# The Twenty Worst Science and Technology Errors in Films.



## Urien (Oct 13, 2009)

The twenty worst science and technology errors in films... according to the Telegraph. 

What do you think? What have they missed?


The 20 worst science and technology errors in films - Telegraph


I couldn't help noticing they missed ship to ship battles. Even in WW2 they often couldn't see each other, in deep space they'd probably be thousands of miles apart, not nose to nose. 

My other favourite, though not a movie, was Space 1999, where the moon would conveniently slow down to pass a planet, and then presumably speed up to near light speeds top move from system to system.


----------



## TheEndIsNigh (Oct 13, 2009)

OK I can be picky but it seems to me they go over the top in places.

We only have to insert an ion pulse into a laser beam and a 'tracer' will result. Similar to the way they can do it it with fluorescent tubes in shop windows (OK that's not how it's actually done but it sounded feasible)

Star Trek Romulans seem to have had a little genetic engineering too. Once they were fine healthy looking human like fellows.

The Matrix energy was 'special energy' hence the need for the farm.

Batman's arms - these devices actually exist they slow you down at an acceptable rate so you don't loose your guts although they aren't hand held devices but a bit of engineering will no doubt fix that. 

As for things they missed

Time travel.


----------



## Ursa major (Oct 13, 2009)

TheEndIsNigh said:


> We only have to insert an ion pulse into a laser beam and a 'tracer' will result.


 
But why put a tracer in a "beam" when all it does is allow the magical being with the torch-sword to swat the "beam" away?

(Okay, I do know the answer: it's to make the fight work on the screen and to allow the torch-sword holder to defend themselves; but even so....)

Oh, and why shoot such short "beams"? A longer one would persist in travelling towards its target long after the "blade" had swept through its path.

Westerns managed mostly without swords and similar weapons; so should sci-fi.


The two that most bother me most are:

the head-to-head starship battles (sometimes "at Warp").
the engines failing, causing the ship to stop (but allowing the artificial gravity to keep going). If the effects budget can't reach to the portrayal of weightlessness, try to keep the storyline well away from the inside of a spaceship lacking all power.


----------



## Boneman (Oct 13, 2009)

Even better, there was an awful SciFi film some years ago (so awful I forget its name) but the climax at the end comes in a spaceship that seems to be hundreds of yards long and there's a big explosion at one end and the characters in the film (with no airlocks between them and the catastrophic rendering of the hull) have time to run the two hundred yards to safety before the blast reaches them. Purlease... as soon as the hull is breached the outside temperature, (minus 270C) and complete vacuum would whisk anything not triple-welded down, into the great unknown before you could draw breath... script-writers, eh?


----------



## Ursa major (Oct 13, 2009)

And then there are the rogue planets (i.e. ones in the space well away from stars) with vegetation (with leaves).

* Shakes head *


----------



## Boneman (Oct 13, 2009)

Or Dune: a totally desert planet with  not a single tree to produce oxygen and absorb carbon dioxide...


----------



## mercs (Oct 13, 2009)

I'm not too bothered about some of them, as the stories would be crap without the effects. star trek early on did it due to constraints, but there's no excuse for the later ones to still be all humans with different dress or face paint! i mean even star wars (largely all humanoid) occassionally had characters like jabba that didn't follow the norm quite as much...although he too was a fat human in the original!

The bit about the engines stopping and the ship shuddering to the halt always made me laugh! even a car would go for sometime, whereas a space ship would carry on until something asserted a second force to it, so that could be eternity...


----------



## paranoid marvin (Oct 13, 2009)

The Martian Chronicles - look at those blue skies and white fluffy clouds - on MARS!?


----------



## paranoid marvin (Oct 13, 2009)

There are many liberties taken with the vast majority of tv sci-fi. For a start , the same  air is breathable by all life-forms - improbable. There is a universal language spoken and understood by 99% of the inhabitants - highly unlikely. The vast majority of the population of planets is physically nearly identical - approx 6 feet tall , 4 limbs , bi-pedal , 2 eyes , one nose , one mouth , 2 ears - practically impossible.


Understandably , due of monetary constraints and for entertainment purposes , these anomalies are generally overlooked , with the odd tip of the hat to reality with giving the odd attractive female blue skin  , pointy ears or a Cornish pasties strapped to their heads.

What really makes me laugh though are when characters are portrayed as 'evil'. Like in Star Trek , they either have a scar , leering grin , or -worst of all - a goatee!


----------



## Harry Kilmer (Oct 13, 2009)

The running away from explosions always bugged me. Just once I'd like to see someone get toasted - kinda like how Michael Douglas swings across a ravine in Romancing the Stone only to get greeted by a face full of cliff.


----------



## biodroid (Oct 14, 2009)

*SF Related*:- It's also amazing that every planet you visit on Star Wars or Star Trek with alien life forms have perfectly balanced O2 levels therefore humans can breathe on any of the planets they visit without any breathing aids.

Why are starships shaped so sleek with wings in a vacuuous environment, are they not starships and not planetships?

In Star Trek, why is it only one person calls on the computer and responds to that person. What if 40 other people access the same computer at the same time, do I have to wait in a queue like on a call centre line?

If you open all Hailing Frequencies should you not get other ships chatter as well besides the one you really want to speak to?

*Non SF related*:- I found it quite strange that in the 80's movies and tv shows all cars have tyre squeal when on dirt roads ahem I have never heard a car do that ever!! 

The mercs or soldiers are so good at what they do they can't even hit the main baddy while spraying 5000 bullets in his direction but the baddy fires one shot from his gun and wounds the good guy.

Lets give away our secret hiding place by sneezing so that baddies can capture us.

I always cringe when people are trying to log into someone elses PC and get ACCESS DENIED and by some miracle they figure out the persons password after 2 tries. Does not happen in real life and by the 3rd time the system will lock you out if typed in more than X times. 

Why does Indiana Jones only sometimes bleed after the 15th solid punch that would knock a heavy weight champ out cold.

