WorstPreviews.com Logo Join the community [Login / Register]
Follow WorstPreviews.com on Twitter
What\ News Coming Soon In Theaters On DVD Trailer,Posters,Pictures,Wallpapers, Screensavers PeliBlog.com Trivia/Quizzes
News/Headlines
Trailer for "Midnight Special" Sci-Fi Film, with Michael Shannon and Joel Edgerton
Nov 23rd, 2015
Trailer for "Central Intelligence" Comedy, with Dwayne Johnson and Kevin Hart
Nov 23rd, 2015
Trailer for Melissa McCarthy's "The Boss" Comedy
Nov 23rd, 2015
Trailer for Juan Antonio Bayona's "A Monster Calls"
Nov 23rd, 2015
First Look at "Central Intelligence" Comedy, with Dwayne Johnson and Kevin Hart
Nov 19th, 2015
Trailer for "Zoolander 2" Arrives Online
Nov 19th, 2015
Official Trailer for "Now You See Me" Sequel
Nov 19th, 2015
Trailer for Chris Hemsworth's "The Huntsman: Winter's War"
Nov 19th, 2015
Trailer for Keanu Reeves' "Exposed" Thriller
Nov 19th, 2015
First Look at Chris Pine on "Wonder Woman" Set
Nov 16th, 2015
Ridley Scott Reveals Another Title for "Prometheus" Sequel
Nov 16th, 2015
Gerard Butler is a God in "Gods of Egypt" Posters
Nov 16th, 2015
First Look at Liam Neeson in Martin Scorsese's "Silence"
Nov 16th, 2015
New Trailer for "The Divergent Series: Allegiant"
Nov 16th, 2015
Trailer for "Moonwalkers" Comedy, with Ron Perlman and Rupert Grint
Nov 16th, 2015
Trailer for Charlie Kaufman's "Anomalisa" Stop-Motion Film
Nov 3rd, 2015
Poster for "Warcraft" Arrives Online, Trailer Coming on Friday
Nov 3rd, 2015
There's a Good Reason Why Luke Skywalker Isn't on "Star Wars: The Force Awakens" Poster
Nov 2nd, 2015
First Trailer for Sacha Baron Cohen's "The Brothers Grimsby" Comedy
Nov 2nd, 2015
"Spectre" Breaks Box Office Records Overseas
Nov 2nd, 2015
Final Trailer for Ron Howard's "In the Heart of the Sea," with Chris Hemsworth
Nov 2nd, 2015
New Photos From "Warcraft" Video Game Movie
Nov 2nd, 2015
Lots of New Photos From "Suicide Squad"
Oct 30th, 2015
Trailer for "Dirty Grandpa" Comedy, with Robert De Niro and Zac Efron
Oct 30th, 2015
Sandra Bullock to Star in Female Version of "Ocean's Eleven"
Oct 30th, 2015
Trailer for Jared Hess' "Don Verdean" Comedy, with Sam Rockwell
Oct 30th, 2015
"Indiana Jones" Producer Says Harrison Ford Will Not Be Recast
Oct 28th, 2015
Trailer for Adam Sandler's "The Ridiculous 6" Comedy
Oct 28th, 2015
"The Walking Dead" Fan Kills Friend Who Turned Into a Zombie
Oct 28th, 2015
Another "Monopoly" Movie in the Works
Oct 28th, 2015
"Jumanji" Remake Hires "Con Air" Writer
Oct 26th, 2015
Disney's "Tower of Terror" Park Ride Movie Moving Forward
Oct 26th, 2015
Johnny Depp and Edgar Wright Team for "Fortunately, the Milk"
Oct 26th, 2015
Previous News Stories Next News Stories

Which Movies Break Laws of Science?

Posted: December 28th, 2010 by WorstPreviews.com Staff
Which Movies Break Laws of Science?Submit Comment
It can sometimes be tough to make a sci-fi film that uses laws of physics and science accurately. Today we have a chart, courtesy of io9, that shows a list of eighteen movies and which of eleven laws they have broken.

Some of the rules include "no sound in space," "planets having Earth gravity," "fire in space," "easy communication with aliens" and "faster than light travel."

The only films on the list that didn't break any rules are "Apollo 13" and "The Right Stuff." Meanwhile, "Star Wars" movies have broke almost all of them.

Question: Which movie not on the list that has complete disregard for laws of science?

