- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: The official Interstellar thread (spoilers)
Posted on 11/24/14 at 1:44 am to abellsujr
Posted on 11/24/14 at 1:44 am to abellsujr
quote:
Um, when he fell into the blackhole into the teseract, did he not go back in time?
No. For the hyperdimensional beings, time is a physical, spatial dimension, and was being displayed as such within the tesseract. Cooper himself didn't travel back "in time", but was able to view all points within the time dimension concurrently.
2
Posted on 11/24/14 at 1:45 am to Cs
quote:My bad. So do we know that THAT happens when we go into a black hole? In reality?
For the hyperdimensional beings, time is a physical, spatial dimension, and was being displayed as such within the tesseract. Cooper himself didn't travel back "in time", but was able to view all points within the time dimension concurrently.
This post was edited on 11/24/14 at 1:46 am
Posted on 11/24/14 at 1:46 am to Volvagia
quote:
I just gave an explanation that fits the story very well and destroys the main argument for the wormhole being closed.
Many of your second points could actually serve as evidence that the wormhole was indeed closed.
Posted on 11/24/14 at 1:49 am to abellsujr
quote:
So do we know that THAT happens when we go into a black hole? In reality?
No. In reality, every subatomic particle in Cooper's body would have likely dispersed omnidirectionally at the speed of light as soon as he crossed the event horizon.
With respect to the plot, Gargantua wasn't a typical black hole, as it was modified by the hyperdimensional beings to allow Cooper to experience their five dimensional reality within a three dimensional structure.
This post was edited on 11/24/14 at 1:51 am
Posted on 11/24/14 at 1:50 am to Cs
quote:Sounds like a lot of badass science FICTION to me.
No.
With respect to the plot, Gargantua wasn't a typical black hole, as it was modified by the hyperdimensional beings to allow Cooper to experience their five dimensional reality within a three dimensional structure.
Posted on 11/24/14 at 1:55 am to abellsujr
quote:
Sounds like a lot of badass science FICTION
Certainly. Wormholes likely don't even exist...they're simply a byproduct of some of the math one can perform with the relativity equations.
They actually would require a material with negative density to form, which is not surmised to even exist.
This post was edited on 11/24/14 at 1:58 am
Posted on 11/24/14 at 2:02 am to abellsujr
quote:
Um, when he fell into the blackhole into the teseract, did he not go back in time?
Nope.
They directly explained that in the movie.
Going back in time would have been him popping back in the bedroom with TARS after his younger self left and gone to Brand directly with the gravity solution.
The tesseract was a 4-dimentional construct within the fabric of spacetime (the plucking effects of the ribbons separating him from the world seemed to be a literal reference to string theory...that they would resonate like guitar strings when struck) allowing a three dimensional being to still exist, and to see the 4 dimensions in 3 dimension terms.
I hesitate to refer to science in terms of a comic book movie.....but think of the Watchman's Dr. Manhattan. He was a 4th dimensional being. He existed in all times simultaneously, seeing past and future at once. But he was still here in the present at a specific point in time and couldn't move his body back and forth in time.
The tesseract allowed Cooper to do this without being overwhelmed. He could have floated over to the bedroom after the last human left earth, and theoretically he could observe alternate realities of the bedroom. One where he never left for instance....
quote:
You've given me nothing viable to change my mind.
Of course not.
You have already expressly stated that your mind on what happened IN the movie was made up by something occurred OUTSIDE of the movie. When that is the case, how on earth can any compelling evidence within the framework of the movie's story or plot can change it?
The movie could have said in big bold letters with the inception BWAAAAAAA that the "Wormhole is open" and it wouldn't matter because to you, the matter was closed because someone who worked on the project in a previous iteration said he wrote that version that way.
Posted on 11/24/14 at 2:12 am to Cs
quote:
Many of your second points could actually serve as evidence that the wormhole was indeed closed.
Possibly. I don't see it but I may have missed something:
How?
Humanity was in a desperate fight to save itself....nothing to spare for curious exploration until survival was assured.
The wormhole only has value as a goal or focus if you think there is something on the other side necessary for survival.
In that hope, they sent out unknown number of probes, followed by 12 manned missions, followed by a followup to the follow up mission to the most promising targets they had.
From humanity's prospective, the Endurance mission failed as well, with zero contact, not even "Hey I am still alive" transmissions for 40 years before the gravity equations were solved.
