What's the worst depiction of science did you see in fiction?

[Keltest]

Oh man, don't even get me started on Star Wars fans.

I at least kind of like the Maw explanation. It actually turns the boast into somewhat of a vetting process, because non-underworld types would be unlikely to understand why that is impressive and, like Obi-wan, tend to be dismissive rather than impressed, and should be treated accordingly. Anybody who legitimately understands it meanwhile, is a serious client who has just been fairly impressed.

[Peelee]

I at least kind of like the Maw explanation. It actually turns the boast into somewhat of a vetting process, because non-underworld types would be unlikely to understand why that is impressive and, like Obi-wan, tend to be dismissive rather than impressed, and should be treated accordingly. Anybody who legitimately understands it meanwhile, is a serious client who has just been fairly impressed.

Agreed. Changing the Maw from a bunch of black holes to a single planet-sized gravity well inside a Maelstrom of gases was not a good idea IMO. Both are ridiculous, but I like the black hole ridiculousness better (plus it paved the way for Centerpoint Station shenanigans and a lot of pre-Republic lore).

[Keltest]

Agreed. Changing the Maw from a bunch of black holes to a single planet-sized gravity well inside a Maelstrom of gases was not a good idea IMO. Both are ridiculous, but I like the black hole ridiculousness better (plus it paved the way for Centerpoint Station shenanigans and a lot of pre-Republic lore).

On top of that, "A bunch of black holes" is just a cooler concept than "well its a bunch of space thats kind of weird."

[Bohandas]

To be fair, Jurassic World is defined by "We've managed to fix all the mistakes from the first time... Let's make some new ones!"

Like deliberately engineering a scary superpredator out of the most dangerous animals on the island and few extras, up to and including the smartest and most sadistic predator you have

Plus Futurama did it better

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=j-58j4Dl_1Q

[Drakeburn]

Off the top of my head: Clockstoppers.

Speeding up molecules don't give people super speed. It would just turn them into gas. And that is just one of the problems with the science in that movie.

[Brother Oni]

Oh man, don't even get me started on Star Wars fans.

501st represent!

[Rodin]

Agreed. Changing the Maw from a bunch of black holes to a single planet-sized gravity well inside a Maelstrom of gases was not a good idea IMO. Both are ridiculous, but I like the black hole ridiculousness better (plus it paved the way for Centerpoint Station shenanigans and a lot of pre-Republic lore).

Holly: Well, the thing about a black hole - its main distinguishing feature - is it's black. And the thing about space, the colour of space, your basic space colour, is black. So how are you supposed to see them?
Rimmer: But five of them? . How can you manage to miss five black holes?
Holly: It's always the way, innit? You hang around for three million years in deep space and there hasn't been one, then all of a sudden five turn up at once.


Ah, Red Dwarf. Another Sci-Fi show with nonsensical "science" all over it. At least in Red Dwarf's case they knew the science was bunk. They just didn't care.

[sktarq]

A CHALLENGE!.... However, the Velociraptor (and Deinonychus, conveniently enough) while also three-toed, was distinct in that one of the toes did not touch the ground. This would result in a two-toed track.

Sorry, but I've spent too much time working the Hell's Creek and chilly storage basements not to make a comment here. Deinonychus, Utahrapor, and the other members of the Velociraptors had four toes. Three of which touched the ground although one (2nd digit) did so only at the base of the toe and would be only marginally seen as a "toe mark" in tracks. So it would look like the "two toe print" like you said. The 1st digit is basically a dewclaw and never gets near the ground. Which is actually quite common in therapods.

I know I"m picking nits but ....

[Peelee]

Sorry, but I've spent too much time working the Hell's Creek and chilly storage basements not to make a comment here. Deinonychus, Utahrapor, and the other members of the Velociraptors had four toes. Three of which touched the ground although one (2nd digit) did so only at the base of the toe and would be only marginally seen as a "toe mark" in tracks. So it would look like the "two toe print" like you said. The 1st digit is basically a dewclaw and never gets near the ground. Which is actually quite common in therapods.

I know I"m picking nits but ....

I actually did know this (it definitely came up when I was researching to make sure my arguments were correct), but I decided to gloss over that because I couldn't fit it in smoothly, probably because it's doesn't affect the substance of my argument. But it's still cool you brought it up!

[sktarq]

Holly: Well, the thing about a black hole - its main distinguishing feature - is it's black....
Ah, Red Dwarf. Another Sci-Fi show with nonsensical "science" all over it. At least in Red Dwarf's case they knew the science was bunk. They just didn't care.

I kind of think of red dwarf and the Hitchhikers Guide in same vein of the wacky pseudoscience is actually a form of humour in and of itself. Thus they care DEEPLY, just about making it funny instead of scientifically accurate.

