Movies and plausibility...

Forums: Movies
Email this Topic • Print this Page

There seems to be a point at which the theme of a movie becomes too implausible or even stupid for me to enjoy the movie, and it's hard to say exactly where that point is.

For instance, I view time travel as totally impossible and yet find both versions of "Time Machine" enjoyable to watch.

On the other hand, the idea of anybody physically traveling cosmic distances either to kidnap rednecks or to mine any sort of mineral basically ruins a plot. The cost of getting to any other star would so totally dwarf the value of anything you could conceivably bring back from that other star system that the idea is basically wrecked a-priori.

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 9 • Views: 2,764 • Replies: 78

No top replies

@gungasnake,

0 Replies

@gungasnake,

You have a consistency problem. (Not unusual for you.)

0 Replies

@gungasnake,

gungasnake wrote:

On the other hand, the idea of anybody physically traveling cosmic distances either to kidnap rednecks or to mine any sort of mineral basically ruins a plot. The cost of getting to any other star would so totally dwarf the value of anything you could conceivably bring back from that other star system that the idea is basically wrecked a-priori.

I agree, and I'm pretty sure I know what movie you're talking about:

http://www.horreur.net/img/filme-marsneedswomen-aff.jpg

Highly implausible. Mars has plenty of women.

2 Replies

@joefromchicago,

Mars is one thing...

But the trip to Mars compares to the trip the nearest star about like six or eight inches compares to four miles.

Funny thing is, humans on Mars is about to cease being sci-fi.

0 Replies

@gungasnake,

You probably wouldn't enjoy Lost Smile

Not only is there time-travel involved, but Ben actually succeeds in moving the island! (Oops...possible spoiler there LOL)!

0 Replies

@gungasnake,

gungasnake wrote:

There seems to be a point at which the theme of a movie becomes too implausible or even stupid for me to enjoy the movie, and it's hard to say exactly where that point is.

Me too. And I'm hard pressed to figure out where I draw the line. Sometimes I'm able to forgive the story and enjoy what I see, while other times I'm inclined to nitpick the science until I'm distracted from the story.

0 Replies

@joefromchicago,

Depend on the technology as if the cost of the journey of a thousand light years is the same as the cost now of shipping across a few thousand miles then you can have wars and mining and so on over those distants.

0 Replies

@gungasnake,

gungasnake wrote:

The cost of getting to any other star would so totally dwarf the value of anything you could conceivably bring back from that other star system that the idea is basically wrecked a-priori.

And of course the pursuit of profit is the greatest fundamental law of physics known in the universe.

Personally, I don't believe in alien abductions but I'm not going to dismiss the possibility of interstellar space travel on the assumption that all alien races must be slaves to the ultimate goal of capitalism.

2 Replies

@tsarstepan,

Quote:

possibility of interstellar space travel on the assumption that all alien races must be slaves to the ultimate goal of capitalism.

They would however would need to be "slave" to the economic laws of the universe just as they would need to be "slave" to the physics laws of the universe.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

At one point...
They believed the Earth was the center of the universe. Proven wrong.
Then They believed our solar system was center of the universe. Proven wrong.

They believed speeds faster then 60MPH were unachievable. Proven wrong.
They believed speeds faster then 100MPH were unachievable. Proven wrong.
They believed speeds faster then the speed of sound were unachievable. Proven wrong.

Einstein said that the speed of light is an absolute constant. Proven wrong!
http://www.news.harvard.edu/gazette/1999/02.18/light.html
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/08/07/tech/main517850.shtml
http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/magazine/15-11/st_alphageek

It may some day be proven that the speed of light is quite achievable as we find out our present day physics are shot down by newer theories.

Also unknown science:
Existence of wormholes;
No one has directly witnessed a black hole;
etc....

2 Replies

@gungasnake,

I had to walk out on Pirates of the Caribbean.
I just coud not take it anymore.

0 Replies

@tsarstepan,

tsarstepan wrote:

Einstein said that the speed of light is an absolute constant. Proven wrong!
http://www.news.harvard.edu/gazette/1999/02.18/light.html
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/08/07/tech/main517850.shtml
http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/magazine/15-11/st_alphageek

Incorrect. The speed of light is a constant.
The second article is a speculation.
The first and third articles are a sloppy mis-representation of what is really happening. Light traveling through a vacuum is always a constant and that's all the original theory ever says. When light propagates through atoms it can "appear" to be moving more slowly, but it's actually just the absorption rate of the atoms affecting the photons. A photon moving between the atoms is still moving at its normal constant velocity.

