.)

Lets take our helmets off!

Lets get lost despite all this extremely advanced mapping/navigation equipment.

Lets not all be on the same page re: quarantine measures.

Lot of flamethrowers onboard considering this isn't trench warfare.

After the mostmetalgeologistintheworld gets mutated by the goop, he rocks up to the ship and for some reason folds himself into a neat little pile in front of the ship to await discovery. I get that he perhaps was setting an ambush, but thats a freaking weird way to go with it...

***

Apart from the obvious blunders, I really like the movie, I especially like the parts where they are messing around in rooms designed for people twice their size

You gotta feel for the Charlize character though, yeah she dies stupidly, but apart from that is a fairly good character, if unimportant. She is the daughter of an incredibly wealthy and powerful tycoon, who is closer to one of his own products than to his own daughter, to the point of potentially disowning her by refusing to die. She comes along because if she is left behind her life will dissolve into mediocrity whilst "the board" runs her fathers company in perpetuity, or until he comes back immortal. Is she there to stop him and userp his power? Just to see what happens? Does she want to try and win some of his affection back? Then it all goes to poop and her and her father both die for nothing. Ouch!

***

My pet theory -

Anyone watching Westworld? Anyone notice how similar the "Westworld" logo is to the "Weyland Enterprises" logo? AND THEY BOTH DO ANDROIDS!

And while we are at it lets throw bladerunner in there too.

 

 

[Jonfliesgoats]

I think the Westworld logo is meant to be similar to the Westworld logo from the 1970s with Yul Brinner.  Since I am not Jonathan Nolan, I can't confirm my suspicions.

That or they are all big fans of Whataburger's corporate logo:

http://www.eater.com/2016/9/19/12974462/whataburger-wonder-woman-logo-dispute

 

Edited December 6, 2016 by Jonfliesgoats

[todofwar]

Since someone brought up the Martian, just how feasible is it to strip down the MAV enough to intercept Hermes on a flyby? Wouldn't that imply it's on an escape trajectory itself? And wouldn't it already be as light as possible?

[Bill Phil]

50 minutes ago, todofwar said:

Since someone brought up the Martian, just how feasible is it to strip down the MAV enough to intercept Hermes on a flyby? Wouldn't that imply it's on an escape trajectory itself? And wouldn't it already be as light as possible?

It's as light as possible for its mission. Which includes carrying payloads as well as enough stuff for six astronauts. While it's definetly a stretch for it to intercept Hermes, I'd say it could be lightened further. Chairs, for example, could be gotten rid of when you're only launching with one astronaut.

[Tex_NL]

1 hour ago, todofwar said:

Since someone brought up the Martian, just how feasible is it to strip down the MAV enough to intercept Hermes on a flyby? Wouldn't that imply it's on an escape trajectory itself? And wouldn't it already be as light as possible?

Yes, the intercept would mean the MAV needs to be on an escape trajectory. And obviously it would not be designed to be a lot heavier than it needs to be. But it was never designed to be on an escape trajectory. All it needed to do is get into orbit and rendezvous with Hermes. It it's original configuration it would be too heavy to reach escape velocity. Removing all the unnecessary weight would increase the TWR and dV.
The exact figures required might be off. I do not know all the details. But the theory behind it is sound.

[peadar1987]

 

1 hour ago, todofwar said:

Since someone brought up the Martian, just how feasible is it to strip down the MAV enough to intercept Hermes on a flyby? Wouldn't that imply it's on an escape trajectory itself? And wouldn't it already be as light as possible?

So the delta-V for Mars ascent is 3.8km/s. The delta-V for a Mars-earth Hohmann transfer is a further 2.1km/s, giving a total of 5.9km/s

The Lunar ascent module had a delta-V of 2.2km/s, and the delta-V for a lunar ascent is about 1.7 km/s. We can probably assume that a similar factor of safety would be credible for the MAV, so building in the factor of safety, we get a nominal delta-V of 4.92 km/s. So we need an increase of 1km/s of Delta-V, or about 20%. Playing around with a delta-V calculator, I get that the dry mass of the spacecraft needs to change by about 30-35% in order to achieve this.

