lajoswinkler

Yes, I have the exact same feelings. He is an amazing person and did a lot for popularizing science, but sometimes he can be a downright fool. Some things he said about "Gravity", wow... And I know he's not socially inept, so what's the deal with him? There is a box office drop? First news for me. Regarding your critique on the sad movies - reality is sad. Space is tough. The minimum of happiness is here on Earth under a warm atmosphere. Out there you're in a tin can against the Void. While I understand the human nature that wants to feel good and better and happier, when you offer "Gravity", the humanity spits on it because "there's no way she could survive". No sh*t? People are a weird crowd, never truly happy. I enjoyed "Interstellar" and would like to see it again.

The state can and did warp the history numerous times. When global communications are scarce, it's enough to repeat and repeat something and it will become the truth, no matter how stupid, incorrect or evil it is. Proof: Germany during 1930s, Soviet union for decades, North Korea today. Even China with their Tianmen massacre. People stop fighting and resisting because from one side there's oppression and chance of your life going towards death, and the other side offers nice stuff. This is carrot and stick method, and if there wasn't so many sticks, Soviet union would last longer. People get tired after a while and less and less of them transfer their knowledge to their children. The children know less. Their children lack the knowledge. Old people die, the knowledge disappears from the society. It is entirely possible to wipe the legacy of Apollo from this civilization, but not overnight. The society exists because of information transmission. Remove the information and we're back in the stone age.

As with all religions, most of its things aren't explained. They are just said to exist and you have to believe it. So... there isn't an explanation inside the Nordic mythology.

This is truly a historical thing and the public barely knows about it. :/

I've tried to perform the docking with a fast rotating, poorly precessing object in KSP. It is very, very difficult and if there weren't magnetic properties of the ports, I'd never do it. Original soundtrack helped a lot.

There were.

SRBs are just like any other solid fuel motors and I think they use the star design of the fuel assembly. There's obviously not gonna be ON and OFF in thrust like in KSP, no matter which design you use. For example, here's a large amateur rocket on solid fuel.

Yes. One of the largest cinema franchises in Europe sports fake posters. Have you ever seen a movie? There's some liberty in the making of it. It did rotate on a random axis. It is visible when the two docking ports are close together. There's wobbling. BTW, as far as I know, those were actual models, and not CGI, for which I applaud Nolan's team. Probably the best scene in the movie. Very powerful with awesome music. Months ago I tried doing stuff in KSP, similar scenarios, so watching this on a big screen was something I could appreciate even more.

It isn't Saturn V. That's the wallpaper I've seen in cinema. It looks like an Atlas V to me.

It's been YouTube's way of expressing an error almost since it started.

That's a great example of laminar turning into turbulent flow on a great scale.

You made a friend? Yeah... no. That is not a friend. That is an annoying acquaintance. As it has already been said, he's gonna be a great politician someday. Well, great for himself and his interests.

Salty and nonsalty fluids mix readily, but they can form transient "phases" in oceans. Unfortunatelly, stupid people turned that into a pseudoscientific meme around this photo often captioned as "two seas not mixing". This exists as a dynamic balance. New salty fluid is coming and new nonsalty fluid is coming all the time. Their solution flows beneath. It doesn't happen always, though. Specific weather properties follow this behaviour.

I know it's impossible for a 4 km lump of icy rocks to look completely different in 10 years as in "now it looks like a lump, and now it looks like two lumps connected by a neck". I don't really think you understand the work (in physical sense, W) needed for something like that to occur. The comet was never close to any body in 10 years. The only thing affecting its shape was sublimation, and we know it wasn't serious because it was discovered in 1969 and it never expelled much gas. It takes very little icy matter (compared to the mass and volume of the comet) to make even a spectacular coma and tail. This comet is a local one, with aphelion at around Jupiter's distance, and perihelion at around Mars' distance. For as long as it has been observed, it was very quiet. The amount of matter released from the surface is very small, which is expected. This comet was spinning around the Sun since the nebula has collapsed into a protostar. If it was so active, it wouldn't survive this day as any icy body. All the volatiles would be long gone. There is no concieveable mechanism in the realm of physical laws that would turn its shape from Hubble's approximation into the observed comet we're seeing today. On the contrary, I pay a lot of atention to the style of my writing. When I use absolutes, which is rarely, there's a very good reason behind it. I'm not really sure most people reading this thread and commenting understand what I'm arguing against. I'm saying that the comet such as 67P can not change its shape from what Hubble telescope data analysis predicted into the duck-shaped 4 km double bulge we're seeing today using Rosetta. That's all. Nothing else.

If asteroids were made of typical Earth rocks like limestone, then you could heat them over 1000 °C to get quicklime and CO2. However, that's not the case with asteroids. Carbon in asteroids is not likely to be fixed with oxygen into carbonates. Asteroids are mainly silicates contaminated with iron and nickel alloys. There's also carbon in those alloys.

We will, but it's impossible for a comet to change its shape so dramatically in 10 years. I honestly don't know why we're discussing this, it's dumb. ESA did reposition Philae a bit, so it's very much possible it will receive enough energy to do more experiments.

People are so serious around here so I thought you were, too. Comets are fragile, but there's no evidence it was pulled around in the last 10 years. It was discovered in September 1969 and we know very well its orbit and the changes it has experienced during all these decades. It was never close to anyone's Roche limit so there is absolutely no reason to think that it has significantly changed its shape - probably in the last few millenia, and certainly not in the last decade.

It couldn't look much different. Why would it make different shapes? It's not near anyone's Roche limit. It's a lump of ices and rocks. It goes around the Sun and it's slowly erroded by sublimation over the eons. 10 years is nothing. It's a ridiculously small amount of time for comets in such orbits.

It couldn't. All that mass would have to escape, and we know, by observation, that such carving releases of ices didn't happen.

Almost not accurate at all. Faster than light travel is a fantasy and some people need a reality check because real life is not a Hollywood movie.

I hope this made sense to people now. Miller' and Mann's received light and heat from Gargantua, or maybe all the way from the neutron star itself. Neutron star is called Pantagruel. It's from Rabelais' set of novels with a giant and his son, "La vie de Gargantua et de Pantagruel". Both Gargantua and Pantagruel are shiny, though sometimes we can see something is "wrong" with Gargantua on the sky as it looks like a weird annular eclipse.

So the wormhole in the movie was orbiting Saturn? Because I was puzzled by "it's near Saturn". Saturn moves around the Sun. In the universe of unknown/impossible fixed reference points, all this made me puzzled.

The movie is so good that it forces nerds to try harder finding inaccuracies (something so easy when you watch "Armageddon" lol), and when they do, they s-hit all over it. It's "Gravity" all over again. Just enjoy the f-ing movie.

The whole safety compact razor industry is a lot of BS to begin with. From decent advancements to buzzwords tailored for stupid male herd in less than 20 years. Tax for idiots.

Truth to be told, we can always pretend and roleplay like this is the case.