Interstellar

[CaptainKipard]

And when a lot of reality is respected, some of nerds lift their expectations and s*it all over the movie. Example - Gravity.

What exactly was respected in Gravity? There must be something ground-breaking for you to chide those nerds.

Edited October 26, 2014 by Cpt. Kipard

[lajoswinkler]

What exactly was respected in Gravity? There must be something ground-breaking for you to chide those nerds.

Is that sarcasm?

Newtonian mechanics, behaviour of sound, all kinds of technical details of ISS and Soyuz, etc.

It wasn't perfect, but it extremely well made, compared to other movies of its genre.

[CaptainKipard]

Maybe it's just that when something is done right, you don't really notice it. Or maybe people notice the nonsense more when there's a lot of realism to contrast it. That tether scene with whatshisname made me wut so hard. Not a great example of newton's first law of motion.

[lajoswinkler]

Maybe it's just that when something is done right, you don't really notice it. Or maybe people notice the nonsense more when there's a lot of realism to contrast it.

Probably the latter. The more realistic these things are, the more crap comes out of people's mouths. Very sad.

That tether scene with whatshisname made me wut so hard. Not a great example of newton's first law of motion.

If you're talking about the scene when dr. Stone gets tangled into the parachute, it's one of the rare examples of extreme realism. For the love of Newton, I've never understood why do people think the scene is incorrect. Even deGrasse made a mistake criticizing it.

[SpaceXray]

Probably the latter. The more realistic these things are, the more crap comes out of people's mouths. Very sad.

If you're talking about the scene when dr. Stone gets tangled into the parachute, it's one of the rare examples of extreme realism. For the love of Newton, I've never understood why do people think the scene is incorrect. Even deGrasse made a mistake criticizing it.

finally u someone who understood that scene! They made it realistic, but everyone's lack of knowledge made them think it was unrealistic(paradox). I am starting to doubt whether Neil de crap Tyson actually has a degree of some sort...

[sp1989]

What exactly was respected in Gravity? There must be something ground-breaking for you to chide those nerds.

I there are alot of mistakes made in gravity, but as a science nerd I appreciated the hell out the detail in all of the space infrastructure. Now when we start talking about how the ISS and Hubble are not anywhere near each other and are actually in different orbits. Yes Gravity is not exactly accurate. That since there was no on on the ISS we have to assume that the crew escaped and both Soyuz wouldn't be docked with the station? However I mean all things being equal, the was she got back to earth is very reasonable and realistic.

[CaptainKipard]

Probably the latter. The more realistic these things are, the more crap comes out of people's mouths. Very sad.

No that's not the implication.

If you're talking about the scene when dr. Stone gets tangled into the parachute, it's one of the rare examples of extreme realism. For the love of Newton, I've never understood why do people think the scene is incorrect. Even deGrasse made a mistake criticizing it.

The official explanation on wikipedia is that Clooney thinks the parachute chords designed to hold a spaceship capsule will break when two humans are being decelerated by them. I'll have to rewatch it some day, but it still makes little sense to me.

[PakledHostage]

I am starting to doubt whether Neil de crap Tyson actually has a degree of some sort...

Thank you for sharing your clearly learned opinion.

[lajoswinkler]

I there are alot of mistakes made in gravity, but as a science nerd I appreciated the hell out the detail in all of the space infrastructure. Now when we start talking about how the ISS and Hubble are not anywhere near each other and are actually in different orbits. Yes Gravity is not exactly accurate. That since there was no on on the ISS we have to assume that the crew escaped and both Soyuz wouldn't be docked with the station? However I mean all things being equal, the was she got back to earth is very reasonable and realistic.

The orbit thingy was a neccessary thing. Without that, the plot falls apart. It's not a scientific error, but a technical one. If you put two objects in the same orbital height and inclination, but with different argument of periapsis, they will follow each other. So if Hubble, ISS and Tiangong were in such orbits, they'd look motionless to each other.

Her return is not realistic. It's highly simplified, but I'm ok with it.

The official explanation on wikipedia is that Clooney thinks the parachute chords designed to hold a spaceship capsule will break when two humans are being decelerated by them. I'll have to rewatch it some day, but it still makes little sense to me.

Wikipedia is written by anyone, therefore that's someone's opinion. That has absolutely no sense. Don't build your opinion about something based on someone's opinion. Watch the scene yourself. They were already deccelerated from their linear motion, but ended, unavoidably, in a rotational reference frame around Soyuz. Centrifugal force held the chords tight enough to cause gradual slipping.

Edited October 26, 2014 by lajoswinkler

[SpaceXray]

The orbit thingy was a neccessary thing. Without that, the plot falls apart. It's not a scientific error, but a technical one. If you put two objects in the same orbital height and inclination, but with different argument of periapsis, they will follow each other. So if Hubble, ISS and Tiangong were in such orbits, they'd look motionless to each other.

