peadar1987

Bad science in fiction Hall of Shame

Recommended Posts

57 minutes ago, 5thHorseman said:

this.

It has amazing (sadly, short) pictures of the gas giants being sucked out by the compact thing, and the board engineer from Firefly takes part, so I presume, it's sci-fi.

59 minutes ago, 5thHorseman said:

to blow up the Easter Island heads with exact precision using nuclear bombs.

Probably, the last nuke ready to use has been spent in 2013 Die neue Prophezeiung der Maya (aka End of the World) to blow up with ICBM a depleted diamond mine where the government had secretly hid a bigger nuke or so, to produce an ascending shockwave to hit all space targets at once.
They successfully used that to deflect an interplanetray shockwave caused by the solar flash and bombing Earth with explosive electric balls.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

Probably, the last nuke ready to use has been spent in 2013 Die neue Prophezeiung der Maya (aka End of the World) to blow up with ICBM a depleted diamond mine where the government had secretly hid a bigger nuke or so, to produce an ascending shockwave to hit all space targets at once.
They successfully used that to deflect an interplanetray shockwave caused by the solar flash and bombing Earth with explosive electric balls.

Stop! Slow down you're making me dizzy! Please <sob> I want to get off!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, p1t1o said:

Stop! Slow down you're making me dizzy! Please <sob> I want to get off!

Btw if you like the Origin, maybe Nightflyers have a chance, too. For me they look close to each other.

***
P.S.
So, does anybody still insist that just "a craft floating to the Sun" is a bad science?

Edited by kerbiloid
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Star Wars series of course requires a huge suspension of disbelief, and that is okay. However, even with that said, I really, really, hated the fact that in The Force Awakens (which I otherwise quite enjoyed), they somehow needed to suck an entire star dry to knock off a planet, especially considering the original Death Star did just fine on its own.  There is an explanation online, but it just makes it worse:

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Starkiller_Base

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Klapaucius said:

The Star Wars series of course requires a huge suspension of disbelief, and that is okay. However, even with that said, I really, really, hated the fact that in The Force Awakens (which I otherwise quite enjoyed), they somehow needed to suck an entire star dry to knock off a planet, especially considering the original Death Star did just fine on its own.  There is an explanation online, but it just makes it worse:

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Starkiller_Base

"Dark Phantom Energy".  Really?  We don't need a scientific explanation, so please don't give us a terrible one.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

50 years ago humans could to Moon.
50 years ago the Galactic Empire could to That's No Moon.

Old school. Everything went wrong without Palpatine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, kerbiloid said:

Everything went wrong without Palpatine.

I don't want to start that thread again, but remember that FTL missiles are now not entirely physically impossible.

Thanks, Rian.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Klapaucius said:

The Star Wars series of course requires a huge suspension of disbelief, and that is okay. However, even with that said, I really, really, hated the fact that in The Force Awakens (which I otherwise quite enjoyed), they somehow needed to suck an entire star dry to knock off a planet, especially considering the original Death Star did just fine on its own.  There is an explanation online, but it just makes it worse:

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Starkiller_Base

Well, the first Death Star destroyed one planet that was somewhat closeby. Starkiller Base destroyed multiple planets from many lightyears away, which would take more energy. Still, a whole star is definitely far fetched.

I think it would’ve been more interesting if the Republic’s corruption was shown. Maybe a Republic faction is building their own Death Star or something, all in the name of the greater good.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Bill Phil said:

ore interesting if the Republic’s corruption was shown

Or if literally anything worldbuilding was shown.  Seriously, other than the Casino planet, we learned little of the Star Wars universe in TLJ.  We saw NOTHING of the New Republic or its incompitancy in either movie, or where Lando went, or who is in control of the galaxy.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, kerbiloid said:

So, does anybody still insist that just "a craft floating to the Sun" is a bad science?

Unless that craft was designed to do it, or leave the galaxy, then yes I think it's bad science. You may has well have a car jumping the pacific ocean.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Bill Phil said:

I think it would’ve been more interesting if the Republic’s corruption was shown.

(Like when the jalopy with Luke and Kenobi gets stopped by a patrol.)

Spoiler

 

Corrupted Stormtrooper: "Let me see the droid identification."

Spoiler

O.B. "Good morning, officer. Please, can I help you?" (waves with a hand with a 200 cred banknote invisible to others)
C.S. "Do you mean a bribe?!"
O.B. "Force forbid, no! I see you guys are honest officers, all of you!" (adds two more banknotes, then one more, waves with a hand again)

O.B. "You don't need his identification."
C.S. "We don't need his identification."
O.B. "These aren't the droids you're looking for".
C.S. "These aren't the droids we're looking for".