1 Reply

@tsarstepan,

tsarstepan wrote:

gungasnake wrote:

The cost of getting to any other star would so totally dwarf the value of anything you could conceivably bring back from that other star system that the idea is basically wrecked a-priori.

And of course the pursuit of profit is the greatest fundamental law of physics known in the universe.

Personally, I don't believe in alien abductions but I'm not going to dismiss the possibility of interstellar space travel on the assumption that all alien races must be slaves to the ultimate goal of capitalism.

This is a pretty naive response. It has nothing to do with capitalism. Any government in any civilization would be obliged to justify the expenditure of energy and materials for such a project. If it had no purpose which could be demonstrated to the population, did not provide at least a return equivalent to the expenditure, and especially if it called upon the population to make sacrifices to accomplish the goal, they would be unlikely to want to go along with the program.

1 Reply

@rosborne979,

People really hate the idea that their reality would limit the expression of their imaginations. That the speed of light might be an insurmountable barrier makes some people crazy.

0 Replies

@Setanta,

Setanta wrote:

Any government in any civilization would be obliged to justify the expenditure of energy and materials for such a project. If it had no purpose which could be demonstrated to the population, did not provide at least a return equivalent to the expenditure, and especially if it called upon the population to make sacrifices to accomplish the goal, they would be unlikely to want to go along with the program.

That's funny. Your very closed-minded human-centric dogmatic view assumes that every single intelligent civilization arisen in the universe (if they do exist out there) has to develop their society around a governmental based society. I bet even you insist that all aliens have to have 2 arms and 2 legs and be mostly composed of carbon and water. Why not?! You already made the assumption they're purely rational driven budget minded expenditure fetishists. A little too dismissive of the possible motivation for expansion into the universe: Religious crusade; military conquest; etc.... Heck even a drive for profit doesn't mean a society has a legitimate sense of rationality to back up their pursuit.

And are you that certain human understanding of physics in 100% accurate?! Even the scientists who make the laws of physics their entire life would give that level of absolute guarantee.

How many decades have food scientists gone on about the excellence of spinach as an iron source only to later find out their biggest mistake was to pass on the original error of the scientist who made the claim in the first place?
http://soundmedicine.iu.edu/segment/238/redirect?seg=238

So, has no scientist ever made a mistake in devising her or his theoretical scientific formulas?

2 Replies

@tsarstepan,

Quote:

That's funny. Your very closed-minded human-centric dogmatic view assumes that every single intelligent civilization arisen in the universe (if they do exist out there) has to develop their society around a governmental based society. I bet even you insist that all aliens have to have 2 arms and 2 legs and be mostly composed of carbon and water. Why not?! You already made the assumption they're purely rational driven budget minded expenditure fetishists. A little too dismissive of the possible motivation for expansion into the universe: Religious crusade; military conquest; etc.... Heck even a drive for profit doesn't mean a society has a legitimate sense of rationality to back up their pursuit.

And are you that certain human understanding of physics in 100% accurate?! Even the scientists who make the laws of physics their entire life would give that level of absolute guarantee.

All societies are rationally driven or they are very short live indeed and the religious crusades and military conquests that did happen in history made economic sense or was not long lasting.

An example of that is when the Eastern Roman Empire re-conquest the Western Empire territory including the city of Roman only to find it did not make economic sense to keep this land and they gave it back up within one generation.

1 Reply

@tsarstepan,

Oh one more question who are “they” in they believed this or that?

Somewhere like three thousands years ago in the city of Alexandria the earth circular was measure within a very small margin of error.

The story that in 1491 Columbia needed to convicted anyone that the earth was round is nonsense, in fact he was of the opinion that the earth was a great deal smaller then the Greek measurements had shown it was and therefore his propose journey to Indian by sailing West was possible and he was in fact wrong in that regard.

The earth was the center of the universe was question far and wide for thousands of years and it took all the religion community power to keep the earth in the center as long as it was kept in Europe.

The speed of light is the universal constant to this day and never been question as such by the scientific community no matter how badly you misunderstand theories of wormholes and that the universe in it first birth moments have space expanding faster then light.

0 Replies

@tsarstepan,

You're pretty funny yourself. If such an enterprise is not undertaken collectively, are you really do dense as to think it could be accomplished? It has no more to do with "human-centric" thinking than it does with capitalism. Such an enterprise could not plausibly be accomplished by an individual. Therefore, some means of guiding the efforts of a collective of individuals must be in operation.

That you have not given sufficient thought to the implications of interstellar flight to have realized such implications is not evidence that they don't apply.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

All societies are rationally driven

Ahahahahahahahaha!

Thanks for that.

1 Reply

Movies and plausibility...

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know