Her return is not realistic. It's highly simplified, but I'm ok with it.

Wikipedia is written by anyone, therefore that's someone's opinion. That has absolutely no sense. Don't build your opinion about something based on someone's opinion. Watch the scene yourself. They were already deccelerated from their linear motion, but ended, unavoidably, in a rotational reference frame around Soyuz. Centrifugal force held the chords tight enough to cause gradual slipping.

There was nowhere near enough centrifugal force to do that. Stone was caught in the cords, she grabbed Clooney and the cords started stretching, deccelerating them, but then Clooney realised they weren't strong enough to rubber band them both back, so he had to let go. Note all this time they were still moving away, stretching the cords.

And this I the official version stated by Gravity's scientific advisor from NASA.

[lajoswinkler]

There was nowhere near enough centrifugal force to do that. Stone was caught in the cords, she grabbed Clooney and the cords started stretching, deccelerating them, but then Clooney realised they weren't strong enough to rubber band them both back, so he had to let go. Note all this time they were still moving away, stretching the cords.

And this I the official version stated by Gravity's scientific advisor from NASA.

God, not this again...

The decceleration lasted for a few seconds, and their talk lasted for a fairly longer time. It was over by the time he let go.

They were rotating around Soyuz. I even calculated it somewhere. The total length is close to 27 m, and the force (I think it was less than 1 N) is small but enough to keep it tight.

It doesn't matter if the numbers aren't exactly true (this is the part where nerd fandom starts irritating me), the point is that they're rotating and the grip is very slight. They will experience centrifugal force and that fits the plot of the movie. End of discussion. Geez.

[dryer_lint]

I bet you 20 Funds the movie ends with them coming back to Earth, saying "nope sorry there's no other planets we're screwed", and then a recital of Pale Blue Dot as the camera fades to black.

[SpaceXray]

God, not this again...

The decceleration lasted for a few seconds, and their talk lasted for a fairly longer time. It was over by the time he let go.

They were rotating around Soyuz. I even calculated it somewhere. The total length is close to 27 m, and the force (I think it was less than 1 N) is small but enough to keep it tight.

It doesn't matter if the numbers aren't exactly true (this is the part where nerd fandom starts irritating me), the point is that they're rotating and the grip is very slight. They will experience centrifugal force and that fits the plot of the movie. End of discussion. Geez.

Note this is your c**p opinion, I am putting forward the official version by the ones who MADE THE MOVIE. Their explanation makes sense unlike yours. End of story. Please stop being so stubborn and go look it up and accept that your theory had 0 value.

[rtxoff]

There was nowhere near enough centrifugal force to do that. Stone was caught in the cords, she grabbed Clooney and the cords started stretching, deccelerating them, but then Clooney realised they weren't strong enough to rubber band them both back, so he had to let go. Note all this time they were still moving away, stretching the cords.

And this I the official version stated by Gravity's scientific advisor from NASA.

It may be the official version but the realization of it into the movie was just pathetic. Everybody with a glimpse of knowledge about space that watches it feels how ridiculous it looks like. Normally i am not that kind of guy that is bothered about such details however in this case it is so obviously wrong that i really doubt the sanity of this Gravity NASA advisors.

[Dodgey]

Note this is your c**p opinion, I am putting forward the official version by the ones who MADE THE MOVIE. Their explanation makes sense unlike yours. End of story. Please stop being so stubborn and go look it up and accept that your theory had 0 value.

Just because it is an official explanation doesn't mean it is the one which makes the most sense, if they are rotating then it provides an explanation of why they are being pulled outward at what appears to be a constant speed, not slowing down as they would if it was simply momentum. In anycase this isn't the place for that argument.

@Cpt. Kipard, Cloony isn't worried about the cords breaking, more so them slipping off of Stone's leg.

[lajoswinkler]

Exactly. The chords were slipping because of the centrifugal force. When you watch the shots with Clooney holding the chord, the stars are passing by all the time. They are rotating. The exact numbers aren't important, the idea is.

I've made a multilayered image of the scene.

Rotation is clearly visible. The plane of the rotation isn't parallel to the viewer, though. It is under angle, but that's ok.

After a tethered realistic body (not a mathematical point) is stopped by the tether, it will enter rotation around the pivot. Here we have two bodies tethered to each other. Even if they were mathematical points, the rotation would be inevitable. We're talking about a momentary double pendulum action here.

I honestly don't understand where's the problem. They must enter rotation, the consequence must be centrifugal force. Whether it's enough to cause slipping, oh well, that depends on the friction between the chord and the EVA suit, doesn't it? If it fits to the plot, I say great.