I like this one, just when you thought the good guy is about to be defeated he suddenly has this great second wind to give him all the strength when 5 seconds ago he could barely stand and lift his head.


----------



## Urien (Oct 14, 2009)

I was always troubled by the uniformity of alien planets. The aliens all had the same language, religion, physiognomy and were one planetary nation.

No I know it's a simplifying assumption but given the diversity of Earth; constantly landing on the planet Easy to Explain, becomes unlikely.



... I know Star Trek and a couple of others on rare occasions gave a planet as many as two races/religions etc.


----------



## chrispenycate (Oct 14, 2009)

As a sound engineer, frequently involved in adding these effects to films, I'm worried about noise pollution. Spaceships that whooosh in vacuum, lasers that swish in atmosphere, monsters that make acceleration noises, footsteps in microgravity environments. "It has to be thus," sayeth the director "to make things more believable."

Sound travels at the speed of light in a vacuum; when a spaceship blows up, half a million kilometres away, the bang is synchronised with the flash, and nobody else thinks it odd. (I will, hesitantly, accept the possibility of a bang, as the shock wave will contain a fair percentage of the atmosphere and vaporised personnel of the ship; but there are never micrometeorites, the enemy's coffee pot and the bits of his armour plating that set off in your direction during the explosion rattling off your windows half an hour later - presumably atmospheric friction and gravity have taken care of these as they would on Earth.


----------



## Pyan (Oct 14, 2009)

Have you noticed that when two spaceships "meet", they're always in exactly the same plane, as in "face-to-face"? Given the 3d nature of space, what are the odds of this happening?







And when a planet or moon is blown up, why is there a shock-_*ring *_of energy and matter given off? Surely it should be a *sphere*!


----------



## Urien (Oct 14, 2009)

Ooooohhh pretty pictures; a graphic post. Now I have post envy.

Damn you Pyan, damn you to hellllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll.


Beat this then:






... and these terrifying aliens


----------



## paranoid marvin (Oct 14, 2009)

People being shot and carrying on fighting back. I would imagine even a relatively minor shot gun wound would put you out of action. Also firing large machine guns and continuing to talk , when the likelihood is that they would all be completely deafened by the noise.


----------



## jojajihisc (Oct 15, 2009)

chrispenycate said:


> As a sound engineer, frequently involved in adding these effects to films, I'm worried about noise pollution. Spaceships that whooosh in vacuum, lasers that swish in atmosphere, monsters that make acceleration noises, footsteps in microgravity environments. "It has to be thus," sayeth the director "to make things more believable."
> 
> Sound travels at the speed of light in a vacuum; when a spaceship blows up, half a million kilometres away, the bang is synchronised with the flash, and nobody else thinks it odd. (I will, hesitantly, accept the possibility of a bang, as the shock wave will contain a fair percentage of the atmosphere and vaporised personnel of the ship; but there are never micrometeorites, the enemy's coffee pot and the bits of his armour plating that set off in your direction during the explosion rattling off your windows half an hour later - presumably atmospheric friction and gravity have taken care of these as they would on Earth.


 
The bang is ridiculous too. Without a medium to travel through we would not perceive any noise whatsoever. You are too forgiving.


----------



## J-WO (Oct 15, 2009)

Does anyone else find the sentiment of No2 a little disconcerting? Mr Chivers appears to find it more acceptable to interfere sexually with a chimp (a creature wholly incapable of articulating consent or even understanding) than with a fully intelligent alien (Which, for the sake of argument, is somehow capable of amorous liaison with a human) that is capable of expressing its desires or lack thereof.
So what planet is Chivers from? Alabama Prime?

The introduction is intriguing too. A classic example of apologist SF/ Fantasy. _'Yeah, I know its a bit nerdy, anorak, anorak, live with our mum, BO problem etc, etc, yawn, have I filled a thousand words yet? Anorak- get a girlfriend- etc, yawn...'  _

The get a girlfriend cliche is a bit bigoted when you think about it, with regards to the article's bent. It suggests women have no interest (and are therefore no good at) anything involving science or reason. My female friends are often the first to point flaws in a film's reasoning.


----------



## biodroid (Oct 15, 2009)

Doesn't Star Wars: Episode II - Attack of the Clones film locations look a lot like Italy and Spain? Oh thats because it was in Italy and Spain? even if you cover it up with as much SFX it still looks like the off world is actually pretty close to home.


----------



## Interference (Oct 15, 2009)

Urien said:


> Ooooohhh pretty pictures; a graphic post. Now I have post envy.
> 
> Damn you Pyan, damn you to hellllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll.
> 
> ...



ROTFL 

Your aliens are truly scary


----------



## Ursa major (Oct 15, 2009)

pyan said:


> Have you noticed that when two spaceships "meet", they're always in exactly the same plane, as in "face-to-face"? Given the 3d nature of space, what are the odds of this happening?


 
And if your picture is showing the result of one ship ramming another, the ramming ship should have rotated (i.e. rolled) through 90 degrees, allowing it to penetrate deeper (because both ships are wider than they are high and so the impact area would be smaller).





pyan said:


> And when a planet or moon is blown up, why is there a shock-_*ring *_of energy and matter given off? Surely it should be a *sphere*!


They erred because they equated rolleyes:) their limited imagination and knowledge with reality.


----------



## HareBrain (Oct 16, 2009)

Not exactly SFF, but still falls within science errors:

Why does every night-time jungle/forest scene, no matter how tropical, have Great Northern Divers (Loons to you Canadians) voicing off in the background, even though these are basically birds of the tundra?


----------



## thepaladin (Oct 17, 2009)

Not really a Star Trek junkie but I surprised no one pointed out that it has been at least intimated that most of the humanoid races who have made contact (humans, Vulcans, Romulans, Klingons) are related possibly from a common ancestor. Also, most of the Star Trek babes are much hotter than any chimp or worm I ever saw, but then that may be speciesist of me.

