What was the last movie you saw?

[Starbeast]

Batman vs Superman: Dawn of Justice (2016) - Pretty good.


Rewatched

American Movie (1999) - One of my favorite documentaries, about a struggling film maker, living in Wisconsin. (watched it with and without audio commentary)

Parenthood (1989) - I love this tremendous drama, about a family. Lots of great actors/actresses are featured in this film.

The Incredible HULK (2008) - Marvelous movie that explodes with excitement. And fun to watch again.

Loaded Weapon 1 (1993) - Outstanding spoof on the Lethal Weapon film series.

 

[Steve S]

Interstellar - really enjoyed it, visually stunning and thought-provoking.

 

[GCJ]

I would say "yes", that should be very simple, but what makes you think that is the way it is hovering?

I suppose as an engineer I've developed a mindset where I assume our mathematically based universe always has mathematical solutions. It's a good call to break from that and wonder what the other solutions might be.

 

[RX-79G]

I suppose as an engineer I've developed a mindset where I assume our mathematically based universe always has mathematical solutions. It's a good call to break from that and wonder what the other solutions might be.

There are many mathematical solutions, I just didn't understand why the one involving a constant calculation of the precise location in the universe seemed like a likely one to you when gravity and visual reference are also obvious and simple methods to hold a position over a moving body.

 

[GCJ]

There are many mathematical solutions, I just didn't understand why the one involving a constant calculation of the precise location in the universe seemed like a likely one to you when gravity and visual reference are also obvious and simple methods to hold a position over a moving body.

Imagine a world where Elon Musk and his ilk had mastered landing a rocket back on Earth after launching it into space. The technical difficulties they encountered to do just that saw endless effort and guile, and they still haven't mastered it to the point of routine. It blows my mind to think of the solution to holding something so steady a few feet over the Earth. Nonetheless, if the physics allow it, even if they're unlikely, then to me it's possible. The only barrier is brute force and a civilization that can pull together to do such a thing.

 

[RX-79G]

Imagine a world where Elon Musk and his ilk had mastered landing a rocket back on Earth after launching it into space. The technical difficulties they encountered to do just that saw endless effort and guile, and they still haven't mastered it to the point of routine. It blows my mind to think of the solution to holding something so steady a few feet over the Earth. Nonetheless, if the physics allow it, even if they're unlikely, then to me it's possible. The only barrier is brute force and a civilization that can pull together to do such a thing.

We have had devices that will automatically hover over the earth for 60+ years. So I don't understand what Elon Musk has to do with it.


Your initial post makes it sound like if someone asked you to design a car suspension you would want a computer contour map of the road, radar and a computer controlled solenoid system to actively change the car's level over the wheels. But all that's necessary is a leaf spring and a damper. Why do you assume that some alien "anti-gravity" technology could only work by calculating the Earth's precise orbit instead of just referencing the immediate environs?

 

[GCJ]

We have had devices that will automatically hover over the earth for 60+ years. So I don't understand what Elon Musk has to do with it.


Your initial post makes it sound like if someone asked you to design a car suspension you would want a computer contour map of the road, radar and a computer controlled solenoid system to actively change the car's level over the wheels. But all that's necessary is a leaf spring and a damper. Why do you assume that some alien "anti-gravity" technology could only work by calculating the Earth's precise orbit instead of just referencing the immediate environs?

Well, I suppose I just tend to think of the bigger picture. The Earth is spinning at a fine rate. Not only that, but it's spinning at that pace accompanied by the Moon and the perturbations it exerts upon our beautiful home. Furthermore, the pair are rotating around the Sun at a phenomenal trot that throws in another complexity. And, to top it all, the three of them are rushing outwards from the theoretical point of the 'Big Bang'.

There's a wonderful video to be found somewhere on the internet that represents this multi-faceted problem and includes the theoretical outward rush, but I fear I'm not allowed to post links quite yet. Nonetheless, I'd recommend it for any avid science fiction fan.

But back to my post. Yes, I'd stand by the problem hovering just above the Earth poses. It's a tremendously difficult feat that would take a civilization far, far in advance of us to achieve. All we can do right now is squirt burning hydrocarbons out the wrong end of a pipe to get us off the ground, and generally attempt to engineer solutions that minimise failure.

Wouldn't it be wonderful to see such a thing though?

 

[RX-79G]

Well, I suppose I just tend to think of the bigger picture. The Earth is spinning at a fine rate. Not only that, but it's spinning at that pace accompanied by the Moon and the perturbations it exerts upon our beautiful home. Furthermore, the pair are rotating around the Sun at a phenomenal trot that throws in another complexity. And, to top it all, the three of them are rushing outwards from the theoretical point of the 'Big Bang'.

There's a wonderful video to be found somewhere on the internet that represents this multi-faceted problem and includes the theoretical outward rush, but I fear I'm not allowed to post links quite yet. Nonetheless, I'd recommend it for any avid science fiction fan.

But back to my post. Yes, I'd stand by the problem hovering just above the Earth poses. It's a tremendously difficult feat that would take a civilization far, far in advance of us to achieve. All we can do right now is squirt burning hydrocarbons out the wrong end of a pipe to get us off the ground, and generally attempt to engineer solutions that minimise failure.

Wouldn't it be wonderful to see such a thing though?