[Nibb31]

If the ISS is rotating that fast, how come there are no other signs of rotation or spinning once Bullock climbs on board? And how come all the effects stop as soon as Clooney lets go. If the centrifugal force is strong enough to fling Clooney away, the spin would get worse as she approaches the CoM of the station and would be unbearable once inside.

Also, all they needed to do was to pull on the rope to shift their own movement relative to the station. This would either accelerate or decelerate their own rotation around the station and the rope would have wound itself around the station like a yoyo, reeling them in.

[Dodgey]

The station isn't rotating, when the cords go tight their velocity isn't directly away from the anchor point of the parachute cords so rotation is created. It's the same situation if I held a string with a ball attached to it horiziontal from hand, with the ball slightly closer to my hand then the length of the string, if I drop the ball it will fall vertically before swinging.

It's the same situation here, assuming I'm remembering the screen correctly I need to go and rematch it tomorrow.

[lajoswinkler]

If the ISS is rotating that fast, how come there are no other signs of rotation or spinning once Bullock climbs on board? And how come all the effects stop as soon as Clooney lets go. If the centrifugal force is strong enough to fling Clooney away, the spin would get worse as she approaches the CoM of the station and would be unbearable once inside.

Also, all they needed to do was to pull on the rope to shift their own movement relative to the station. This would either accelerate or decelerate their own rotation around the station and the rope would have wound itself around the station like a yoyo, reeling them in.

No.

Their rotation is not dependable on the rotation of ISS. It arises from the fact they were momentarily a double pendulum jerked when the shortest part of the chord stopped them. That induces rotation around the pivot point, which is the connection of the chord to the Soyuz capsule.

There is come movement of the ISS in the layered image I've made, but that's because of the movement of the camera. Notice it's similar to the background stars, but very different from the astronauts.

When Clooney lets go, he remains in a linear motion away from the pivot point.

Bullock, on the other hand, starts to go back. The chord isn't perfectly rigid. It's elastic and quite long, probably almost 25 metres. Also, Bullock is not rigid, either. She springs back and hits one of the modules instead of Soyuz, which makes sense.

Yes, that's what she was trying to do, but he thought it wouldn't work. The chord really was on the verge of slipping.

Also, by the time they're reeled in, she would've suffocated. Rotation was too slow, and the rope too long. She had minutes before real agony starts.

[lajoswinkler]

The station isn't rotating, when the cords go tight their velocity isn't directly away from the anchor point of the parachute cords so rotation is created. It's the same situation if I held a string with a ball attached to it horiziontal from hand, with the ball slightly closer to my hand then the length of the string, if I drop the ball it will fall vertically before swinging.

It's the same situation here, assuming I'm remembering the screen correctly I need to go and rematch it tomorrow.

Something like that, yes. Similar thing happened when Bullock got tangled in the chords. She was in a linear motion. When the chords jerked, she went into rotational motion because she's not a mathematical point, and she was not moving radially from the pivot point (what you've observed, and it's true). All that induces rotation. Then she bumps into Clooney. Their rotation doesn't cease, in fact it's amplified when another tightening starts.

Coming to a complete halt in such condition is physically impossible.

[Technical Ben]

I bet you 20 Funds the movie ends with them coming back to Earth, saying "nope sorry there's no other planets we're screwed", and then a recital of Pale Blue Dot as the camera fades to black.

I think a better option would be an Alien going...

"You had an entire planet? Wow, how many million years did it last you... oh what? You used it ALL up aready? But never bothered to check for water on any of the Moons... okay. Wow, um, no spare sugar here. Guess you'll have to ask next door!"

[lajoswinkler]

I haven't read this, so I can't tell if there are any spoilers inside. Readers, beware.

http://badassdigest.com/2014/10/27/interstellar-movie-review-ambitious-inert-beautiful-flawed/

[SpaceXray]

I haven't read this, so I can't tell if there are any spoilers inside. Readers, beware.

http://badassdigest.com/2014/10/27/interstellar-movie-review-ambitious-inert-beautiful-flawed/

You just ruined my day with that.

[Astronomer]

Few weeks ago I had to decide what to name the next big update for my mod.

Now, I am guilty as charged for using movie references in the past, but I'd by lying if I said that I had any other ideas that could bring the essence of the mod in one or two words.

Javascript is disabled. View full album

I often find myself very into playing KSP each time I watch a sci-fi film such as this. And I can already tell that this movie is going to be a sci-fi classic.

Edited October 28, 2014 by Astronomer
....ing imgur album bb code changes

[CaptainKipard]

Amazing. Not only are you riding on name recognition, but also, is there a version of the above mod without the vain title and loading screen?