Chart: (click to enlarge)


Source: io9


Bookmark and Share
You must be registered to post comments. Login or Register.
Displaying 53 comment(s) Profanity: Turn On
boogiel writes:
on December 28th, 2010 at 7:29:06 AM

Any movie with Lindsay Lohan will fit into that chart
Kooky SpunkCaked writes:
on December 28th, 2010 at 7:38:11 AM

I don't know, but I know what movie this year broke the law of human decency.

Little f*ckers ... with Ben Stiller and Robert Deniro.
Kooky SpunkCaked writes:
on December 28th, 2010 at 7:39:20 AM

boogiel writes:
on December 28th, 2010 at 7:29:06 AM
Any movie with Lindsay Lohan will fit into that chart

@boogiel

In Lovag's vagina, noone REALLY can hear you scream.

Or whimper.

Or flat-out cry.
Kooky SpunkCaked writes:
on December 28th, 2010 at 7:41:30 AM


The only films on the list that didn't break any rules are "Apollo 13" and "The Right Stuff." Meanwhile, "Star Wars" movies have broke almost all of them.

... I don't know. I could've sworn I saw Buzz Aldrin shoot an AK-47 out in space on some motherf*ckin' space monsters, all the while letting one ripping roaring loud from out of the poop shoot section of his space suit.
Kooky SpunkCaked writes:
on December 28th, 2010 at 7:42:23 AM

... and having Clint Howard play a normal civilian in a movie is a clear violation of all that is right with the world.
trailertrash writes:
on December 28th, 2010 at 7:55:46 AM

^ Which then rules out Apollo 13 from this list then..
Nihilistic Michael Maus writes:
on December 28th, 2010 at 8:47:21 AM

trailertrash writes:
on December 28th, 2010 at 7:55:46 AM

^ Which then rules out Apollo 13 from this list then..


@tt

Sure as shootin' as Ron Howard's bald little chrome dome.

Hey, since we're talkin' about breaking th' laws o' science, what about Back to the Future ?

There is no f*cking way going 88 miles per hour, even with a flux compacitor, can make you go back in time ...

unless you're in Texas, get pulled over by a Trooper, perform a 'breathalyzer' with his c*ck in your mouth and you WISH you were back in time.
Nihilistic Michael Maus writes:
on December 28th, 2010 at 8:47:48 AM

Sloppy New Years, everyone!
Popcorn101 writes:
on December 28th, 2010 at 9:32:04 AM

"all planets have one climate" - Star wars????
movie had different ones, one was sunny one was rainy lol
BadChadB33 writes:
on December 28th, 2010 at 10:00:18 AM

How come Star Trek is not on the list?
Max Rockatansky Junior writes:
on December 28th, 2010 at 11:17:06 AM

BadChadB33 writes:
on December 28th, 2010 at 10:00:18 AM

How come Star Trek is not on the list?


@BadChadB33

They don't want to bring The Wrath of Shatner down upon them.

"Connnnnn!!!!!!!!"
Nimzabaat writes:
on December 28th, 2010 at 11:55:36 AM

Oh where to begin? Scientists at NASA have recorded sound waves coming from a black hole (so sound really does travel through space, and goes a fair distance as well, who'da thunk it?). As for the Alien movies (a) I wouldn't call the alien impregnation process "easy interbreeding". (b) they landed on a planetoid more like a moon. Does our moon have the same climate all over? Yes it does. As for "easy communication between aliens" we're getting apps for that on the fricking i-phone. I'd imagine technology might actually get more advanced in the future (Star Wars has a common language, like the world is developing, what an outlandish and far-fetched concept?). Dodging lasers? People can dodge bullets if they have a basic idea of where the weapon is pointing before it fires, same principle. (a degree or two off is enough to miss a target given a reasonable distance) Now deflecting lasers with a lightsaber... (gotta give on that one) The list is just nit-picking bs.
BadChadB33 writes:
on December 28th, 2010 at 12:46:22 PM

Nice avatar Max it fits ya lol
UnNameable_One writes:
on December 28th, 2010 at 1:27:24 PM

Ok, am I the only one who is having a hard time seeing the point of this article, or is it something i'm missing? It's Science Fiction.....key word being "Fiction".
trailertrash writes:
on December 28th, 2010 at 1:46:01 PM

Nimzabaat -

I'd go nit-picking out of Mila Kunis furry garden all day long ....
trailertrash writes:
on December 28th, 2010 at 1:47:27 PM

Nihilistic - lol
minkowski writes:
on December 28th, 2010 at 2:17:49 PM

I love how so many people turn a potentially interesting and intelligent thread into another vomit vacuum for Lohan jokes.Good work, fellas. Because we can never get tired of Lohan jokes, right?