And, while it's not so dramatic...the Han Solo's "parsec" as a time measurment screw up still drives me crazy.


----------



## thepaladin (Oct 17, 2009)

Sorry some typos in that post...always in a hurry. sigh


----------



## Ursa major (Oct 17, 2009)

That comes of travelling through typospace....



I never really bought into the "seeded" explanation of humanoid intelligent alien (and human) life suggested in that ST:TNG episode. It suggests that DNA contains not only possibilities and mechanisms for translating whatever possibilites are active into a living organism, but also a third, controlling element, patiently creating one species per world among millions (or billions, if you include the other worlds containing life) in a very limited time window.

How does the DNA tell the time? If it is by number of generations, how does it control the intergenerational interval? How does it operate in widely differing environments? The answers to all of these questions are: it can't and it doesn't. A moments thought (I couldn't be bothered to think about it for longer ) will tell you this "explanation" has no credibility at all.


----------



## Dave (Oct 17, 2009)

Not only that, but the appearance of humanoid species in the Gamma and Delta Quadrants of the Milky Way as seen in DS9 and Voyager also discredited that explanation, even that intelligent reptiles had once lived on Earth and left. Star Trek does not stand up to any fine scrutiny and I say that as a "junkie".

The lack of money and limited special effect available on TV was once a valid excuse, but what is the excuse today? I want to see Kzin and Puppeteers on TV.


----------



## Pyan (Oct 17, 2009)

Dave said:


> I want to see Kzin and Puppeteers on TV.



Yes! 

I'd also like to see Jinxians and Wunderlanders, and WeMadeItians as well - Star Trek planets all seem to have identical 1g gravity fields.

(You may like this, Dave, if you're a fan: The Complete Idiot's Guide To Known Space. No implication intended there... )


----------



## thepaladin (Oct 17, 2009)

I didn't say it was logical I only meant they could use it as an out for the cross species breeding. There are crosses between humans and vulcans, romulans, and Klingons that I remember and Like I said. I'm not a "Trekker", or "Trekkie", whichever you prefer. The argument could be made..it probably couldn't be by chance though. The inteligence who set it up would have had also to have made provision for chromosome number at least (a fox is a canine but can't produce offspring with a dog). 

(Actually that's close to the plot of a novel I've got in my "still being re-written" area. Close but not the same...maybe if I keep writing...sigh.)


----------



## Ursa major (Oct 17, 2009)

No criticism of you was intended, TP. Sorry if my post suggested that it was.



Oh and the seeding was supposed to have been done _billions_ of years ago, and they were seeding all life, not just manipulating a strand of it, so you can add chromosome number variation to the list of impediments to the process.


----------



## thepaladin (Oct 18, 2009)

ya, all true...and the problems go even deeper. I just figured it would give fans of Capt. Kirk's love life an out. Though, if you think about it Kirk probably hopes all these humanoid races can't reproduce with humans....


----------



## gully_foyle (Oct 18, 2009)

What about the instantaneous exploding head in the space suit routine, most notably portrayed in  the eighties flick *Outland*? Bad things happen when you're exposed to space, but not quite so immediate and graphical.

And ofcourse the worst offence is the callous disregard for gravity. Everytime they defy the laws Newton spins in his grave just that little faster.

btw, apparently an Outland remake is on its way. It was okay, but I didn't think it was that good.


----------



## clovis-man (Oct 18, 2009)

thepaladin said:


> Also, most of the Star Trek babes are much hotter than any chimp or worm I ever saw, but then that may be speciesist of me.



Actually, Helena Bonham Carter as a chimpanzee in the latest *Planet of the Apes* is hotter than she ever was as a human. Better make-up too. No bestiality comments, please.


----------



## clovis-man (Oct 18, 2009)

paranoid marvin said:


> People being shot and carrying on fighting back. I would imagine even a relatively minor shot gun wound would put you out of action.



Maybe they were all related to Rasputin.


----------



## TheEndIsNigh (Oct 18, 2009)

Urien said:


> Ooooohhh pretty pictures; a graphic post. Now I have post envy.
> 
> Damn you Pyan, damn you to hellllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll.
> 
> ...


 

Urien: Take care. If you continue to post such *"graphic detail"* someone, I'm sure, will report your posts.



thepaladin said:


> ya, all true...and the problems go even deeper. I just figured it would give fans of Capt. Kirk's love life an out. Though, if you think about it Kirk probably hopes all these humanoid races can't reproduce with humans....


 
Surely now that time has reversed they never happened. Though it seems a bit of an extreme way to get out of all those paternity claims



> Originally Posted by pyan
> 
> 
> _And when a planet or moon is blown up, why is there a shock-ring of energy and matter given off? Surely it should be a sphere!_


 
pyan: Although if you saw the program on the Hubble last week it seems that stars blow up that way (or at least appear to)


----------



## J-WO (Oct 18, 2009)

Do you think people in the federation go to nightclubs carrying a toolbox of erm... 'adaptor units' in case they get lucky?


----------



## Ursa major (Oct 18, 2009)

If they do, J-WO, I'm copyrighting the portmanteau name, Scrooge, for it. 







(You can stick with the term, toolbox, if you like. )


----------



## J-WO (Oct 19, 2009)

That high pitched sound is Charles Dickens spinning in his grave from moral outrage.

_'I am the ghost of xenophilia past,' said the strange, green lady._

_'Humbug,' said Scrooge.

'No, your thinking of Klendathu.'_


----------



## thepaladin (Oct 19, 2009)

Remember Bab.5. Apparently they published a pamphlet on which species could safely mate with which other species (we find this out when a guy spots a couple of "hot looking" humanoid females whom (he is informed) are from a species who eat their male mates. Meanwhilethe girls smile interestingly at the perspective victom/lover (or would that be lover/victom...oh well?).


