Not OP, but my wife and I were incredibly disappointed by Interstellar after seeing how much praise it got.
SPOILERS BELOW!!!
First off, the pacing was waaay too fast. I felt like I was getting whiplash from how they spent like five minutes in each location. I hear people complaining about the long runtime (like the other comment that was just posted, lol), but I have exactly the opposite problem - I think this movie really needed like four hours to do everything they tried to do right.
The biggest failing for us, though, was how ridiculously terrible and inaccurate the science was, from start to finish. From little things like needing a full multi-stage booster system to break earth’s gravity, but being able to effortlessly jet off the ocean planet with no help, to absolutely bonkers ridiculous stuff like just casually going beyond an event horizon without getting spaghettified in the process.
So yeah, valiant attempt, a couple of really cool story ideas, and some good (but overrated) cinematography, but, while I wouldn’t go so far as to say I hated Interstellar, I would absolutely say that I didn’t like it, and that it was actively painful to watch.
Physicist Kip Thorne consulted on the movie. The physics are accurate.
Miller’s planet (the ocean world) was spinning extremely rapidly and it was located just above the event horizon of the supermassive black hole, Gargantua. The rapid spin of the planet provides a slingshot effect when you take off in the direction of the spin. This is true on earth as well, and is most pronounced near the equator, but the extreme spin of Miller’s planet makes it much easier to achieve orbit.
The proximity of the black hole is the cause of the extreme tidal forces which create the tidal waves on the planet, but would also help them take off for the same reason (tidal forces affect all masses moving in the gravitational field).
The lack of spaghettification is a known and established fact with supermassive black holes. What you were expecting is what happens with stellar black holes (10x mass of the sun to 100x), not with supermassive black holes (millions to billions of times the mass of the sun) whose event horizons are much larger and therefore have less extreme gravitational gradients (the source of spaghettification).
They’re not space ghosts, they’re literally the main character interacting with the past from within a black hole, where the whole of spacetime has collapsed into a single point. As the other commenter said, this is the science fiction part.
Physicists have said that physics as we know it break down in the singularity of a black hole. Kip Thorne signed off on their artistic license plot device of having spacetime collapse into the “tesseract.”
Anyway, that isn’t what I was referring to when I said “the physics are accurate.” I was only referring to the parts involving the black hole and planets and tidal forces and time dilation, which were what they worked very hard on to get right.
It’s a little known fact of physics, but yes, at the center of every supermassive blackhole is a hypercube that lets you manipulate time and space. It’s just not commonly accepted since so far very few people have made it there and back.
Then the spin should have reduced gravitational effect, created a “lean” toward the equator of the spin, created a bulge at the equator where the water would be slung outward due to the spin…
There’s all kinds of problems with this planet assuming a slingshot effect to help reach escape velocity based on the fuel requirement differential in this hypothetical.
Not OP, but my wife and I were incredibly disappointed by Interstellar after seeing how much praise it got.
SPOILERS BELOW!!!
First off, the pacing was waaay too fast. I felt like I was getting whiplash from how they spent like five minutes in each location. I hear people complaining about the long runtime (like the other comment that was just posted, lol), but I have exactly the opposite problem - I think this movie really needed like four hours to do everything they tried to do right.
The biggest failing for us, though, was how ridiculously terrible and inaccurate the science was, from start to finish. From little things like needing a full multi-stage booster system to break earth’s gravity, but being able to effortlessly jet off the ocean planet with no help, to absolutely bonkers ridiculous stuff like just casually going beyond an event horizon without getting spaghettified in the process.
So yeah, valiant attempt, a couple of really cool story ideas, and some good (but overrated) cinematography, but, while I wouldn’t go so far as to say I hated Interstellar, I would absolutely say that I didn’t like it, and that it was actively painful to watch.
Physicist Kip Thorne consulted on the movie. The physics are accurate.
Miller’s planet (the ocean world) was spinning extremely rapidly and it was located just above the event horizon of the supermassive black hole, Gargantua. The rapid spin of the planet provides a slingshot effect when you take off in the direction of the spin. This is true on earth as well, and is most pronounced near the equator, but the extreme spin of Miller’s planet makes it much easier to achieve orbit.
The proximity of the black hole is the cause of the extreme tidal forces which create the tidal waves on the planet, but would also help them take off for the same reason (tidal forces affect all masses moving in the gravitational field).
The lack of spaghettification is a known and established fact with supermassive black holes. What you were expecting is what happens with stellar black holes (10x mass of the sun to 100x), not with supermassive black holes (millions to billions of times the mass of the sun) whose event horizons are much larger and therefore have less extreme gravitational gradients (the source of spaghettification).
Space ghosts from the fourth dimension can give you physics advice by wiggling your books?
They’re not space ghosts, they’re literally the main character interacting with the past from within a black hole, where the whole of spacetime has collapsed into a single point. As the other commenter said, this is the science fiction part.
Physicists have said that physics as we know it break down in the singularity of a black hole. Kip Thorne signed off on their artistic license plot device of having spacetime collapse into the “tesseract.”
Anyway, that isn’t what I was referring to when I said “the physics are accurate.” I was only referring to the parts involving the black hole and planets and tidal forces and time dilation, which were what they worked very hard on to get right.
Well, then, I guess it’s all perfectly real and believable. Next time I see a clock rattle or a bookshelf shake, I’ll know what’s up.
Or you could just educate yourself on what artistic license means.
Well that’s the science fiction part lol and it’s pretty out-there
For me it was the part about how at the center of a supermassive black hole is a hypercube that let’s you see and manipulate all time and space…
It’s a little known fact of physics, but yes, at the center of every supermassive blackhole is a hypercube that lets you manipulate time and space. It’s just not commonly accepted since so far very few people have made it there and back.
it’s not always a hypercube tho! It can be other shapes too!
Mine was a form of a hyper-dyno-shaped nuggie!:D
Not all time and space, just those moments and places that you have a strong connection to via power of love, duh
Then the spin should have reduced gravitational effect, created a “lean” toward the equator of the spin, created a bulge at the equator where the water would be slung outward due to the spin…
There’s all kinds of problems with this planet assuming a slingshot effect to help reach escape velocity based on the fuel requirement differential in this hypothetical.
Just curious: what’s your physics background?