And I also love the guy that actually posted something thoughtful, yet got everything unimaginably wrong.



“Scientists at NASA have recorded sound waves coming from a black hole (so sound really does travel through space, and goes a fair distance as well, who'da thunk it?)”

Sound does NOT carry through space, and had you read the article in question, you would know that the sound waves detected are actually propagated through hot interstellar GAS, not empty space. Please read the information before you comment.



“As for the Alien movies (a) I wouldn't call the alien impregnation process "easy interbreeding". “

This has what to do to with physics, or even science in general, given that Alien/Predator genetics and origins are not described with enough detail, or any for that matter, to really make any sort of determination.



(b) they landed on a planetoid more like a moon.

What? Which alien film? Aliens, Alien 3? In Alien/Aliens they landed on an actual planet because it had Earth-like gravity and showed no signs of being a satellite to a gas giant. The same goes for Alien 3. In AVP, they were on earth. In AVPR, the same. In Predators, which isn’t an ‘Alien’ film, they were on a large planet possibly circling a gas giant, but there was no concrete clarification. In reality though, complex earth-like life likely would not develop on such a world because of enormous radioactivity belching from the gas giant.



“Does our moon have the same climate all over?”

It has NO climate because it has NO atmosphere, and you have to have the latter before you have the former.



“Yes it does”

No, it doesn’t.



“As for "easy communication between aliens" we're getting apps for that on the fricking i-phone.”

Uh-huh. When was the last time you spoke to an ‘alien’? Please do clue us in on your interstellar chats.



“I'd imagine technology might actually get more advanced in the future”

Because the trend is for technology to get less advanced with time, right?



“ Star Wars has a common language, like the world is developing, what an outlandish and far-fetched concept?).”

There is no universal language, and in fact China has actually recently reversed the encroachment of English. In many places, English is not the preferred language, and as a matter of business logic, people have adopted English

because of the leading impact of English-speaking nations, not because of some Star Trek/Star Wars impetus to adopt a ‘universal language’.



“Dodging lasers? People can dodge bullets if they have a basic idea of where the weapon is pointing before it fires,”

That would either require either knowing the future or having an imbecile fire the gun.



“same principle. (a degree or two off is enough to miss a target given a reasonable distance) Now deflecting lasers with a lightsaber... (gotta give on that one)”

You cannot dodge a laser because it moves at the speed of light. It’s on you before you even know it was turned on. Photons and bullets, other than generally traveling in a straight line, have NOTHING to do with one another.. Your comparison is feeble at best.



“The list is just nit-picking bs.”

Nah. It’s just bullsh*t.
minkowski writes:
on December 28th, 2010 at 2:34:32 PM

Oh, I get it now: Nimzabbat is just a Star Wars apologist. His unintelligent post now makes some sense, but only in how far it goes to explain his motives.

I also like how Star Trek was conspicuously left on the list. Only eleven films in that franchise, but hey, no need to list them, obviously.

As for other films, The Matrix is an egregious nreaker of physical laws, and made next to no common sense, either. Great action though, even if the entire cast was a bunch of robots.

And one of the worst sci-fi films is The Core, which broke not just the rules on iO9's limited chart, but essentially ALL of them.

And the chart is in error at least once, with respect to Stargate.

That film had neither 'easy interbreeding with aliens' nor 'easy communication' with aliens. I don't think the idiots at io9 really understood the film.

One, the 'aliens' were really just a few and they didn't speak English. The main bad guy did but only because he had studied earth from afar over the millennia.

The other 'aliens' were actually transported humans, and they were able to be understood, with some effort, because they spoke a language derived from an ancient Earth language, and because Daniel was into languages.

And then there was no interbreeding. Daniel made a relationship with the woman, but she was human. That was the entire point of the film.

And the planet may have had some earth-like climate, but there's no indication in the film that the planet in question was sun and sand all over. They couldn't know that.

Nevermind that the alien planet was specifically chosen by the aliens to serve as an analog to ancient Egypt, from whence the trsnplanted humans came.