----------



## J-WO (Oct 20, 2009)

Changing genres briefly, I've never understood why there's so many half-orcs in fantasy worlds (AD&D etc). Half-elves, yes, but _Orcs_? 

The ale and mead in these fantasy worlds must be lethal...


----------



## Ursa major (Oct 20, 2009)

* Avoids temptation of generating a string of puns based on words such as "orcassional", "orcward" and orccidental". *



And back to SF (or, to be more accurate, scifi)....

Picard is talking to some planetary ruler (or governor) over a subspace link - the Enterprise is still at warp on its way the system - and yet the ship's counsellor can determine the ruler's state of mind. If the information she requires is carried over a tecnoloigy-determined/encrypted/whatever subspace link, why can't the ship's computer work out the ruler's state of mind (at least to the level of the vague pronouncements that Picard receives)?


----------



## J-WO (Oct 20, 2009)

One can only assume she does it by listening to the voice and reading facial expressions. But, if that is the case, how can Deeana possibly know every nuance of every intelligent species around, sometimes that of ones no one has encountered yet?

Definitely one for the PSB* file.

*Pseudo scientific Bullsh*t


----------



## Urien (Oct 20, 2009)

"What do you think counsellor?" Jean-Luc intoned.
"Oooh he looks a bit miffed," Troi simpered.
"Can you be more specific?" Jean-Luc ACTED.
"Not really; grumpy? Er bad curry last night, dead?" Troi vacillated.
"Thank you. Number one, create a plan on the basis of Troi's ill-informed guesswork," exasperated Jean-Luc.


----------



## Interference (Oct 20, 2009)

I think that's metascience, Ursa.  Troy is an empath and empathy knows neither distance nor time.  Only intent.

Of course, she's about as empathic as a dishrag and the ship's computer could do a better job just picking random quotes from Jung.


----------



## Ursa major (Oct 20, 2009)

It can't be metascience: she hand't met the person.


----------



## J-WO (Oct 20, 2009)

Ursa Major; fastest Punslinger in the old west.


----------



## ktabic (Oct 20, 2009)

Ok, I'm going to bite, and call some of these false.



Boneman said:


> Or Dune: a totally desert planet with not a single tree to produce oxygen and absorb carbon dioxide...



Kull Wahad! In a word, Shai-hulud! Appendix 1 of Dune mentions that a medium sized sandworm produces, as waste, as much Oxygen as 10km^2 of photosynthesis greenary. This might not be mentioned in the film or the miniseries, but was covered in the book.



biodroid said:


> every planet you visit on Star Wars or Star Trek with alien life forms have perfectly balanced O2 levels therefore humans can breathe on any of the planets they visit without any breathing aids.



Maybe not as strange as you would think. The basic conponents of life on this planet are pretty common through out the Universe, and it provides a decent amount of energy using a quite simple chemistry. And is easily replenished using another quite simple bit of chemistry. Which should result in O2 (with Carbon) being common where ever the components are (everywhere). In fact free Oxygen in an atmosphere is probably a decent indicator of the exsistance of life (of the Oxygen/Carbon Dioxide kind).
As for tolerable levels of O2, it's a case of the more there is the better for life (resulting in a preference for increased O2 in the atmosphere) but baring in mind that O2 concentrations of 25% or more become a serious fire hazard.



paranoid marvin said:


> People being shot and carrying on fighting back. I would imagine even a relatively minor shot gun wound would put you out of action. Also firing large machine guns and continuing to talk , when the likelihood is that they would all be completely deafened by the noise.



It would depend on many factors, the person, the gun, the ammo. People can be remarkably tough. Just have a read through some of the citations for people awards the Victoria Cross or the Medal of Honor or other countries equivalents, you'll find dozens of people who have carried on fighting dispite being seriously wounded.


----------



## Daisy-Boo (Nov 30, 2009)

Urien, you are too funny.


----------



## J-WO (Nov 30, 2009)

The hero outruns an explosion and then dives into water which saves them.

Now I'm no physics boffin, but I'm sure explosions are even worse in water, density etc...


----------



## williamjm (Dec 3, 2009)

J-WO said:


> The hero outruns an explosion and then dives into water which saves them.



It's a bit like the trope in a lot of Hollywood blockbusters where apparently you can survive an explosion of any size, as long as you happen to jump in the air as it explodes.


----------



## HareBrain (Dec 3, 2009)

Or the one that says the impact of a single bullet can throw a man backwards -- _and upwards_ -- to smack against a wall behind him.

_Unless _he's standing on a tall building, in which case he falls forwards off it.


----------



## Boneman (Dec 3, 2009)

But it depends on how quickly the bullet stops. If it hits something incredibly dense (the sternum, the skull for instance) then look at this formula: a bullet hits an object and it stops in 1/10000 of a second the force is for a bullet traveling a 2000 ft/s and weighing 180 gr is for example 
Force = ( ( 180 gr * 2000 ft/s ) / 225218 ) / .0001 = 15984.6 lbs . 
That is if it stops in 2.4 inches of medium 15984.6 lbs is applied. 
If a bullet hits an object and it stops in 1/1000 of a second the force is for a bullet traveling a 2000 ft/s and weighing 180 gr is for example 
Force = ( ( 180 gr * 2000 ft/s ) / 225218 ) / .001 = 1598.46 lbs . 
That is if it stops in 24 inches of medium 1598.476 lbs of force is applied. 


Now being hit by something that weighs a few tons might just throw you back against a building, and possibly upwards if the trajectory were right. It's all in the kinetics...


----------



## HareBrain (Dec 4, 2009)

180gr for a bullet??


----------



## thatollie (Dec 4, 2009)

In Cowboy Bebop, Spike survives in space by holding his breath. Twice.


----------



## J-WO (Dec 4, 2009)

In Fireball XL5 (A precursor to Thunderbirds) the crew took special pills to go spacewalking outside the craft!