 

P.S.
Is it my bad English, or Kenobi says "his" about the beeping tin can on wheels?
Of course I would say "he" about R2D2 because the word "robot" is of m-gender in my language.
But why an English-speaking character says this?
Living far from people, Kenobi has been going wild so much that speaks with toasters, trash cans, and monkey wrenches, and they respond to him?

 

4 hours ago, 5thHorseman said:

You may has well have a car jumping the pacific ocean.

Don't underestimate the might of Asylum.

Edited by kerbiloid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

 

  Reveal hidden contents

O.B. "Good morning, officer. Please, can I help you?" (waves with a hand with a 200 cred banknote invisible to others)
C.S. "Do you mean a bribe?!"
O.B. "Force forbid, no! I see you guys are honest officers, all of you!" (adds two more banknotes, then one more, waves with a hand again)

O.B. "You don't need his identification."
C.S. "We don't need his identification."
O.B. "These aren't the droids you're looking for".
C.S. "These aren't the droids we're looking for".

 

Not sure what the issue is here. The whole point was Kenobi used the Force to bend a weak mind to his will.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Klapaucius said:

Not sure what the issue is here.

To show an example of corruption in the galaxy far, far away.
A corrupted cop takes money from a driver.

4 minutes ago, Klapaucius said:

Kenobi used the Force to bend a weak mind to his will.  

You see, everybody thought this. Dexterity rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/3/2018 at 3:41 PM, DDE said:

I don't want to start that thread again, but remember that FTL missiles are now not entirely physically impossible.

 

I've been thinking about it for a while, and I've come to the conclusion that the Last Jedi does not prove the effectiveness of FTL missiles. The ship used in the ramming sequence is at least 5 magnitudes larger than any missile, and it was only able to cripple Snoopy's Star Destroyer, or whatever it's canonically known as. The ship was still able to limp around, and plenty of the crew survived as well.

Seeing as how a large starship wasn't able to destroy a slightly larger starship, it seems completely unreasonably that a tiny FTL missile could do more than minor damage.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, roboslacker said:

I've been thinking about it for a while, and I've come to the conclusion that the Last Jedi does not prove the effectiveness of FTL missiles. The ship used in the ramming sequence is at least 5 magnitudes larger than any missile, and it was only able to cripple Snoopy's Star Destroyer, or whatever it's canonically known as. The ship was still able to limp around, and plenty of the crew survived as well.

Seeing as how a large starship wasn't able to destroy a slightly larger starship, it seems completely unreasonably that a tiny FTL missile could do more than minor damage.

But if you put a hyperdrive on an asteroid...eh, maybe it'd still be too expensive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, roboslacker said:

I've been thinking about it for a while, and I've come to the conclusion that the Last Jedi does not prove the effectiveness of FTL missiles. The ship used in the ramming sequence is at least 5 magnitudes larger than any missile, and it was only able to cripple Snoopy's Star Destroyer, or whatever it's canonically known as. The ship was still able to limp around, and plenty of the crew survived as well.

Seeing as how a large starship wasn't able to destroy a slightly larger starship, it seems completely unreasonably that a tiny FTL missile could do more than minor damage.

Why use an FTL missile when you can use a completely anachronistic "bomber" and drop the charges onto the ship?  Why this makes sense in a zero-gravity environment is beyond me...

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Klapaucius said:

Why use an FTL missile when you can use a completely anachronistic "bomber" and drop the charges onto the ship?  Why this makes sense in a zero-gravity environment is beyond me...

Yeah, that was stupid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, kerbiloid said:

Use FTL missiles. Shoot down a spaceship before it has been built.

Well...... that broke my brain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why not. FTL is often accused in breaking the causality principle, effect appears before the event itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, roboslacker said:

The ship was still able to limp around

“Not to worry, they were still flying half a ship.”

Keep in mind that a large number of Resurgents behind the target were also obliterated. Thus the ‘missile’ didn’t get the chance to fully show its destructive potential and went through the target like a tank gun shell through a sheet of paper. That means it would cause vastly more damage if the target were larger, and was actually overpowered for the task at hand.

Whereas an X-wing is just the right size for an anti-capital ship torpedo, and with the other features ditched you could probably reduce the size and cost of a viable FTL torpedo even further.

11 hours ago, Klapaucius said:

Why use an FTL missile when you can use a completely anachronistic "bomber" and drop the charges onto the ship?  Why this makes sense in a zero-gravity environment is beyond me...

Something-something, magnetically attracted bombs.

Come on, the whole reason Luke did the projection thing was that Rian could get a shot of him dying under the twin suns. If he wants a certain shot, he gets it, the rest of the movie be damned.