You know, the need for the right oxygen ratio would mean also finding a planet with the right atmosphere-retaining gravity, the right amount of water, et cetera.

The idiots at io9 should learn some science, and the films they're critiquing, before making cute but stupid charts.
minkowski writes:
on December 28th, 2010 at 2:42:53 PM

I'd also like to comment on the faster than light category, given that a number of films have the technology.

From Einstein's perspective, and from that of relativity, the law only states that photons, having no mass, travel the fastest possible velocity (of all particles) and that conventionally, nothing particle based and carrying information can go faster than light.

On the other hand, it says nothing for closed-time loops, wormholes or the warping of space, as occurred in the very early universe wherein space expanded faster than the speed of light.

The fact is, the speed of light is conventionally insurmountable, yes, within the relativistic framework, but that doesn't mean that there's absolutely no technological way to get from one place to another, in space, at 'speeds' greater than that of a photon. Mark Vizier and Michio Kaku have written extensively on the physical possibilities, as have others.

So, yes, sound in space is impossible, but traveling 'faster' than a photon is possibly only a limitation of current technologies.
minkowski writes:
on December 28th, 2010 at 2:43:36 PM

on=off
holtlt writes:
on December 28th, 2010 at 3:13:16 PM

really? who gives a sh*t, it's just movies
angryblackman writes:
on December 28th, 2010 at 3:14:59 PM

you really are a douchebag, Mink. If you haven't noticed yet, which you have because you complain about it constantly, 99% of the users on here don't like to get technical with what they say, to them its all in good fun. Why do u have to sit there and get all bitchy just because we like to joke around and have a good time. Just because no one wants to here your theories about everything in your life doen't mean you have to come to this website and do the same.f*cking imbecile.
angryblackman writes:
on December 28th, 2010 at 3:16:01 PM

btw Mink, what do you think of my new avatar? You gonna bitch about this one too?
minkowski writes:
on December 28th, 2010 at 3:34:02 PM

ABM said: "Fo' shame, mane, becuz what had happ'ned wuz..."

I don't pay much attention to you 'angryblackman'. You're what I call a 'detriment to civilization', such that your existence represents intellectual decay and the rot of all good things. You're just a waste of oxygen, and that's well indicated by by both your mouthbreathing rhetoric and your patenetly idiotic name/avatar.

And the poster in question WAS getting technical, but he got his technicalities all wrong, hence he is clearly fair game.

But do pardon me for interjecting some intelligent discussion into a comment thread that we all otherwise know should be about d*ck jokes, endless Lohan/Coleman remarks (two years later and going strong!)and people pathetically aping Ranger as if they have neither their own personality nor their own mind. Which is why I like Max, but I digress.

God forbid I try to raise the mean IQ a degree or two above absolute zero, lest some of you single-celled slime molds get a mental sunburn.
minkowski writes:
on December 28th, 2010 at 3:35:14 PM

"really? who gives a sh*t, it's just movies"

Hey, if the women don't dig you for your looks, you can always sell them on your mind.
minkowski writes:
on December 28th, 2010 at 3:40:43 PM

"btw Mink, what do you think of my new avatar? You gonna bitch about this one too? "

ABM, you're a black teenager. Me having an argument with you is like God smiting Somom's fornicators. Yeah, it's fun, but pointless and proves nothing not already well known.
minkowski writes:
on December 28th, 2010 at 4:02:58 PM

"you really are a douchebag, Mink."

Haven't heard that one before. You're original, if nothing else. But more likely nothing else.

"If you haven't noticed yet,"

Oh, I've noticed. It's you who are unware of your behavior. Irony, motherf*cker!

"which you have"

Have or have not? I think you mean 'haven't', because that would be consistent, but hey, it's you we're talking about.

"because you complain about it constantly"

Complain about what constantly? Different threads, different topics. Critical thinking and witty criticism are a luxury for the intelligent, and you sir are in dire poverty, apparently. Go get some more welfare.

"99% of the users on here don't like to get technical with what they say,"

99% of the posters on here are virtual morons with nothing to say but the echoing of unfunny, crude and mindlessly stupid jokes they take from cue from the two or three people (one really) originating the 'jokes' in question.

I mean every f*cking day it's the same sh*t. This is supposedly a FILM SITE, stupid f*ck, not a laugh-in for morons. Talk about something else, if you can.