----------



## mosaix (Dec 4, 2009)

Boneman said:


> But it depends on how quickly the bullet stops. If it hits something incredibly dense (the sternum, the skull for instance) then look at this formula: a bullet hits an object and it stops in 1/10000 of a second the force is for a bullet traveling a 2000 ft/s and weighing 180 gr is for example
> Force = ( ( 180 gr * 2000 ft/s ) / 225218 ) / .0001 = 15984.6 lbs .
> That is if it stops in 2.4 inches of medium 15984.6 lbs is applied.
> If a bullet hits an object and it stops in 1/1000 of a second the force is for a bullet traveling a 2000 ft/s and weighing 180 gr is for example
> ...



For every action there is an equal and opposite...

Any person firing a bullet that knocks a man backwards off his feet is also going to be knocked backwards off his feet.


----------



## Tillane (Dec 5, 2009)

mosaix said:


> For every action there is an equal and opposite...
> 
> Any person firing a bullet that knocks a man backwards off his feet is also going to be knocked backwards off his feet.


As proven on Mythbusters, if memory serves...


----------



## Harry Kilmer (Dec 5, 2009)

mosaix said:


> For every action there is an equal and opposite...
> 
> Any person firing a bullet that knocks a man backwards off his feet is also going to be knocked backwards off his feet.



Strangely,the only two films I can recall that get this right are Men in Black, and Police Academy.


----------



## CyBeR (Dec 15, 2009)

"There's a problem with the hydraulics, sir"

And then they show an image of a bevel gear, or any other kind of gears. THOSE ARE NOT THE HYDRAULICS! Those are gears for damn's sake. 
A hydraulic system is a whole different matter altogether, it's pumps and distributors and...I have a really bad memory lapse right now for I can't remember the synonym for hose. 

And when the problem arises, there's a nifty little animation on screen, that shows the precise point where it's at. I really really wish it were that simply...


----------



## Boneman (Dec 15, 2009)

> by Mosaix
> _For every action there is an equal and opposite...
> 
> Any person firing a bullet that knocks a man backwards off his feet is also going to be knocked backwards off his feet. _




Except in this case, the action is the ignition of close packed explosive, and the reaction is the bullet being ejected, as the blast seeks the only possible exit. A lot of the reaction is thermic... You'd have to have a hammer moving incredibly quickly to eject a bullet at 2000f/s, if there was no gunpowder in there, I agree. The reaction between the hammer striking the bullet and the reaction as it stops dead is minimal - witness a dud bullet.


----------



## thepaladin (Dec 15, 2009)

Just a note. There are 180 grain bullets in larger calibors such as .30-06 so that could depend on application.

If we aren't talking of zero G aplication recoil and impact can expend their force differently. For example a Colt .45 ACP round the pistol recoil will generally cause the shooter's hand and arm to go up. The round, striking a body will generally expand (except in the case of full metal jacketed rounds) to the point that they will knock a full grown human male down. A full jacketed bullet will usually stagger to knocking down the same male and then smash on through depending on how much tumble there is.

Application and bullet type are important.


----------



## Metryq (Apr 3, 2011)

Ursa Major to play the Punisher.

The Telegraph column had some valid points, but it also had a number of — for lack of a better term — "reading comprehension" errors. For example, I've seen the argument many times that the "laser swords" in _Star Wars_ would pass right through each other, and they also wouldn't end abruptly one meter from the hilt. Nowhere in the movies are the _lightsabers_ called "laser" swords. Some fan publications get into technobabble explanations about magnetically bottled plasma, which certainly sounds good. Aside from the fact that most "sci-fi" is of the very "soft" variety bordering on fantasy, criticizing a fictional technology is usually wasted effort. Or to quote the corollary to Clarke's Law: 

_Any sufficiently repeatable magic is indistinguishable from technology._

Many posters have commented on firearm tropes, such as bullet hits picking up and throwing a large person. The Schwarzenegger movie _Eraser_ really went to town on this account. A hand-held, projectile EMP weapon may be possible, but as others have noted, Newton set an upper limit on the practical momentum of the projectile. Even the smaller designs I've seen must be clamped down. One silly line in _Eraser_ described the projectiles as moving "at the speed of light." (I don't have any Einsteinian biases, but more on that in a moment.) In reality, a super-fast bullet would probably pass through a target, rather than throw it...or it might "vaporize" it. I've seen videos on-line of snipers using the big Barrett rifles firing .50 BMG. The targets were literally turned into dog food — chunks of meat flying through the air from the hydrostatic shock of the impact. (Both horrifying and fascinating at the same time.) If the snipers used a "hollow point," the target would probably explode into a red mist, just like a videogame. 

But if you want to know what really rubs my fur the wrong way? "Authorities" like Michio Kaku showing up on TV almost as often as the news anchors themselves to proclaim the accuracy of "Star Trek science" and other fantasies. I'm only an "armchair" physicist, but many qualified scientists disagree with Einstein and other aspects of orthodox science. Yet the books and documentaries written for the layman push the idea that there is a consensus on all of this — "proof." This is a more detailed argument for another thread. I think it was Lord Kelvin who said, sometime toward the end of the 19th century, that science was finished and all that remained was a mopping up of details.


----------



## Lemmy (Apr 3, 2011)

It's way past bedtime already, so I haven't read the whole threat yet. I will soon, though. Probably. Maybe. I do have a few weird errors, though. Not just from sci-fi, but horror too. Naturally, as I'm a horror geek.

- Critters: We're talking small, furry hairballs with sharp teeth, all the size of a football. Then one eats a cow and grow to the size of a car in two seconds? How? What can it possibly be made of? True, The Blob grew in size too, but even that took time.

- Freddy vs Jason: Demon who killes people in their dreams fighting a zombie that never sleeps. Anyone see a problem here?

- Isn't it funny how every single spaceship, from small one-man fighters to Star Destroyers can not only land on a planet, but travel back up into space again on their own?