Going back to the Apollo ascent module, it had a dry mass of about 2000kg. 100kg of samples gets you 5%. Get rid of 80% of the humans, that's another 5%. Maybe could get rid of another 5 or 10% by stripping out everything that's not essential structural material, another 5-10% by getting rid of all the life support and piloting equipment, but I think you would struggle to reduce the dry mass by that much.

Of course, the Ares programme is completely fictional, so Andy Weir can build in as much of a factor of safety as he likes to make things work out.

[DarkOwl57]

Another pet peeve of mine (Also about star wars. Well... Any movie actually.): Whenever an extra (Non-important character) Gets hurt by something, they die instantaneously. But whenever a main character is hurt, they live on through the injury and end up being just peachy. Example: In Star Wars (Episode 6 (VI) I think) Leia is hit with one of those lasers. Now if she weren't an important character, that hit to her stomach would have killed her. Heck, if it hit her pinky toe it would have killed her. But because she was important, she just has to live. In what way is that even possible?!?!?

Humph. Rant over.

[monstah]

10 minutes ago, DarkOwl57 said:

Whenever an extra (Non-important character) Gets hurt by something, they die instantaneously. But whenever a main character is hurt, they live on through the injury and end up being just peachy.

It's all about levels and hit dice, man.

[wumpus]

10 minutes ago, DarkOwl57 said:

Another pet peeve of mine (Also about star wars. Well... Any movie actually.): Whenever an extra (Non-important character) Gets hurt by something, they die instantaneously. But whenever a main character is hurt, they live on through the injury and end up being just peachy. Example: In Star Wars (Episode 6 (VI) I think) Leia is hit with one of those lasers. Now if she weren't an important character, that hit to her stomach would have killed her. Heck, if it hit her pinky toe it would have killed her. But because she was important, she just has to live. In what way is that even possible?!?!?

Humph. Rant over.

That is a special case of the law of conservation of characters.  In any work, there are only a small number of characters in the universe (specifically limited to the space and effort needed to describe them in the work).  If you need a violent act, simply bring in a red shirt to die, as you can't afford to lose one of your characters.  Also if something important happens late in the work, no matter how far away you, no matter how unlikely, one of the existing characters will be involved on hand to describe it.

Conservation of character isn't going to leave thanks to a brain developed for dealing with either* a relatively small band of hunter gatherers or perhaps a traditional village.  The other issue is that characterization is *hard* and takes up most of a writer/filmakers job.  Filling out a world with the hundreds or thousands that would be involved in a typical plot is impossible, so we have a limited number of characters developed and used.

* there are a surprising number of human adaptations since paleolithic times making the assumption that the brain finished adaptation during paleolithic times less likely.

[monstah]

9 minutes ago, wumpus said:

 If you need a violent act, simply bring in a red shirt to die, as you can't afford to lose one of your characters.

*cough* GoT *cough*

[wumpus]

1 hour ago, monstah said:

*cough* GoT *cough*

Way back on USENET (when the thing was still published regularly), there was a claim that the last book would be nothing but the wind blowing snow over all the graves.  Then again, I don't think I've read any since then (I've learned not to start unfinished series since then).  I'm pretty sure that plenty of the characters I've heard mentioned weren't in the first few books, so presumably he is introducing new characters while killing off the rest.

I've also heard that by the time "War and Peace" is over, almost everybody is dead.

[todofwar]

7 hours ago, DarkOwl57 said:

Another pet peeve of mine (Also about star wars. Well... Any movie actually.): Whenever an extra (Non-important character) Gets hurt by something, they die instantaneously. But whenever a main character is hurt, they live on through the injury and end up being just peachy. Example: In Star Wars (Episode 6 (VI) I think) Leia is hit with one of those lasers. Now if she weren't an important character, that hit to her stomach would have killed her. Heck, if it hit her pinky toe it would have killed her. But because she was important, she just has to live. In what way is that even possible?!?!?

Humph. Rant over.

My favorite explanation for this involves the many worlds theory. Basically, since we are nothing more then the sum of random events splitting off into different possibilities, when a bullet is fired at the main character there is a world in which they die and a world in which they are somehow barely injured. And we are just watching one of the most improbable outcomes. I believe this is called "quantum immortality", and one idea is that a conscious mind is not able to observe its own death so it always observes the outcome resulting in its survival. 

That's all nonsense, but very entertaining technobable. 