"to them its all in good fun."

Don't they have a HOME for that? A bar? A joke site? IMDb and RT has better coversations than WP.

Why f*ck up a film site with one inbecilic line after another, to which you obviously agree? Try something different, even if it hurts.

"Why do u have to sit there and get all bitchy just because we like to joke around and have a good time."

Thats' right. I get bitchy because you're having a good time. It's all about you, isn't it? Has nothing to do with my personality or need to comment in my own style.

No, it's all about you and your inane, monotonous humor, right? Please, then, forgive me, for existing in YOUR universe, of which, ABM, you play absolutely no part. lol. Moron.

"Just because no one wants to here your theories"

They're called opinions. Theories are scientific ideas about how things work, which strangely enough, and ironically too, is what this thread is SUPPOSEDLY about.

But hey, I also apologize for not going along with the herd of idiots that plague this site by following in their footsteps with one Lohan joke after another, day after day, month after month, YEAR after YEAR.

Please, black rapist, forgive me for having a mind and the natural desire to express it.

"about everything in your life"

I rarely mention my life. Unlike some of the narcissists on here, I don't brag about my life, which is hardly exceptional, and admittedly so.

Unlike the typical American, I'm not in love with myself, like so many of you, which is strange, given that you have so little to love, apparently.

I mean, yo're an ape, but you don't know enough to realize it, nor do you see how limited you are, and nor do you care, you just 'want to have fun' like monkeys flinging sh*t. I pity you. And myself for having to take you as a consolation prize in the game of socialization.

"doen't mean you have to come to this website and do the same."

That makes no sense whatsoever. I guess ebonics and urban schooling has failed you. Again.

"f*cking imbecile."

You don't have to sign your posts, ABM. I know it's you just by the stink.
minkowski writes:
on December 28th, 2010 at 4:16:38 PM

I guess stupidblackman is too busy bragging to the world just how much he loves the violent act of sexual assault to take some time to offer another illiterate response.

I'm sure there's a prison somewhere with his name on it. I hope so. It's obviously the place he deservedly belongs. Sc*mbag.
Rambo writes:
on December 28th, 2010 at 4:42:23 PM

Matrix anyone?
minkowski writes:
on December 28th, 2010 at 4:45:49 PM

^Already said. By me.
Rambo writes:
on December 28th, 2010 at 4:53:44 PM

^ok,sorry,didn't notice
minkowski writes:
on December 28th, 2010 at 5:05:29 PM

No one but the c*cksucking loser *sshole lurkers read my posts, so no worries.

Why did you mention the Matrix? Specifically? I'd like to hear your impressions.
Nimzabaat writes:
on December 28th, 2010 at 6:13:20 PM

@ Mink

Read the article. Have someone with a measureable iq explain the big words.

http://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/universe/black_hole_sound.html

Comments on Alien interbreeding were part of the original post. If you can't be bothered to read it, don't comment.

In the movie "Alien" they landed on a rock. Bigger then the moon so therefore more gravity than the moon, probably less than that of earth. But still no atmosphere so just as many "seasons" as our moon (ie none). You actually got my point without being smart enough to realize it that you understood it. Thank you. I'd say that takes a special kind of stupid, but you're not that special.

Easy communication with aliens. Try foreign languages first. Once aliens are encountered, alien languages are just "foreign". It's called following a logical path of conversation without requiring everything to be laid out like you're five years old and still crapping yourself.

As for missing sarcasm. Have someone smarter explain the concept. Don't try to find someone too smart though, they may put you out of our misery.

As for adopting a universal language for trade. You honestly think there won't be economics in the future?

Now on to dodging bullets. Most gunfights with handguns at least happen within 10 m of each other and result in more misses than hits. If the person(s) being shot at are not static then they are dodging. By your logic, that's a lot of clairvoyant people out there. As for photons and bullets having nothing in common. They both hit before the eye can detect them. They both can theoretically kill you. In the movies they both can be fired or emitted from a gunlike object. They both travel in a relatively straight line (at the distance of engagements shown in the aforementioned films, I know that bullets are affected by gravity).