- Sandworms: From Dune to Tremors, we have always been terrified of the giants worms that live under the sand and attack anywhere at any time. But... how do they move? Sand is solid enough to drive a car on and build a house on, but loose enough to swim through like it's water? Now that's some magical sand. Maybe that's why Dune had an atmosphere.

- Living dolls: Chucky, I'm looking at you. He's a serial killer who knew he was going to die, so he transfered his soul into a doll. But when the doll started getting destroyed, why didn't he simply transfer his soul into another doll instead of trying to send it into a human? If he had kept sending his soul into different objects, no one would know where he was or what he was. He would be an unstoppable killing machine.

- Stargate: Can someone please explain to me how they work? What is that liquid stuff they walk into? How does it stay up like that, and how can it send people all the way across the galaxy in seconds?


----------



## CyBeR (Apr 3, 2011)

Lemmy said:


> - Sandworms: From Dune to Tremors, we have always been terrified of the giants worms that live under the sand and attack anywhere at any time. But... how do they move? Sand is solid enough to drive a car on and build a house on, but loose enough to swim through like it's water? Now that's some magical sand. Maybe that's why Dune had an atmosphere.
> 
> - Stargate: Can someone please explain to me how they work? What is that liquid stuff they walk into? How does it stay up like that, and how can it send people all the way across the galaxy in seconds?



For *Dune*, there's quite a detailed explanation as to how sandworms move in the Arakis desert. Of course, it involves elements particular to Frank Herbert's universe, so there's that. 

For *Stargate*, they spend quite a lot of time explaining how the tunnel stays open. I honestly can't remember it here, but there's some pseudo sciency stuff over there. Least there's an explanation. 

For myself, the biggest tech error I seem to always notice are the gear wheels. I've mentioned them before I believe. 
Not only are they often HUGE (for no good reason), but they're also working in CLEAN environments. Those things would be dead in mere hours of working under load.


----------



## Lemmy (Apr 4, 2011)

True, but explaining it in a movie doesn't matter unless it's explained realistically. Take Dune, for instance. Let's do a little test. Go to a dirt road, desert or whatever that's full of sand you can walk on. Now take a big knife and push it into the ground all the way up to the shaft. Think you can do it? Now replace the knife with a sandworm that's 40 meters in diameter and push it so far through the ground it can outrace a car. See the problem there? 

The same goes for Stargate. What is that stuff the gate is made of?


----------



## CyBeR (Apr 4, 2011)

I think we may be transitioning into a whole different discussion here honestly. 
Should a film explanation make sense in our world or in the world the film is taking place in? I think that based on your opinions on this, how you perceive a film changes drastically. 

I for one would prefer the explanation of the sandworms where they're evolved from other sand creatures that basically glide underneath the sand and so on (been a bit since I've read *Children of Dune*). 

But otherwise, as I've said, we're moving into a whole new discussion that I don't believe would make the discussion of this topic.


----------



## Metryq (Apr 4, 2011)

I'm guessing the Stargate is supposed to be a "wormhole" (Einstein-Rosen bridge) that can be dialed like a telephone, and the watery surface and "plume" fountaining out of the gate is just a cool-looking effect the FX artists tinkered up while playing with an air cannon in a pool. I've seen the movie and a few episodes of the first series, but never heard any explanations of _what_ the watery boundary was supposed to be. Perhaps it is a safety curtain to prevent uncontrolled joining of _here_ and _there_, as seen in the movie _The Philadelphia Experiment_. Only things intentionally pushed through will go. It might also be to prevent transportees from touching the sides of the tunnel, as the tidal stresses in an ER bridge would tear you to atoms before you had a chance to shout "ouch!"


----------



## Vladd67 (Apr 4, 2011)

I think the watery boundary is meant to be the event horizon of the wormhole.


----------



## CyBeR (Apr 4, 2011)

Vladd67 said:


> I think the watery boundary is meant to be the event horizon of the wormhole.



Yup, I seem to remember this as well from the series.


----------



## Norlan (Apr 5, 2011)

Quite a few things i notice in movies. Mostly just hacking and computer elements. Like when they assume typing faster is going to make the trace work faster or when a big box pops up on the screen and says success or something like that. Or my personal favorite when they show a "computer expert" in a movie and after he types something into google or the computer he puts his hand on the mouse and clicks "search" or "ok" instead of just hitting enter.


----------



## Interference (Apr 5, 2011)

NCIS - Yeah, all that typing?  I use a mouse a lot more


----------



## clovis-man (Apr 5, 2011)

Interference said:


> NCIS - Yeah, all that typing? I use a mouse a lot more


 
Ah. Like Scotty in Star Trek IV when he tries to use the computer by talking into the mouse, but then declares it "quaint" and types the necessary data like a summa cum laude Mavis Beacon graduate.


----------



## Moonbat (Apr 5, 2011)

I always liked the bit in *Swordfish* when Hugh Jackman's chracter is expected to hack into some government system in 45 seconds, with a gun to his head. The tension building is fine, it's the GUI setup for hackers that I find amusing.
I'm sure there is one point in the film, where he is hacking in and he is (somehow) moving through lots of three dimensional cubes that keep unlocking different parts of the system.
Granted, true hacking would not be so exciting on screen, imagine just lines of code in a command window rushing past instead of all this purpose built graphical user interface, for hacking!!!!

I'm going to write a program and into it I'm going to put a specially designed animation for when hackers try to break in. It wont keep them out, but it'll look good.


----------



## HareBrain (Apr 5, 2011)

Something that amused me even in _Alien _back in the 80s but which, unbelievably**, came up in the recent _Outcasts_: computer screens that display one character at a time.

**(unbelievably given how recently it was made, but on second thoughts, given the quality of the rest of it, perhaps not)


----------



## Metryq (Apr 5, 2011)

"I know this! It's a Unix system!" — _Jurassic Park_

Then there was an action film — a Stallone film, I believe — where a character is getting ready to hack another system. He types a few strokes on his laptop, delivering the self-satisfied line, "A Gig of RAM oughta do it!" Right. All you need to break through any security is more memory. And you can add more RAM to your computer by typing in the command.

