flat assembler
Message board for the users of flat assembler.

Index > Heap > Interstellar (movie)

Goto page 1, 2  Next
Author
Thread Post new topic Reply to topic
typedef



Joined: 25 Jul 2010
Posts: 2913
Location: 0x77760000
typedef
Just watched this movie and still trying to understand some stuff. But I recommend it.


http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0816692/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1

http://putlocker.tn/interstellar/

Good movie overall Smile
Post 14 Feb 2015, 18:21
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
AsmGuru62



Joined: 28 Jan 2004
Posts: 1412
Location: Toronto, Canada
AsmGuru62
IMO it is a little naive -- climate change BS and all.
How did he survive the black hole plunge and came out behind the book shelves?..
That was weird.
Post 14 Feb 2015, 23:12
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Reply with quote
l_inc



Joined: 23 Oct 2009
Posts: 881
l_inc
I was very disappointed, because I hate nonsense being passed off as science. There is a quite clear borderline between unknown but potentially possible and obvious bullshit incompatible with current state of the science. The value of a movie with scientific context is dramatically reduced if that borderline is crossed. I take how far Interstellar went beyond that line for disrespect to a viewer.

_________________
Faith is a superposition of knowledge and fallacy
Post 15 Feb 2015, 12:36
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
typedef



Joined: 25 Jul 2010
Posts: 2913
Location: 0x77760000
typedef
It's Hollywood guys. They don't care whatsoever.
Post 15 Feb 2015, 17:49
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
AsmGuru62



Joined: 28 Jan 2004
Posts: 1412
Location: Toronto, Canada
AsmGuru62
Yeah, they only want their golden globes polished.
Smile
Post 15 Feb 2015, 20:32
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Reply with quote
axlucas



Joined: 02 May 2014
Posts: 66
Location: Argentina
axlucas
Quote:

I was very disappointed, because I hate nonsense being passed off as science. There is a quite clear borderline between unknown but potentially possible and obvious bullshit incompatible with current state of the science. The value of a movie with scientific context is dramatically reduced if that borderline is crossed. I take how far Interstellar went beyond that line for disrespect to a viewer.


I couldn't agree more. I read Kip Thorne served by providing scientific support, but the truth is that even though he's a scientist, he likes to dream too much. Other scientists were asked to give their opinions on the film, but of course, we only read about the ones that said something good. In science, there are still too many people who wish so much the supernatural were true that tend to promote it, despite it being non-scientific.

The film exploits every hole in science (including black holes Razz). Wherever there's something that's still not known, they assume fantastic man-centred concepts. Since they're talking about the unknown, they argue that there's no proof that things aren't like that, but hey, when we don't know what is true, at least we consider what is likely.

It's a fantasy, sci-fi movie. That's it. Great effects. No real science.
Post 18 Feb 2015, 11:33
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
revolution
When all else fails, read the source


Joined: 24 Aug 2004
Posts: 17287
Location: In your JS exploiting you and your system
revolution
If you want to enjoy a movie you have to allow something called "suspension of disbelief". Without that there is a good chance you won't enjoy it. So just go with it and don't fight it. It gets stuff wrong, yes, but it is just a movie designed to entertain. It's not designed to teach. It is not a documentary. It is not a lecture class from university.
Post 18 Feb 2015, 12:03
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
TmX



Joined: 02 Mar 2006
Posts: 821
Location: Jakarta, Indonesia
TmX
revolution wrote:
If you want to enjoy a movie you have to allow something called "suspension of disbelief". Without that there is a good chance you won't enjoy it. So just go with it and don't fight it. It gets stuff wrong, yes, but it is just a movie designed to entertain. It's not designed to teach. It is not a documentary. It is not a lecture class from university.


Indeed. It's a movie, after all. Not a lecture on quantum physics.
Post 18 Feb 2015, 13:10
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Picnic



Joined: 05 May 2007
Posts: 1288
Location: behind the arc
Picnic
imo every cinema movie is by definition a fiction movie. And this is a science fiction movie. Personally i spent 3 fun hours watching the film.
Post 18 Feb 2015, 13:20
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
l_inc



Joined: 23 Oct 2009
Posts: 881
l_inc
revolution, TmX, Picnic
"Suspension of disbelief" is applicable to fantasy movies such as "Harry Potter" or "Spider-Man", both of which I do like. The unique feature of Sci-Fi movies is however that they manage to make you believe initially unbelievable things. Like when you start watching "The Matrix" and see people jumping over the buildings then you think: "OK, this is clearly a fantasy". But as soon as the context is disclosed, you get astonished: "Wow! Every single piece of it in fact IS possible!"