To anyone else reading this post. I know Mink is just a dumb douchebag trying to be smart and failing. I'm just egging him on for the fun of it.
Rambo writes:
on December 28th, 2010 at 6:20:58 PM

@mink

I think the matrix just breaks every possible law of science :-)
trailertrash writes:
on December 28th, 2010 at 7:12:44 PM

^ And invents some of it's own along the way too ...
trailertrash writes:
on December 28th, 2010 at 7:15:46 PM

Mink -

Enjoyed reading your posts tonight ;-)
dorkus1226 writes:
on December 28th, 2010 at 8:05:16 PM

@mink
its safe to say your comments are some of the only intelligent ideas expressed on this website. all i want to say is dont let the dumbass, ignorant, feeble-minded *ssholes bog you down. the same goes to all the others who keep this site interesting: ranger, max, trailertrash, and all you other lovely regulars =)

i dont post a ton of comments, but iv been coming to this website for a loong time, and the wit on here is f*cking brilliant. you guys never sceace to amaze me. Thanks for keeping if fresh, yo. =)
you may think, "whadda f*ck is this sob sh*t!? ..too many emotions..! my head hurts.. *BAM*

i understand if this makes your brain whine, i am a woman and i guess its kind of my thing. =)
<3
minkowski writes:
on December 28th, 2010 at 8:31:17 PM

Nimrodbat:

Had you read the article, you would have seen this:

"In fact, space is not a pure vacuum but rather it contains stray bits of stuff -- gas atoms and dust of varying amounts. In the case of the Perseus cluster, the gas throughout it serves as the medium through which the sound waves coming from the central black hole travel."

Read the last part again, dumbass. It states that the sound waves travel through the GAS, as I said. Read it again, or have your mother do so for you. And again.

The fact that there's gas means that sound waves are not propagating through a vacuum, because if you have matter, then you don't have a f*cking vacuum. It's really simple.
minkowski writes:
on December 28th, 2010 at 8:33:58 PM

And not everyone here, obviously, is a moron, but those that aren't either are not often given a chance to demonstrate their intelligence, or they are drowned out by all the fools and chattering idiots that seem compelled to fill this place with their mindless bloviating.

To those that still bring something to the table, who contribute and makes this place unique and smart, thanks. You know who you are. And you're the only reason I bother coming back.
minkowski writes:
on December 28th, 2010 at 8:41:45 PM

"In the movie "Alien" they landed on a rock. Bigger then the moon so therefore more gravity than the moon, probably less than that of earth"

They landed on a planet equal to earth because, as I recall, they didn't bounce around, thus the planet's G was roughly equal to earths.

Combine that with the lack of a parent planet, say a gas giant, and it's obvious that they landed on a PLANET, not a moon, which is often merely a planet revolving around a larger planet, like Luna, whioch, it it had it's own orbot around the sun, would be a planet, and not a moon.

But if you're so smart, why do I have to explain the basics to you?
minkowski writes:
on December 28th, 2010 at 8:42:40 PM

And thanks to everyone else. Good to know there's some people on here that can handle acerbic commentary without getting their panties in a wet wad.
minkowski writes:
on December 28th, 2010 at 8:53:34 PM

"As for adopting a universal language for trade. You honestly think there won't be economics in the future?"

What does one have to do with the other? Humans have had economics for millennia. But they still do not have a 'universal language'. Not even close.

And we will continue to have economics in the future, lest the world perish, but to assume that we'll require ourselves to use only one language in order to pursue trade is just silly.

Besides, you have to realize that films like Star Wars and Star Trek employ one language, or two at most, because in order to have every alien using his or her, or it's, natural language is not only confusing for the viewer but enormously expensive for the studios.

In short: It's just an 'economical' film conceit that you shouldn't confuse with a necessity impinging on our real future.
minkowski writes:
on December 28th, 2010 at 9:25:28 PM

"Now on to dodging bullets."

Which is impossible unless you can see the future or you can move and think faster than the bullet itself.


"Most gunfights with handguns at least happen within 10 m of each other and result in more misses than hits."

Even if true, the fact has nothing to do with the converstaion. Most people are just poor shots, and others get lucky.

"If the person(s) being shot at are not static then they are dodging."

You're playing with words. By 'dodging bullets' you were specifically talking about films like the Matrix where someone can move faster than the bullet itself. You were not talking about the simple case of a poor shot trying to hit a moving target. Two totally different things.

When you talk about dodging, the word implies deliberation, not accident or chance. Say, dodging a ball, or dodging a car. Use of the word in these instances implies a deliberate movement of the body in response to the object in question, usually by moving faster via a reflex.