So why do you think that they would make further exploration of the wormhole a priority?
Seemed to me that Cooper Station was a lone outpost stationed there because things were no longer quite so dire and they were considering to start exploring the worm hole in much the same way we explore Mars.
But just out of curiosity's sake....not because of they were looking for a homeworld.
Posted on 11/24/14 at 2:20 am to Cs
quote:
No. In reality, every subatomic particle in Cooper's body would have likely dispersed omnidirectionally at the speed of light as soon as he crossed the event horizon.
I think you confusing the event horizon with some other threshold.
There is no reason to expect that damage will always occur at the event horizon. It is simply the point of no return.
And there is no reason to think that passing the event horizon would cause a breakdown of the strong nuclear force. If it would happen anywhere, it would be at the singularity....because why not....the rest of physics breaks there anyway.
What damage that would occur would be from tidal forces.....and the torn off bits will have a increasingly strong preference to move in a particular direction.
Posted on 11/24/14 at 2:24 am to Volvagia
So, we can do 90% of what was done in that movie? Wow.
This post was edited on 11/24/14 at 2:25 am
Posted on 11/24/14 at 2:30 am to Volvagia
quote:
Possibly. I don't see it but I may have missed something:
It's not that you missed something, it's simply that the points you mentioned could easily serve as evidence in support of the argument you're attacking.
Your main argument is seemingly the nonchalance and disinterest in the wormhole displayed by the remaining humans, predicated on the fact that humanity has all it needs and doesn't require a planetary body on which to subsist.
However, that lackadaisical nature could easily serve as evidence for the fact that the wormhole, quite simply, is no longer there. They're drifting along with "no urgency", as you put, because the wormhole is gone. They have no direction or plan because the portal that held their future has closed.
Narratively, it makes sense that the wormhole would be closed, at least in terms of the its purpose. The hyperdimensional beings didn't have an interest in providing humanity with an expressway to a suitable new domicile, but rather to guide them specifically to the black hole. That was the purpose behind the presence of the wormhole - to emancipate humanity from Earth by edifying them on their understanding of gravity. With this understanding, it seems logical that the wormhole would indeed close after that venture concluded, especially after we see the tesseract close, which was overtly linked to the wormhole through the fabric of spacetime.
This post was edited on 11/24/14 at 2:32 am
Posted on 11/24/14 at 2:32 am to abellsujr
quote:
So, we can do 90% of what was done in that movie? Wow.
I'm literally afraid to even attempt the mental gymnastics it took for you to translate a statement saying that 90% of the things brought up here regarding scientific nitpicking we do have a good idea about feasibility to one that said that we can do 90% of what is done in the movie.
Posted on 11/24/14 at 2:36 am to Volvagia
quote:So, you admit that it was a science fiction movie? What percent of the movie do you think we can currently do in reality?
I'm literally afraid to even attempt the mental gymnastics it took for you to translate a statement saying that 90% of the things brought up here regarding scientific nitpicking we do have a good idea about feasibility to one that said that we can do 90% of what is done in the movie.
Posted on 11/24/14 at 2:40 am to Cs
quote:
Your main argument is seemingly the nonchalance and disinterest in the wormhole displayed by the remaining humans, predicated on the fact that humanity has all it needs and doesn't require a planetary body on which to subsist.
Ah....I see.
My point isn't that though.
Cooper Station is an argument against that in fact.
They are planning on exploring the wormhole, and are pre positioning assets to facilitate it at the end of the film.
The implications of "disinterest" that you are referring to is from statements made earlier in the thread that if the wormhole was open, Cooper wouldn't have needed to take a Ranger to get to Brand.
They insinuated that there was a fleet of ships just hovering around Saturn eagerly waiting to go through.
I was demonstrating that wasn't the case.
My argument is that given that from their perspective, the Lazarus and Endurance missions all failed miserably. So factoring in anything requiring the other side of the wormhole to survive was considered a low percentage move.
And because it wasn't judged to be a major factor in survival anymore with the ability to build massive stations, it jumped way down the priority list.
If you are in your front yard and your house is burning down, you probably aren't googling for airfares to Hawaii. Sure, you might go on that trip later....but it will be after you get your affairs in order on the homefront.