When you get ready to a Sci-Fi and then see a gravitational slingshot near an event horizon (one must have an escape velocity larger than c for that) without the maneuvering macroscopic physical body being torn into fundamental particles, then you think: "The film director must be taking me for an idiot".

_________________
Faith is a superposition of knowledge and fallacy
Post 18 Feb 2015, 13:56
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
revolution
When all else fails, read the source


Joined: 24 Aug 2004
Posts: 17287
Location: In your JS exploiting you and your system
revolution
One of the Star Trek movies used a slingslot around the Sun(!) to go backwards in time (and save the whales, yay). I enjoyed that movie even though it was clearly way out of the realm of known possibilities. Oh, and it had transparent aluminium also.
Post 18 Feb 2015, 14:01
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
l_inc



Joined: 23 Oct 2009
Posts: 881
l_inc
revolution
I watched one or two of the Star Trek movies and somehow they did not pretend to resemble the laws of nature. Regarding Aluminum I'd need to think for quite a while to make sure that it cannot have yet unknown transparent allotropes. Like the Fullerenes were not known until 20 years ago.

P.S. Actually 30 years. I was rather thinking about the Nobel Prize for their discovery.

_________________
Faith is a superposition of knowledge and fallacy
Post 18 Feb 2015, 14:26
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
sid123



Joined: 30 Jul 2013
Posts: 340
Location: Asia, Singapore
sid123
I liked Inception more than Interstellar.
Post 18 Feb 2015, 15:06
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Matrix



Joined: 04 Sep 2004
Posts: 1171
Location: Overflow
Matrix
l_inc wrote:
revolution
I watched one or two of the Star Trek movies and somehow they did not pretend to resemble the laws of nature. Regarding Aluminum I'd need to think for quite a while to make sure that it cannot have yet unknown transparent allotropes. Like the Fullerenes were not known until 20 years ago.

P.S. Actually 30 years. I was rather thinking about the Nobel Prize for their discovery.


Hey guys

Not much to say about dumb movies that teach BS, but 'transparent Aluminium' could have been called Sapphire crystal that military things use as window. I assume it was top-secret back then.
it consists of Aluminium and Oxygen
Post 18 Feb 2015, 16:28
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
gens



Joined: 18 Feb 2013
Posts: 161
gens
i thought sapphires, emeralds and such were diamonds with various gasses trapped in them
i'l have to rethink my whole life now

interesting is that metals are usually very reflective
mhm
Post 18 Feb 2015, 20:53
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
TmX



Joined: 02 Mar 2006
Posts: 821
Location: Jakarta, Indonesia
TmX
l_inc wrote:

When you get ready to a Sci-Fi and then see a gravitational slingshot near an event horizon (one must have an escape velocity larger than c for that) without the maneuvering macroscopic physical body being torn into fundamental particles, then you think: "The film director must be taking me for an idiot".


I must admit before that my physics knowledge is very rusty, so I had to do some Google search before. Is that due to this equation?
Image

But anyway, I think I understand this point. Interstellar was billed as a 'hard sci-fi' movie, and they even hired a real physicist (Kip Thorne) as its science advisor. So, all science-related plots should be consistent with real science, right? And it's really annoying if certains parts are OK, while the others are not.

Smile
Post 19 Feb 2015, 01:34
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
revolution
When all else fails, read the source


Joined: 24 Aug 2004
Posts: 17287
Location: In your JS exploiting you and your system
revolution
What does the fi in sci-fi stand for?
Post 19 Feb 2015, 03:15
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
gens



Joined: 18 Feb 2013
Posts: 161
gens
revolution wrote:
What does the fi in sci-fi stand for?

in hi-fi it means "fidelity"
Post 19 Feb 2015, 17:37
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
l_inc



Joined: 23 Oct 2009
Posts: 881
l_inc
TmX
Quote:
Is that due to this equation?

It's not what I was talking about, but this may justify other objections to the matter of the movie. In particular rotating in such a proximity to a black hole requires you to move around it with a velocity comparable to c in order to compensate for the gravitational attraction by having the corresponding centripetal acceleration. Otherwise the difference of the forces applied to different parts of the body would again torn it into pieces just from the Newton's law. The equation states that you would significantly gain on the relativistic mass by moving that fast. It is however beyond my understanding to predict local (including biological) effects of increasing the relativistic mass.
Quote:
And it's really annoying if certains parts are OK, while the others are not.