"By your logic"

No logic. Just facts. You cannot 'dodge' a bullet. And if you are not using that term as a referenced to sci-fi films like The Matrix then your mention of bullet dodging has no place in this thread.

"that's a lot of clairvoyant people out there."

No Neos, no psychics I'm afraid, just lots of
lucky folks and poor shots.

"As for photons and bullets having nothing in common. They both hit before the eye can detect them."

Yes, and that's where the similarities end. Anything moving with say the speed of sound is quite difficult to see. But otherwise a bullet and a photon are really nothing alike, and certainly you don't mean to claim that because some people escape getting hit in a firefight, thus your 'dodging' of a bullet claim, somehow, in the future, assuming we develop laser-based weapons, people will be able to dodge lasers as well? lol. That's just inane.

Lasres are photon-based, and the photons move in a vacuum at a speed of 186,282 mps. Far, far faster than a bullet, which people can't dodge either.

So if you think that people will develop the ability to dodge lasers at some point in the future, you're mistaken, unless we discover a way to emit gravitons, in order to bend light, but even then you'd need massive, massive amounts of energy.

It's just not feasible, to say the least, to think people will either commonly popssess laser-based weapons, or they'll also have the cancelling ability to 'dodge' them.

You're in total fantasy land now.

"They both can theoretically kill you."

Lasers don't generally have the power to kill.

Some do, but in reality they are just nothing more a highly focused beam of light.

Laser stands for Light Aplified by Stimulated Emission of Radiation, btw, so the acronym should tell you something about it's penetration strength.

Some of the higher megawatt varieties can seriously burn or blind, but we don't have one that can incinerate humans without enormous energy demands, or else it would have been deployed on the battlefirld.


"In the movies"

We're talking about reality versus films, not just films alone. Comparison is key. That was the entire point of this thread. You can hang out in the fiction of films all you want, but that doesn't mean that what you see in a movie works in real life, hence this thread.

"they both can be fired or emitted from a gunlike object."


So can pies and footballs, but neither make realistic weapons.

"They both travel in a relatively straight line"

Light moves in a straight line period unless affected by massive gravity, say when starlight bends around a distant galaxy. It's called gravitational lensing for just that reason.

"(at the distance of engagements shown in the aforementioned films, I know that bullets are affected by gravity)."

So are photons, but I really don't see your point with this entire bullet/photon comparison. They are nothing alike. We can dodge neither, realistically, and lasers are a long, long way off from providing a handgun susbstitute, if ever.
Damon242 writes:
on December 29th, 2010 at 12:23:37 AM

I agree with Mink wholeheartedly. He brought up every point I was about to before I read his, even some things that hadn't occurred to me.

Nimzabaat you are an idiot. I mean...the i-pod application argument? What the heck was that?
encoreyourface writes:
on December 29th, 2010 at 12:27:37 AM

how is this news ....
MattMiller2501 writes:
on December 29th, 2010 at 1:32:05 AM

Boris can dodge bullets. Just saying.
p3rfect writes:
on December 29th, 2010 at 1:59:41 AM

minkowski@ As for other films, The Matrix is an egregious nreaker of physical laws, and made next to no common sense, either.



Did you miss the basic premise of the entire film, because it seems you have.
trailertrash writes:
on December 29th, 2010 at 4:30:12 AM

MattMiller2501 - Boris the Blade !!
Cinemaisdead writes:
on December 29th, 2010 at 4:48:02 AM

HOWWWWWWWWWWWWWW BORRRRRRRRRRRRINGGG
MattMiller2501 writes:
on December 29th, 2010 at 8:19:46 AM

The one and only Trailer :D
Oh hey Mink, can you explain magnets next?
Also Lohan IS a slut! Am I right, fellow's? Hardeeharhar.
Derp.
Nimzabaat writes:
on December 29th, 2010 at 9:42:01 AM