[mikegarrison]

5 hours ago, wumpus said:

Way back on USENET (when the thing was still published regularly), there was a claim that the last book would be nothing but the wind blowing snow over all the graves.  Then again, I don't think I've read any since then (I've learned not to start unfinished series since then).  I'm pretty sure that plenty of the characters I've heard mentioned weren't in the first few books, so presumably he is introducing new characters while killing off the rest.

I've also heard that by the time "War and Peace" is over, almost everybody is dead.

There are some books that end with literally everybody dead. Not just all the characters, but EVERYBODY. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Beach_(novel)

Still, GoT has a pretty high body count for named characters. I think the "Honest Trailer" for the HBO series called George RR Martin "Literature's greatest serial killer" or something to that effect. And yeah, he does introduce new characters as he kills off the old ones. In fact, he introduces more new characters than he kills off, which is why the books have started to drag on so badly. I basically gave up on the fifth book. I realized I was only interested in reading about Arya Stark, and everything else was "the boring bit" I had to skip over.

Another series with a really high death rate for named, viewpoint characters is David Weber's "Honorverse" stories. He's pretty brutal about letting you follow a character for book after book and then suddenly killing them off in a ball of nuclear fusion plasma, or maybe a hypervelocity explosive pulser dart through the brain.

[mikegarrison]

On 12/5/2016 at 3:45 PM, Jonfliesgoats said:

Another science peeve from the films, the Martian atmosphere is too thin to knock over a rocket in a wind storm. Also in the same movie, the Martian atmosphere is thick enough to blow big things over and break stuff, but it's thin enough to launch a vehicle with plastic sheeting protecting it from aerodynamic stresses.

Yes, well that's well-known. Andy Weir did that purely for literary reasons -- he wanted the initial disaster to be caused by a force of Martian nature, and the only thing he could come up with was a storm. The idea behind the book is a survival story of man versus the elements, so it wouldn't have worked right if it had been a human-caused accident that started everything. He knew full well that the dynamic pressure from a Martian storm would not be enough to cause that damage, but he ignored that for thematic purposes.

[Just Jim]

Wait... wrong subject... sorry... <redacted>

Edited December 7, 2016 by Just Jim

[adsii1970]

You're right, @Just Jim, this isn't pet peeves about chick flix thread...

[p1t1o]

@mikegarrison @wumpus

If you're in the mood for an "everybody dies" read, "Level 7" is apparently required reading for all US missile silo troops.

[Hary R]

I have this one pet peeve from many space related story for a while: planets are never recognized as a planet size object. How many time have I heard a dialogue like this in a si-fi movie/anime/series:

"He is on that planet, let's get down and find him...."

Yeah! Like the same way you try find one person that try to hide or have disappeared in the wilderness... quite easy right?

Seriously some writers have no idea how huge a planet really is.

 

Edited December 9, 2016 by Hary R
a misplaced word

[Jonfliesgoats]

Glad Andy Weir addressed this with his fans.  That's pretty cool.

[DDE]

On ‎05‎.‎12‎.‎2016 at 1:30 AM, Jonfliesgoats said:

Battlestar Galactica:

Cylons and Humans are both capable of destroying each other.  They live in a galaxy without any other known intelligent life.  So you have evenly paired powers tat can both devastate each other in an empty galaxy.  Cylons can simply defend themselves and expand away from humanity without the cost and loss of protracted conflict.  Humans can expand in the other direction.

Religious fanaticism. Fwoosh!

@Jonfliesgoats, aircraft carrier carriers will be back. The Soviets used the Combined Dive Bomber (TB-3 with a pair of I-16s) in WWII with some success. They considered flying two Su-27s off an An-225 thirty years later in order to cover the approach from the Arctic. And with DARPA looking into drones and aerial rearmament systems...

[Jonfliesgoats]

DDE, arsenal airplanes and drone-controlling motherships may also be an offshoot of this.  Our idea of a flying aircraft carrier itself may change.  Pilots flying as wing leaders with squadrons of RPV and UAV to provide network and EW capabilities are already in the works.  It is entirey possible that today's fighters or bombers could be equipped with drone underwing stores to extend the reach of sensors and network weapons systems.

Also, I like the Russian pilots and officers I have worked with.  I sort of wonder how long periods in Siberia affect their senses of humor in comparison to long periods of American in the Middle East.  Would we all laugh at the same, translated jokes in South Park?