I guess I'm not explaining myself very well. We walk around on earth without any requirement to plan our motion in reference to anything but the earth, despite rotating around the sun or galaxy. Why is your immediate assumption that the spaceship would have be refer to those things? Why does some sort of reactionless spaceship drive imply that the spaceship is completely divorced from celestial mechanics where is has to "fake it" to remain stationary to a point on earth?

And even if it did need to do that, why would that calculation be difficult, given the very precise and predictable nature of orbits? The earth isn't blowing in the wind or bouncing down a dirt road.

 

[GCJ]

One leap of faith takes another, friend.

Have you ever questioned why, should you drive from west to east, you don't get there quicker as you're driving against the 1000mph rotation of the Earth? I have. As a matter of fact I phoned my mate Andy, a nice fellow who stays in Troon, about the problem a number of years ago as I was driving across the country. Andy is a level-headed and intelligent fellow, and I tend to always turn to him when I get to a problem that befuddles me.

His answer?

Put it this way, it included profanities to accompany his perceptible puzzlement.

I'm going to put it out there that I'm definitely not a flat-Earther. I've observed the planets and stars through my telescope and it's a non-starter for me, just in case you thought I was going there.

I'm sure the orbits of every celestial body aren't entirely predictable though. I'm one hundred percent sure we don't have the resources to model our Solar System in entirety.

The concept is stunning though, isn't it? For me, it would take a breakthrough technology to achieve the same.

One of the things I've pondered is if our current civilisation stymies the unique geniuses that drove step changes in the past.

 

[Droflet]

Not having an engineering bone in my body, I didn't overthink this. It just looked really cool.

 

[GCJ]

Not having an engineering bone in my body, I didn't overthink this. It just looked really cool.

It really did though, didn't it? The film-makers did the concept justice.

 

[RX-79G]

Have you ever questioned why, should you drive from west to east, you don't get there quicker as you're driving against the 1000mph rotation of the Earth?

If you are talking about time dilation, you are moving "faster" one way over the other, but it doesn't produce an effect on arrival times because of the effects of acceleration. It isn't a paradox, just a misunderstanding on your part.

 

[GCJ]

I'm no astrophysicist, but time dilation is directly related to the percentage of the speed of light one travels in relation to another object, except light which is a constant. If it was possible to approach 99.99%, mass would increase ridiculously and length in the direction of travel would decrease. As a consequence, time would pass differently. Definitely not a physicist though, so I'll very possibly be wrong.

No mate, genuinely, I was intrigued by the technology it would take to pull off the feat in the movie. The whole universe alludes to being mathematical in design, so I just tend to look at solutions from a wonderment that focuses on numbers. Otherwise, the situation moves from science to fantasy, which is just fine too.

 

[RX-79G]

The universe is mathematical, but that doesn't mean that relatively straightforward relationships require complex calculations to exist. Look at the orbit of the moon - it is complex to describe from some great remove, but the reality is that it is a simple and self correcting balance of gravity and velocity. One would find that if you need to understand how it orbits the earth, all the additional motion through the universe simply gets cancelled out of the math.

 

[GCJ]

The universe is mathematical, but that doesn't mean that relatively straightforward relationships require complex calculations to exist. Look at the orbit of the moon - it is complex to describe from some great remove, but the reality is that it is a simple and self correcting balance of gravity and velocity. One would find that if you need to understand how it orbits the earth, all the additional motion through the universe simply gets cancelled out of the math.

I don't disagee, friend. Everything finds equilibrium. Life, relationships, the planets. I find it fascinating, all of those concepts. Simple things, like how close would the Moon have to get before perfect equilibrium broke down? It kinda makes me think that perhaps, in the storyline, the alien craft could've altered its mass to defy the maths and just float there; effectively in orbit at fifty feet.

 

[RX-79G]

I don't disagee, friend. Everything finds equilibrium. Life, relationships, the planets. I find it fascinating, all of those concepts. Simple things, like how close would the Moon have to get before perfect equilibrium broke down? It kinda makes me think that perhaps, in the storyline, the alien craft could've altered its mass to defy the maths and just float there; effectively in orbit at fifty feet.

It may, but it would have blown away and required stabilization in all directions. It could also just create thrust that exactly counters gravity, leaving its mass available for inertia and small variance in thrust angle enough to counter wind. Or it could be standing on a tripod of force that reaches deep into the ground, acting something like magnetic levitation.

 

[GCJ]

It may, but it would have blown away and required stabilization in all directions. It could also just create thrust that exactly counters gravity, leaving its mass available for inertia and small variance in thrust angle enough to counter wind. Or it could be standing on a tripod of force that reaches deep into the ground, acting something like magnetic levitation.

And that's the beauty of sci-fi. It could be any explanation, and it's up to the author / director to have the final say.

 

[J Riff]

Didn't like Interstellar - loved The SuperInframan! Never mind why. Also half-watched NatLamp Loaded Weapon 1 and it were a respectable sendup. Actually laughed, once at least. Last night was a long time ago, but Gladiator left me cold, what I could make out of it thru the blood and swords.

 

[Ignited Moth]

A Cure for Wellness
and
Cloverfield Lane
and re-watched Bad Moms

 

[Cat's Cradle]

Good day, @Ignited Moth! Those are three films I've been curious about. I wonder if you'd mind giving your thoughts on them...just a few words on what you thought of each?