Mink,
You have come to a battle of wits completely unarmed. (It’s a fun little saying and go ahead and use it if it ever applies in your favor. The clever will be amused.)
Okay you don’t understand the NASA article. Fair enough. You have problems with the concept of dodging. I get that. We’ll call it “actively avoiding attack by rapidly and strategically positioning oneself out of harms way”. (As an aside there is a laser used by the US military to shoot down ICBMs from several kilometers away. It uses a targeting laser followed by a killing laser. That scenario is truly unavoidable. Also, if it can destroy an ICBM, it can kill a human. The technology exists, it just hasn’t been miniaturized, yet.) You also believe that there can be no earthlike gravities and the only possibilities are micro or earth “standard”. That unrealistic, but you’ve set the bar low so I’ll accept that. As for the i-phone comment. There is an app on the i-phone that translates text that you point the camera at. I believe it only does Spanish to English but they are working on improving the app to do more languages. I was only pointing out that there is existing technology that is the stepping stone for the “universal translator”. You’re not up to date on current technology. Your supporter didn’t understand that either. Okay, I get that.
What I don’t understand is that you’re eloquent enough that I can only guess that you’re not dumb enough to believe your arguments. You are playing devil’s advocate. That would make sense except for the “your mom” comment. If you want to scream out that you’re part of the lowest common denominator and not to be taken seriously… mission accomplished. For future reference “your mom”, anything to do with Chuck Norris, and “that’s what she said” count as automatic failures. Otherwise it was a halfway decent round. Better luck next time.
PS: Because I feel a little bit sorry for you, here’s a freebie. When someone mentions something that could be considered innuendo, just say “gross”. Let their own dirty little mind fill in the joke for you. It’s educational to see how deeply in the gutter some peoples’ minds are.
FBO writes:
on December 29th, 2010 at 11:19:45 PM

Loved Sunshie, such a good move.

IDK if th matrix brakes the laws of physics since it doesn't really take place in the real world
Liesmith writes:
on January 2nd, 2011 at 4:38:40 PM

Nim, it looks like some of the points Mink was making were lost in the ensuing flame war. As an odd man out, I just want to simplify and summarize a few things, flame-free.

1) Sound waves in space:
In the NASA article, scientists didn't actually receive waves of sound; they detected temperature differences in the X-Ray spectrum (since visible light would fall into the black hole), then translated that to sound. While you could technically call this "sound in space", the Worst Previews article was referring to sounds audible to humans, which are impossible with particles that are so far apart.

2)Alien Communication:
It's true that translating human languages will become easier over time...and the invention of a pseudo-"universal translator" for just human languages is a definite possibility in the future...but it's a far cry from that to translating an alien language. For one, it may be difficult for us to even determine how an alien species communicates...it's possible they emit odors to speak, and write with pheromones. Even if they do speak in a language that's audible to human ears, the concepts that they communicate will be, well, alien to us. We'll have absolutely no frame of reference to begin with. For instance, all humans need water to live and have at least one word to identify it, but if it's toxic to an alien species, they may simply refer to it as "a poison" and leave it at that.

3)Dodging bullets and lasers:
Imagine I aim a pistol at someone 10 meters away, and they dive to the side just as I fire. That's not really a dodge, it's a miss. If they dodged anything, it was my eyesight and my muscle reflexes. It was solely by my human frailties that they survived. There currently exist robotic alternatives (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-KxjVlaLBmk&feature=player_embedded, 1:06 in the video) that can outpace these limitations. If that robotic hand/sensor combo was trying to shoot me with a conventional gun, I would not be able to evade it.

Ok, I failed as "summarizing", but I hope we'll at least be able to get back to simple discussion rather than flaming each other.

There's a Good Reason Why Luke Skywalker Isn't on "Star Wars: The Force Awakens" Poster

"The Walking Dead" Fan Kills Friend Who Turned Into a Zombie

"Indiana Jones" Producer Says Harrison Ford Will Not Be Recast

Ridley Scott Reveals Another Title for "Prometheus" Sequel

Johnny Depp and Edgar Wright Team for "Fortunately, the Milk"

"Spectre" Breaks Box Office Records Overseas

"Star Wars: The Force Awakens" Demolishes Pre-Sale Records

Paul Bettany Responds to Jason Statham's "Avengers" Insult

Daniel Craig Would Rather Commit Suicide Than Return as James Bond

Marvel Has Contingency Plans In Case It Regains Rights to Superheroes
Lace Wedding Dresses from ViViDress UK online shop, buy with confidence and cheap price.
WorstPreviews.com hosted by pair Networks WorstPreviews.com
Hosted by pair Networks
News Feeds | Box Office | Movie Reviews | Buzz: Top 100 | Popularity: Top 100
Poster Store | About Us | Advertising | Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Web Tools | Site Map
Copyright © 2009 WorstPreviews.com. All rights reserved