This post was edited on 11/24/14 at 2:41 am
Posted on 11/24/14 at 2:40 am to Volvagia
quote:
I think you confusing the event horizon with some other threshold.
There is no reason to expect that damage will always occur at the event horizon. It is simply the point of no return.
And there is no reason to think that passing the event horizon would cause a breakdown of the strong nuclear force. If it would happen anywhere, it would be at the singularity....because why not....the rest of physics breaks there anyway.
What damage that would occur would be from tidal forces.....and the torn off bits will have a increasingly strong preference to move in a particular direction.
Gargantua was purported to be a smaller black hole, as Romilly told Cooper when they were on Dr. Mann's planet. For smaller black holes, it's likely that matter is shredded at, or just before, one crosses the event horizon.
LINK
Posted on 11/24/14 at 2:45 am to Volvagia
So, they wouldn't send a small ship through? I don't buy that. Small ships were taking off and landing throughout the entire ending. Why would they not send just one out through the wormhole? A scout.
This post was edited on 11/24/14 at 2:47 am
Posted on 11/24/14 at 2:50 am to Cs
quote:
Gargantua was purported to be a smaller black hole, as Romilly told Cooper when they were on Dr. Mann's planet. For smaller black holes, it's likely that matter is shredded at, or just before, one crosses the event horizon.
If you are referring to the part I am thinking of, where Romilly is talking about the viability of sending a probe, you have it backwards. Although to be fair, its counter intuitive.
Supermassive blackholes, and especially supermassive rotating blackholes, are less violently destructive than their smaller counter parts.
And that ties to my point: I was just correcting the statement regarding the survivability being tied to the event horizon at the slightest.
It isn't. It is just the threshold where events within can't be seen by an observer without.
In a smaller black hole, whose event horizon is a lot closer to the singularity than a super massive black hole, you would be torn apart by tidal forces long before you hit the event horizon. But in a rotating supermassive black hole, you can theoretically pass the event horizon for hours depending on your speed and direction before being destroyed
But all that is tied to how close are you to that singularity....not the event horizon.
This post was edited on 11/24/14 at 2:56 am
Posted on 11/24/14 at 2:52 am to abellsujr
quote:
So, they wouldn't send a small ship through? I don't buy that. Small ships were taking off and landing throughout the entire ending. Why would they not send just one out through the wormhole? A scout.
Hence the plothole segment.
If I was running a scouting program, I would be more curious to check out the systems that Endurance didn't go rather than the one that it did.
And even if they did, scouting remember? Not rescue mission.
There is no reason to expect that Brand is broadcasting anything to get their attention.
Posted on 11/24/14 at 2:56 am to Volvagia
So, you would leave that wormhole alone. The one that "they" left? The one that you know your father went through and made it to the other side. The ultimate mission failed, but the question remains as to why you're not curious about three possibly inhabitable planets. You would just ignore them?
Posted on 11/24/14 at 2:57 am to Volvagia
quote:
My argument is that given that from their perspective, the Lazarus and Endurance missions all failed miserably. So factoring in anything requiring the other side of the wormhole to survive was considered a low percentage move.
And because it wasn't judged to be a major factor in survival anymore with the ability to build massive stations, it jumped way down the priority list.
I'm not quite sure I would agree with the notion that humanity viewed the Lazarus (or the Endurance missions) as a failure. Data transmission back through the wormhole was rudimentary, as they could only receive binary pings on an annual basis. Yet, those data were apparently sufficient to impel them to send a ship back through the wormhole to explore the most promising system. This was the purpose behind the Lazarus missions - arrive at your planet, establish your transmitter, and then enter into cryostasis and hope that someone eventually makes it to your planet. Humanity back on Earth received pings from all the planets within one of the star systems, which subsequently prompted them to revisit that system a decade later. The Lazarus missions seemed to have succeeded in that regard.
There was also no reason for Murph, Brand, or any of the other scientists on Earth to speculate that something dire had occurred to the Endurance crew. They all understood the effects of relativity and time dilation, and knew that 40 years for them could have been mere hours for the Endurance crew, depending on where they were. They didn't even have an opportunity to transmit anything back through the wormhole until they landed on Dr. Mann's planet, which was 20+ years later - and, given the revelation of Brand's lie to Cooper, it doesn't appear that they ever did.
This post was edited on 11/24/14 at 3:03 am
Page 71 of 85
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News