[Caledonian]

Honey, I Shrunk the Kids

Don't get me wrong, this is a delightful movie. A classic. Maybe even a must-see. Quite entertaining. But the science is awful. I saw it, in theaters, as a child, and even then I knew the science was awful.

At least Ant-Man puts a little thought into the implications of shrinking... this movie puts absolutely no thought whatsoever into the gimmick. If it wasn't for the sense of humor underlying events, and the wonderful soundtrack, I'd never be able to watch it again.

[Asmotherion]

-How laser beams always cause an impact, as if they were solid. Especially true in anime;

-How a guy can be shot 12 times and still able to walk.

-How cars always seem to explode after a crush. Sure, it can happen, but it's much less intence and VERY unlikelly to happen, unless the car is already somehow on fire.

-How you see a guy with massive muscle mass get easyly owned by a guy (or girl) half his size. I know it gives a nice narrative and all, but if a proffesional bodybuilder is about to deck you in the face, and you're not in his weight category, don't expect to go all anime on him.

-Ant-man. It was a nice movie, I love the attempt to pseudoscientifically explain it, but even if you could somehow supercompress mass (let's theoriese black holes as an example) to, say, the size of an electron, you'd never be able to do so without destroying it's previous form.

-How there's always a new "deus ex machina" secret material that opperates outside the laws of physics to explain a completely farfetched theory that would never work in the real world.

[Bohandas]

-How laser beams always cause an impact, as if they were solid.

I know in some series the "lasers" are actually supposed to be plasma. IIRC this is how the blasters in Star Wars work. It's still a ways off from solid but at least it's condensed matter.

[Brother Oni]

-How laser beams always cause an impact, as if they were solid. Especially true in anime;

-How a guy can be shot 12 times and still able to walk.

-How you see a guy with massive muscle mass get easyly owned by a guy (or girl) half his size. I know it gives a nice narrative and all, but if a proffesional bodybuilder is about to deck you in the face, and you're not in his weight category, don't expect to go all anime on him.

With regard to these three:

1. Similar effect but for a completely different reason; One damage mechanism of weaponised lasers, is ablating and vaporising the surface material of the target, which causes an explosion. That would certainly seem to cause an impact (especially in the LaWS demonstration put out be the USN), rather than the burn through you'd see with laser cutters.

2. Depends on the calibre of the round and shot placement. There's reports of people surviving being shot up to 20 times (NY Times link). Low calibre like a .22 in a non-vital region is likely to be survivable.

3. While I agree with this on principle, body builders aren't the best example - they've got extensive amounts of slow twitch muscle, so while they can exert a lot of force, they can't do so explosively as well (fast twitch), so don't hit as hard as you'd expect for a person of their size. Putting it this way, I'd rather be punched by Arnold Schwarzenegger in his prime than Mike Tyson in his prime, despite the 3", ~18lb (~42lbs in his off season) difference in favour of the Austrian Oak.
That said, never let them get a grip on you.

[Vinyadan]

1. Similar effect but for a completely different reason; One damage mechanism of weaponised lasers, is ablating and vaporising the surface material of the target, which causes an explosion. That would certainly seem to cause an impact (especially in the LaWS demonstration put out be the USN), rather than the burn through you'd see with laser cutters.

All those cables remind me of this.

[Rodin]

All those cables remind me of this.

When I first saw Naked Gun, I knew that scene was a parody of Goldfinger. It's even the same prop!

What I had forgotten is that Goldfinger itself parodies the "cut the wires" trope.

The best one has to be Stargate SG-1, where they have trouble disarming their own bomb.

O'Neill: You know, I'd like to take this opportunity to say that this is a very poorly designed bomb and I think we should say something to somebody when we get back.

[Traab]

With regard to these three:

1. Similar effect but for a completely different reason; One damage mechanism of weaponised lasers, is ablating and vaporising the surface material of the target, which causes an explosion. That would certainly seem to cause an impact (especially in the LaWS demonstration put out be the USN), rather than the burn through you'd see with laser cutters.

2. Depends on the calibre of the round and shot placement. There's reports of people surviving being shot up to 20 times (NY Times link). Low calibre like a .22 in a non-vital region is likely to be survivable.

3. While I agree with this on principle, body builders aren't the best example - they've got extensive amounts of slow twitch muscle, so while they can exert a lot of force, they can't do so explosively as well (fast twitch), so don't hit as hard as you'd expect for a person of their size. Putting it this way, I'd rather be punched by Arnold Schwarzenegger in his prime than Mike Tyson in his prime, despite the 3", ~18lb (~42lbs in his off season) difference in favour of the Austrian Oak.
That said, never let them get a grip on you.