Edited by DDE
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/3/2018 at 10:27 PM, Bill Phil said:

Well, the first Death Star destroyed one planet that was somewhat closeby. Starkiller Base destroyed multiple planets from many lightyears away, which would take more energy. Still, a whole star is definitely far fetched.

Shooting a beam of light at an object from many light-years away in a universe that has faster-than-light travel is also problematic in itself. When Obi-Wan and Rey saw that beam of light travelling across the sky, they would have had ample time to do something about it... after taking a vacation, finding Luke, chatting up about life on desert planets, doing a bachelor's degree, and learning to play the grand piano. The beam from Starkiller Base obviously travels slower than light (as its movement is visible across the sky), and if the galaxy is thousands of light-years across, it would take centuries for it to reach its targets. Obi-Wan and Rey could go on their merry adventures for a long while before hopping to the galactic capital in an afternoon (in Revenge of the Sith it is mentioned that Anakin goes from Coruscant to the Outer Rim in half a day), then warning them that a killer beam is threatening to destroy their planet in a barely shorter time frame than climate change. Maybe their grandkids should evacuate, or something.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Codraroll said:

Shooting a beam of light at an object from many light-years away in a universe that has faster-than-light travel is also problematic in itself. When Obi-Wan and Rey saw that beam of light travelling across the sky, they would have had ample time to do something about it... after taking a vacation, finding Luke, chatting up about life on desert planets, doing a bachelor's degree, and learning to play the grand piano. The beam from Starkiller Base obviously travels slower than light (as its movement is visible across the sky), and if the galaxy is thousands of light-years across, it would take centuries for it to reach its targets. Obi-Wan and Rey could go on their merry adventures for a long while before hopping to the galactic capital in an afternoon (in Revenge of the Sith it is mentioned that Anakin goes from Coruscant to the Outer Rim in half a day), then warning them that a killer beam is threatening to destroy their planet in a barely shorter time frame than climate change. Maybe their grandkids should evacuate, or something.

Ergo - it *wasnt* light, it was something else - essentially magic as defined by Arthur C. Clarke, "Technology sufficiently advanced...etc"

Im not sure if StarWars is relevant to this thread, its not really *science*fiction, its closer to a true fantasy. Closer to Harry Potter than The Martian. Now that I say that, I feel like I could list parallels between Harry Potter and StarWars all day. Child saviour discovers mysterious powers. Trained through a selection of wise old experts. Needs training montages and personal development plots to build ability to defeat mysterious BigBad with the help of a ragtag team of plucky friends, including big hairy friend and amusing malcoordinated friend. Also a parental connection (not the same kind, but familial connections definitely a big role). Could probably go on. A loved character with tiny body and big ears dies in arms of child saviour. Damn that last one is spooky! Also Hermione is Leieiaia. And both are 6-or-more part franchises with spin off movies still coming.

Like, what, in StarWars *IS* scientifically accurate? Food, they need food and drink, so thats correct, and....buildings, they live in buildings, thats pretty accurate, shelter is a very real survival necessity....and I guess they sorta peripherally hint that humans cant breathe vacuum, cant really think of much else to be honest.

None of this is criticism (plot holes and inconsistencies notwithstanding), StarWars is cool for a multitude of reasons, but hard accuracy has never been one of its aims.

 

edit: Hang on! Theres even a hot-danged trench-run scene!

latest?cb=20091018034931

Edited by p1t1o
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, p1t1o said:

Ergo - it *wasnt* light, it was something else

(The movie is not well-known for me, so I can't visually remember the details, but)
couldn't that be not a photonic ray movement itself, but a wave of temperature of interstellar gas or so, making the gas begin glowing, so the far end of the visible ray is the end of already heated gas?

Say, if the cannon is lighting for an hour, first 15 light minutes would receive 4 times more energy and start glowing earlier than the last 15 light minutes.

Just a guess.

Edited by kerbiloid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

(The movie is not well-known for me, so I can't visually remember the details, but)
couldn't that be not a photonic ray movement itself, but a wave of temperature of interstellar gas or so, making the gas begin glowing, so the far end of the visible ray is the end of already heated gas?

Say, if the cannon is lighting for an hour, first 15 light minutes would receive 4 times more energy and start glowing earlier than the last 15 light minutes.

Just a guess.

If Im understanding you correctly, I think that still implies superluminal energy transmission.

You could make a row of light sources (like say, hot gas) light up in sequence to give an artificial impression of a superluminal "front", but if the energy to power the lighting is coming from a point source (the weapon), that energy would have to be superluminal to achieve this effect.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now