And then there's the movie _Hackers_...although _Enemy of the State_ was probably just as bad.


----------



## biodroid (Apr 5, 2011)

Or you could give the Mothership a Cold/Virus like Jeff Goldblum in Independence Day that happens to use the exact same programming language they probably stole from us earthlings in the 50's because we just have the best languages out there.

CSI - I like the really awesome 40 years ahead of time tech they use in that show. They can zoom into a pic that was taken from 500 miles away and you see a spec and then the spec becomes a face in HD no matter how blurry the image is.


----------



## Interference (Apr 5, 2011)

I know it must be tough on actors, as well, but I watched The Tomorrow Man last night wherein the android from the future hacked into a security system by flapping his hands at the keyboard and, apparently, playing chords.  And he didn't need any of the number keys.  I have to say I was truly impressed, from a musicians point of view


----------



## CyBeR (Apr 5, 2011)

biodroid said:


> CSI - I like the really awesome 40 years ahead of time tech they use in that show. They can zoom into a pic that was taken from 500 miles away and you see a spec and then the spec becomes a face in HD no matter how blurry the image is.



Yeah, they magically pull more pixels from where there are none. 
This is actually insanely common in films and police series, where the creators always seem to believe there is unlimited amount of data inside a few kb of data that comprise a jpeg image. 

Or in *Bones*, especially in the first seasons, they had a full 3D hologram system that could in a matter of seconds render complex algorithms about how a  lot of stuff would interact with different objects. I always found that very silly...apart from the whole 3D cube hologram thing.


----------



## Lenny (Apr 5, 2011)

Whilst we're on the subject of bad hacking/coding/GUIs in films, may I go to the other end of the spectrum and say that the best use I've seen (i.e. the most correct) was at the start of the new TRON film.

Emacs, guys! They actually used _Emacs_ in a blockbuster!


----------



## Interference (Apr 5, 2011)

CyBeR said:


> ....where the creators always seem to believe there is unlimited amount of data inside a few kb of data that comprise a jpeg image.



I tend to willingly suspend my disbelief at that point.  As a long-time conspiracy theorist (I have aluminium underpants as well, just in case), I suspect that government agency technology is way ahead of what will eventually be released to the public.  I'd say we're now, at our most advanced, still about ten or twenty years behind the CIA and NSA.

West Coast NCIS (or whatever they're calling that series) is probably only five years behind what they are actually doing in Langley today.


----------



## Ursa major (Apr 5, 2011)

Interference said:


> (I have aluminium underpants as well, just in case)


That's not really the recommended place to wear one's tin foil, Inter.


But that does bring us onto genetic memory, as seen in Star Gate SG-1 and the Dune books (the real ones, not the endless prequels/whatever), for instance. Now I realise that the bottom end of one's spinal chord terminates in one's gonads rolleyes, but is there really enough storage in the various nucleic acids to keep track of so much information about one's predecessors? I'm going to make a wild guess and say no.


----------



## Interference (Apr 5, 2011)

recommended or not, Ursa, it makes _me_ feel care-free and protected, all day long


----------



## Ursa major (Apr 5, 2011)

_I'm beginning to see why one of the top brands is called BacoFoil...._


----------



## Metryq (Apr 5, 2011)

J-WO said:


> The hero outruns an explosion and then dives into water which saves them.
> 
> Now I'm no physics boffin, but I'm sure explosions are even worse in water, density etc...



Yes and no. 

Some of the first naval mines built during the 1700s were discovered to be far more effective below the water line than above. The reason for this is because the greater density of water carries the shockwave more effectively than air. Thus, the air in a ship becomes the path of least resistance to a nearby water explosion.

During the atomic tests after World War II, shot Baker of Operation Crossroads blew out the bottom of a ship and produced far more damage than expected. Again, the "packing" of the water directs the blast.

Underwater demolition experts will tell you to be _very_ far away from any underwater explosion (or preferably above water) because that shockwave will crush any air-filled cavities. 

Similarly, you may have heard that Glocks can fire underwater. Any gun will fire underwater, but any air in the barrel will cause problems. The reason Glocks get all the attention is because military-only modifications can be added to relieve dangerous pressures. As above, you certainly wouldn't want your head underwater nearby.

Okay, so water makes underwater explosions more nasty. So the hero running for water to escape a blast is doing the wrong thing, right? Actually, in this case, the water _can_ protect the hero.

Depending on the angle of incidence, a bullet may shatter or ricochet off the surface of water. Some bullets may penetrate a short distance, then level off parallel to the surface. (I found a study on-line, but cannot dig up the URL right now.) Lower-powered handgun bullets will only make any significant headway (about 3 meters) if fired straight down, perpendicular to the water surface. So water could protect someone from an above-water explosion. All you really need is a ditch or other barrier to give you a protective blast shadow.


----------



## CyBeR (Apr 5, 2011)

Interference said:


> I tend to willingly suspend my disbelief at that point.  As a long-time conspiracy theorist (I have aluminium underpants as well, just in case), I suspect that government agency technology is way ahead of what will eventually be released to the public.  I'd say we're now, at our most advanced, still about ten or twenty years behind the CIA and NSA.
> 
> West Coast NCIS (or whatever they're calling that series) is probably only five years behind what they are actually doing in Langley today.



Even so, you can't pull data from where there is no more data. 
Can you create an algorithm that can reconstruct the image and fill in details...very likely, but hardly to reach . Otherwise, there is just so much information in a collection of pixels. Higher resolution images can and will yield better results, but grainy images from the get go? Never.


----------



## Lemmy (Apr 5, 2011)

Norlan said:


> Quite a few things i notice in movies. Mostly just  hacking and computer elements. Like when they assume typing faster is  going to make the trace work faster or when a big box pops up on the  screen and says success or something like that. Or my personal favorite  when they show a "computer expert" in a movie and after he types  something into google or the computer he puts his hand on the mouse and  clicks "search" or "ok" instead of just hitting enter.