Yeah body builder is a terrible example. An mma fighter would tear arnold in his mr universe prime to shreds in a fight. Tyson is a far better example. there is a reason they break up boxing matches into so many weight classes. Because its just flat out unfair when two equally skilled fighters go at it, but one is 4 inches shorter and 40 pounds lighter. Tyson will punch your soul out of the ring in a fight between equal size competitors. Be smaller than him and your body will also be sent flying into the upper decks. You might be able to dance around him for awhile, plinking away at him with superior speed and agility, but all he has to do is hit you once, and you are physically incapable of hitting as hard as he is used to getting punched.

[Cikomyr2]

All those cables remind me of this.

I watched the French dubbed version of this movie when I was young and monolinguistic. I had no idea of the references, but the dubber sometimes add little things for extra humour, and it works.

In this case, when they rip out the cables, the bomb's computer voice tells them: "You are wasting time, these cables are there just to look pretty"

[Vinyadan]

Yeah body builder is a terrible example. An mma fighter would tear arnold in his mr universe prime to shreds in a fight. Tyson is a far better example. there is a reason they break up boxing matches into so many weight classes. Because its just flat out unfair when two equally skilled fighters go at it, but one is 4 inches shorter and 40 pounds lighter. Tyson will punch your soul out of the ring in a fight between equal size competitors. Be smaller than him and your body will also be sent flying into the upper decks. You might be able to dance around him for awhile, plinking away at him with superior speed and agility, but all he has to do is hit you once, and you are physically incapable of hitting as hard as he is used to getting punched.

There was a gigantic pugilist, Nikolaj Valuev, who pretty much counted as his own weight division, as he was 213 cm tall and weighed 140-150 kg, which made him so huge that he used a bar stool to sit in his corner. He became world heavyweight champion, a title which he lost to David Haye. Haye was 191 cm x 100 kg, and previously world cruiserweight champion, so he actually came from a lighter weight class.
Haye explained that he had examined previous fights, and noticed how Valuev could just wait, get punched and strike back, because he was overwhelmingly strong and resilient and the balance would be in his favour. Haye actually broke his right hand in the second round by punching Valuev's jaw, which he described as the hardest thing he had ever punched. In the end, he had to evade a lot and land after Valuev missed, and take an even more conservative approach because of the broken hand. He landed a lot during the final part of the match, to make sure that the judges would give him the victory, which they did by majority decision.

In a way, it shows both sides, as Valuev's massive advantage from his size made him #1, but he still could be defeated by an exceptionally prepared, cool-headed opponent. But this is also where boxing being a sport comes to matter, as you can rely on points, rather than having to destroy or scare the opponent until he gives up or falls down.

[factotum]

-How cars always seem to explode after a crush. Sure, it can happen, but it's much less intence and VERY unlikelly to happen, unless the car is already somehow on fire.

The funniest example of this is in "Where Eagles Dare". The protagonists manage to force the car they're passengers in to crash, and somehow survive this without injury while everyone else in the car (including the German officer who was sat on the back seat with them!) dies. They then push the car over the edge of a nearby cliff, and it explodes into flames half a second after going over the edge...

[Sapphire Guard]

Colleen Wing's cage fights in IF 1 were interesting takes. She could win, but had to do things like break fingers and arms, and obviously struggled with doing enough damage to put them down.

[Vinyadan]

Colleen Wing's cage fights in IF 1 were interesting takes. She could win, but had to do things like break fingers and arms, and obviously struggled with doing enough damage to put them down.

In MMA (UFC) you can break arms, but you can't break fingers ("small joint manipulation"). One explanation is that fingers can be broken too quickly and the fighter wouldn't have the time to tap out.

Pankration let you break fingers; the only illegal moves were gouging out the eyes or biting (in Sparta, these were allowed), and there were no weight classes.

[Yora]

The funniest example of this is in "Where Eagles Dare". The protagonists manage to force the car they're passengers in to crash, and somehow survive this without injury while everyone else in the car (including the German officer who was sat on the back seat with them!) dies. They then push the car over the edge of a nearby cliff, and it explodes into flames half a second after going over the edge...

Some people being basically unharmed while someone in the seat next to them is pretty much dead on impact is not that unusual, though.
Cars exploding is.

I've actually seen a couple of cars having their engines catch fire, and burning out completely in just a minute. But they don't explode. They just burn. If you have fuel coming out somehwere, that means the fuel tank isn't sealed, and therefore can't be pressurized. And without pressure, no explosion.

Most movie explosions are actually burning gasoline, but I think they are done by having a baloon filled with gasoline in a barrel filled with water. The burning fuel turns water into steam, which shots out of the barrel, pushing the fuel up into the air where it becomes an aerosol, which then catches fire immediately. Which still only burns in a big fireball, but does not explode.

