Dodgey

I was talking of the movie but that's cool that it's an actual thing.

Firstly I'm ashamed that it took me so long top realize that it is a apollo 13 reference. Also one of us one of us one of us one of us

Which is fine, I am in no way excusing the plot however in almost every movie there are concessions made worth regards to reality for the sake of the plot, what people do is see these concessions and complain as if the movie could survive without those inaccuracies. Yes I know I'm complaining about complaining. But yeah nothing can save a bad plot.

So is it just me or is that a familiar looking antenna array?

Honestly it seems like the more realistic a movie it is the more it gets shot down for its inaccuracies. Take Gravity for example, properly modelled the light based on the orientation of the actors, O2 running out isn't instant death, Newtonian motion is mostly correct, so many things are correct however it got destroyed by hard science fiction fans due to things that had to be the way they are because it is a movie and it needs a plot, same with Interstellar. Now it looks like another potentially great hard science fiction movie will be shot down as well because people like to only see what's wrong, I'm with Nova on this one, people are so quick to ignore what is right and point out what is wrong. Oh and UpsilonAerospace, sticks, really? That's getting conspiracy level pedantic in my books. Edit: @Kibble, ever heard of rule of cool?

After thinking about it I can see why they would cut the sub plot of NASA keeping the crew in the dark about Watney. While it is good for the book (added depth) it doesn't really add much to the over all story when you think about it, all that it amounts to is a bit of banter and some tension between the crew and NASA. I really hope they show Melissa being really conflicted about leaving Watney, it made the story seem so much more real.

Yeah can we move this out of The Science Labs, it really doesn't belong here.

Personally I'm glad that JJ is now a producer, I felt like he brought too much Star Wars to Star Trek if that makes sense, I like him but the other films felt too over the top.

Not now I pictured it but not really caring at this point, from the opening sentence to the final words that was awesome. Edit: Ok after watching it again we can deduce that the hemes design in the first trailer is the actual design, it looks like instead of NASA finding out that he is stuck and not telling the crew they find out and tell NASA, there are two different types of space suits (I'm guessing the on in the promotional image is the flight suit) and they are staying very true to the book. Is there anything else of worth that I missed? Oh and I love the interieor design on the MAV by the way.

Speaking of which what's with the solar panels on a nuclear powered ship?

Um what? All I said was that I didn't care about the graphics. What I earth is the "pro gamer" stance.

I am so happy about the blue sky. With regards to the game I hope the story is a bit more open ended, with slightly less of a main story line than the other ones.

I honestly don't see the point in all of the the fancy graphical upgrades games have that the Internet seems to go nuts over, to me it just eats up precious processor space that could be spent on rendering that extra meter, or removing that one scene change.

Am I the only one who doesn't really care about the graphics and is excited to finally see a blue sky?

Mr Shifty I don't want to leave you in the dark but it's like 4:25 in the morning so I need to get to sleep, I'll reply once I have had a bit of a kip.

You give Hollywood too much credit. Form over function really ticks me off.

I posted this on the second page but I'll post it here again incase you missed it, again I'm no expert. To answer your question yes it does affect everything on the ship. My understanding of what would happen if you were impossibly close to the speed of light, say 1m/s slower, and moved or sneezed or whatever is nonexistent though I'm guessing if you were going that fast the universe might die from heart death before you can do anything. In anycase here is my non-professional explanation of the impossibility of going faster than light. The reason why going faster than the speed of light is considered impossible is due to time dilation. Time dilation is the affect of time slowing down due to either being in a gravetational field, such as the earth, or by traveling at a velocity relative to something else. So as you travel faster or deeper into a gravity well time appears to slow down for you, or another way of putting it is that the rest of the universe appears to speed up. So lets say that you are traveling along at 100m/s below the speed of light to an outside observer. Due to this immense speed time dilation makes it so that every second that passes for you a year passes for the outside observer (made up numbers, I think the discrepency would be larger but I'm no expert). Let's say that when you startred your journey your acceleration was 1m/s/s, now if you started thrusting with the same acceleration while traveling at 100m/s below the speed of light to you it would only take one second of thrusting to achieve 99m/s below the speed of light, however to the outside observer you have been thrusting for one year not one second. And as you travel faster the effects of time dilation become pronounced, so one second for you becomes two years for the observer. And we know that time dilation is a thing due to experiments done with identical clocks, one on the ground with another in an aircraft, the experiment showed that the one in the aircraft did run slower due to time dilation.

That's right just 20 minutes ago Bethesda launched fallout4.com Let's get hyped!

Ok can we please not have this thread turn into a flame that this subfourm is practically known for? In anycase I too am curious (although it has no effect on the strength or lack thereof of your argument) as to what your educational background is. Have you gone to university to study science or as I am mainly googlcated (how's that for a term we all need). The reason why going faster than the speed of light is considered impossible is due to time dilation. Time dilation is the affect of time slowing down due to either being in a gravetational field, such as the earth, or by traveling at a velocity relative to something else. So as you travel faster or deeper into a gravity well time appears to slow down for you, or another way of putting it is that the rest of the universe appears to speed up. So lets say that you are traveling along at 100m/s below the speed of light to an outside observer. Due to this immense speed time dilation makes it so that every second that passes for you a year passes for the outside observer (made up numbers, I think the discrepency would be larger but I'm no expert). Let's say that when you startred your journey your acceleration was 1m/s/s, now if you started thrusting with the same acceleration while traveling at 100m/s below the speed of light to you it would only take one second of thrusting to achieve 99m/s below the speed of light, however to the outside observer you have been thrusting for one year not one second. And as you travel faster the effects of time dilation become pronounced, so one second for you becomes two years for the observer. And we know that time dilation is a thing due to experiments done with identical clocks, one on the ground with another in an aircraft, the experiment showed that the one in the aircraft did run slower due to time dilation.

Sould we get a spoiler thread going, if anyone is interested I would like to discuss some aspects of the book but without having to worry about spoiling it for anyone.

I was picturing a more classic white space suit, I justt doesn't look bulky enough.

It's nice to have a sense of personality, also it can serve as a warning of some sort *cough*

Ok I hate you now, it's 3 am and I just saw your post and am reading it online now.

Lest We Forget

Radiators, electric props and a MK3 loading ramp.