Also note how no one ever use spacebar when typing on a keyboard. Ever.  The words are still seperated on the screen, though. Must be the same  function that automatically correct all typing errors as they write.  Sure we have autocorrect too, but how often does it correct every single  word correctly?

Not to mention the good, old "You have mail" message they get instantly  when they get new e-mail. Even if you could do that, who leaves the  computer on 24 hours a day in case you get e-mail?



biodroid said:


> CSI - I like the really awesome 40 years ahead of time tech they use in that show. They can zoom into a pic that was taken from 500 miles away and you see a spec and then the spec becomes a face in HD no matter how blurry the image is.



What I wonder about is how they are able to work at all in the CSI labs. It's too dark to even do normal work there, much less look through a car for a piece of hair so they can get DNA.


----------



## Ursa major (Apr 5, 2011)

I haven't seen many CSI episodes, but their working environments just have to be brighter than those under which Dana Scully sometimes perfomed autopsies.


----------



## Interference (Apr 5, 2011)

NCIS is definitely one of my favourites, but even my disbelief can't be suspended enough to accept four or five people standing around a big screen while one clicks a mouse - that they're holding in their hands - to change the picture.


----------



## The Procrastinator (Apr 5, 2011)

Lemmy said:


> Not to mention the good, old "You have mail" message they get instantly  when they get new e-mail. Even if you could do that, who leaves the  computer on 24 hours a day in case you get e-mail?



Oh. I assumed that was something people in America just _did_.


----------



## woodsman (Apr 6, 2011)

The 'gravity' on space ships that is given no rational explanation really bugs me. they nearly always *&£% up chemical nomenclature as well. Then again so do I, but that doesn't stop me getting grumpy when someone else does 

As long as it furthers the plot I don't mind a bit of handwavium really. The original article seemed very picky.


----------



## biodroid (Apr 6, 2011)

Interference said:


> I tend to willingly suspend my disbelief at that point.  As a long-time conspiracy theorist (I have aluminium underpants as well, just in case), I suspect that government agency technology is way ahead of what will eventually be released to the public.  I'd say we're now, at our most advanced, still about ten or twenty years behind the CIA and NSA.
> 
> West Coast NCIS (or whatever they're calling that series) is probably only five years behind what they are actually doing in Langley today.



But it's been scientifically proven that if an image is blurred you cannot sharpen it to the point that you can use the image in a court case, it's impossible.


----------



## Metryq (Apr 6, 2011)

woodsman said:


> they nearly always *&£% up chemical nomenclature as well.



Ha! Ever see one of those "gotcha" polls where someone demonstrates how ignorant many greenies are by getting them to sign a petition to ban "dihydrous monoxide"?

"It's a terrible _chemical_. It kills many people every year!"


----------



## woodsman (Apr 6, 2011)

Haha I haven't no, will try that one at uni. According to Al Gore it will be covering 'most' of the world in a few years - oh noes.


----------



## clovis-man (Apr 6, 2011)

biodroid said:


> But it's been scientifically proven that if an image is blurred you cannot sharpen it to the point that you can use the image in a court case, it's impossible.


 
Oh, dang. And I thought all you had to do was say the magic word "enhance"*:  YouTube - Harrison Ford in Blade Runner: Voice Command Interface*


----------



## Metryq (Apr 6, 2011)

As noted above, sometimes criticisms of fictional technologies is pointless. Granted, you can't pull information (more resolution) out of a photo when it simply isn't there. However, the print photos in _Blade Runner_ appeared to be more than the types of prints we know today. While poking around one of Leon's photos, the image appeared to be multi-planar at times—foreground objects moving out of the way to reveal something behind, as thought the photo were 3D. 

Before inserting the photos into the processor, one outdoor photo appeared to show motion, namely the movement of tree shadows. Should the audience take that literally, or did it imply something about Deckard's mood while looking at the image?

In general, though, the enhancement stuff shown on TV and in movies is pure BS. Next thing you know, the CSI crew will be reading the pages of closed books by adjusting the sharpness and contrast just right.


----------



## Jeffbert (Aug 26, 2015)

While not scifi, SPLIT SECOND had people taking shelter from an A-bomb blast in a cave. I believe The venturi effect would have sucked out all the air, if not also the people. The cave entrance was perpendicular to the blast.


----------



## JunkMonkey (Aug 27, 2015)

pyan said:


> Have you noticed that when two spaceships "meet", they're always in exactly the same plane, as in "face-to-face"? Given the 3d nature of space, what are the odds of this happening?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Because late in the 22nd century an expedition to the southern pole of the Milky Way discovered the words 'This Way Up' stamped on the bottom of the galaxy thus orientating all future space flight.  

What is _more _interesting though, is how the Universe managed to come up with a pan-galactic video standard that enables any participants in First Contact scenarios talk to each other on huge wide screen TVs when I still can't get NTSC VHS tapes (I'm old fashioned and collect the things) to work in my PAL video players.


----------



## JunkMonkey (Aug 27, 2015)

thepaladin said:


> Remember Bab.5. Apparently they published a pamphlet on which species could safely mate with which other species (we find this out when a guy spots a couple of "hot looking" humanoid females whom (he is informed) are from a species who eat their male mates. Meanwhilethe girls smile interestingly at the perspective victom/lover (or would that be lover/victom...oh well?).



In one episode of _Crusade_ our heroes made use of some alien porn to distract the bad guys:

Dr. Sarah Chambers: [on the porn that came from Eilerson's data crystal] There's something you don't see every day.
[... ]
Dr. Sarah Chambers: As a doctor, I have to say that's totally unrealistic. An alien life form like the Pak'Ma'Ra is not biologically equipped to interface with humans in that kind of... 

They stare at the screen in disbelief...

Capt. Matthew Gideon: ...it's an amazing thing, technology.​


----------