[Bohandas]

Let's talk about the Fallout games. The idea that some areas would still be dangerously radioactive 200 years after the war is ludicrous. Even cobalt bombs would only make the area radioactive for years or decades, not for centuries.

Also, the fat boy "nuclear" grenade launcher is clearly not nuclear based, as it's impossible to build a nuclear bomb with a blast radius and explosive force below the bl0ckbuster range. Furthermore, they don't even really seem to have enough power even to be seriously threatening dirty bombs; they don't disperse radiation very far. (unless, of course, we assume that their explosions and/or radiation release are on the same scale as the lengths of the roads)

[Bohandas]

Some people being basically unharmed while someone in the seat next to them is pretty much dead on impact is not that unusual, though.
Cars exploding is.

I've actually seen a couple of cars having their engines catch fire, and burning out completely in just a minute. But they don't explode. They just burn. If you have fuel coming out somehwere, that means the fuel tank isn't sealed, and therefore can't be pressurized. And without pressure, no explosion.

"It didn't actually blow up, it just burned really quickly"

[hamishspence]

Also, the fat boy "nuclear" grenade launcher is clearly not nuclear based, as it's impossible to build a nuclear bomb with a blast radius and explosive force below the bl0ckbuster range.

True. This is about as small as nuclear grenade launchers have gotten - the equivalent of 10 tons of TNT at the absolute lowest:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Davy_C...uclear_device)

[factotum]

Let's talk about the Fallout games. The idea that some areas would still be dangerously radioactive 200 years after the war is ludicrous. Even cobalt bombs would only make the area radioactive for years or decades, not for centuries.

Yeah, but in real life radiation doesn't turn you into immortal mutants either, so whatever is happening in Fallout games isn't actually radiation as we know it.

[Florian]

Some people being basically unharmed while someone in the seat next to them is pretty much dead on impact is not that unusual, though.
Cars exploding is.

Fun fact: Some years ago, I used to work for the safety engineering department of Shell, while volunteering for the technical help department in my spare time (Don't get fooled, that's the heavy-duty support unit for any kind of police or rescue around here), based on having been trained as a combat medic during my conscript time.

You are right. The human body is extremely durable and can take an astonishing amount of punishment before breaking down. Something similar has been mentioned before in this thread, about bullets. It´s a case of "you won't believe it until you have seen it".

Cars exploding is.... I dunno... sorta-kinda a myth? We can rule out Diesel entirely. Diesel-based motors are a bit more expensive because that stuff is very hard to ignite and the ignition-systems are way more complex than regular gasoline. Gasoline burns all right, the thing is rather that it also evaporates into ignitable aerosols quite quickly and those cause explosions. You need a very specific combination to make a "hollywood explosion": Major damage to the the tank, so you lose a prodigious amount of gasoline. Spread over a wide area, so evaporation takes place at multiple places at once. Enough gasoline to make it a two stage affair, the evaporated gases being enough to ignite the still fluid gasoline.

Mind you, it happens. A ruptured tank will leak Gasoline and a aerosols cloud will form. But that is something else from the instant "boom" we see on tv.

[Vinyadan]

LPG cars used to blow up, but I'm not sure of why that happened. It didn't have to be in a crash: sometimes, they simply exploded while parked.

[Traab]

Fun fact: Some years ago, I used to work for the safety engineering department of Shell, while volunteering for the technical help department in my spare time (Don't get fooled, that's the heavy-duty support unit for any kind of police or rescue around here), based on having been trained as a combat medic during my conscript time.

You are right. The human body is extremely durable and can take an astonishing amount of punishment before breaking down. Something similar has been mentioned before in this thread, about bullets. It´s a case of "you won't believe it until you have seen it".

Cars exploding is.... I dunno... sorta-kinda a myth? We can rule out Diesel entirely. Diesel-based motors are a bit more expensive because that stuff is very hard to ignite and the ignition-systems are way more complex than regular gasoline. Gasoline burns all right, the thing is rather that it also evaporates into ignitable aerosols quite quickly and those cause explosions. You need a very specific combination to make a "hollywood explosion": Major damage to the the tank, so you lose a prodigious amount of gasoline. Spread over a wide area, so evaporation takes place at multiple places at once. Enough gasoline to make it a two stage affair, the evaporated gases being enough to ignite the still fluid gasoline.

Mind you, it happens. A ruptured tank will leak Gasoline and a aerosols cloud will form. But that is something else from the instant "boom" we see on tv.

Plus, its kind of a thing car makers take into account when designing their vehicles. The government frowns on cars exploding, so they make it very hard to cause it to happen. Its possible older models from many decades ago are more likely to explode due to lower tech and less stringent guidelines, but modern cars? They try very hard to make sure cars dont go kaboom.