Yes, that's pretty much it. Cause the movie seemed quite good until they got to the other side of the wormhole. Except for some parts where a presumably technically skilled guy needed simplistic explanations such as how a wormhole should look like. And then it seemed like the contract with the scientific advisors had been terminated.

revolution
Code:
format binary as 'bmp'

macro enum start*,[name]
{
    common
            local cntr
            cntr = start
    forward
            name = cntr
            cntr = cntr + 1
}

enum 0,BI_RGB,BI_RLE8,BI_RLE4,BI_BITFIELDS,BI_JPEG,BI_PNG

macro BITMAPFILEHEADER bfSize=sizeof.BITMAPFILEHEADER,bfOffBits=sizeof.BITMAPFILEHEADER
{
    db 'BM'
    dd bfSize
    dw 0
    dw 0
    dd bfOffBits
}
virtual at 0
    BITMAPFILEHEADER 0,0
    sizeof.BITMAPFILEHEADER = $
end virtual

macro BITMAPINFOHEADER biSize=sizeof.BITMAPINFOHEADER,biWidth=640,biHeight=480,biPlanes=1,biBitCount=24,biCompression=BI_RGB,biSizeImage=0,biXPelsPerMeter=0,biYPelsPerMeter=0,biClrUsed=0,biClrImportant=0
{
    dd biSize
    dd biWidth
    dd biHeight
    dw biPlanes
    dw biBitCount
    dd biCompression
    dd biSizeImage
    dd biXPelsPerMeter
    dd biYPelsPerMeter
    dd biClrUsed
    dd biClrImportant
}
virtual at 0
    BITMAPINFOHEADER 0
    sizeof.BITMAPINFOHEADER = $
end virtual

macro RGBTRIPLE rgbRed=0,rgbGreen=0,rgbBlue=0
{
    db rgbBlue
    db rgbGreen
    db rgbRed
}

match,
{
    local bSqrtAS,t
    virtual at 0
        bSqrtAS::
        repeat $FF
            t = (%-1)
            times t+1 db t
            times t db t+1
        end repeat
        times t+2 db t+1
    end virtual
    struc bSqrt val* \{ load . byte from bSqrtAS:val \}
}

BITMAP_WIDTH               = 640
BITMAP_HEIGHT              = 640
BITMAP_DEPTH               = 3

BITMAPFILEHEADER sizeof.BITMAPFILEHEADER+sizeof.BITMAPINFOHEADER+\
                 BITMAP_WIDTH*BITMAP_HEIGHT*BITMAP_DEPTH,\
                 sizeof.BITMAPFILEHEADER+sizeof.BITMAPINFOHEADER
BITMAPINFOHEADER ,BITMAP_WIDTH,-BITMAP_HEIGHT,,BITMAP_DEPTH*8,BI_RGB

macro TRIANGLE
{
    local offset,t1,t2,x,y,d,dlim,sin,cos,r,g,b
    repeat BITMAP_HEIGHT
        offset = %-1
        repeat BITMAP_WIDTH
            t1 = ((%-1)*$101)/BITMAP_WIDTH
            t2 = (offset*$101)/BITMAP_HEIGHT
            x = t1-$80
            y = $80-t2
            d bSqrt x*x+y*y
            dlim = 1-d/$80
            sin = y*$80/(d+1)
            cos = x*$80/(d+1)
            r = (-sin*$40+cos*$6F)/$40
            r = r * (r shr 64 + 1)
            g = 2*sin
            g = g * (g shr 64 + 1)
            b = -(sin*$40+cos*$6F)/$40
            b = b * (b shr 64 + 1)
            RGBTRIPLE r*dlim,g*dlim,b*dlim
        end repeat
    end repeat
}

bitmap: TRIANGLE    

Sci stands for the green, which is what's known to be true, Fi stands for the blue, which is what's neither known to be true nor to be false, and Wtf stands for the red, which is wtf.

_________________
Faith is a superposition of knowledge and fallacy
Post 20 Feb 2015, 01:52
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
revolution
When all else fails, read the source


Joined: 24 Aug 2004
Posts: 17287
Location: In your JS exploiting you and your system
revolution
I saw this movie just a few hours ago on my flight. Even assuming all the physical things like manipulating gravity, and being able to show and hear the single room on a rotating planet that is orbiting a star that is orbiting a galactic centre, there are still two things that were left undiscussed/unanswered.

1) How did he and the robot escape the black hole? Which, BTW, the chances of him being found floating in space like that were infinitesimal.

2) Where did the original information about the inside of the black hole come from? It forms an ontological paradox.

[edit]Post number 181818[/edit]
Post 31 Jul 2015, 10:41
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:
Post new topic Reply to topic

Jump to:  
Goto page 1, 2  Next

< Last Thread | Next Thread >
Forum Rules:
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Copyright © 1999-2020, Tomasz Grysztar. Also on YouTube, Twitter.

Website powered by rwasa.