main
side
curve
  1. In Memory of LAJ_FETT: Please share your remembrances and condolences HERE

ST The "Bad Science" of Star Wars & TFA

Discussion in 'Sequel Trilogy' started by Negotiator1138, Apr 14, 2016.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Dagobah Dragonsnake

    Dagobah Dragonsnake Jedi Master star 4

    Registered:
    Feb 7, 2016
    Right. Fractional lightspeed kinda sucks. Zipping to a conference thirty lightyears away would be a bit troublesome. You get there and you missed it by a few decades, and some of the conference principals are dead.

    And you were so well prepared.
     
  2. Stoneymonster

    Stoneymonster Force Ghost star 4

    Registered:
    May 8, 2002
    I hate conferences anyway. ;)
     
  3. JabbatheHumanBeing

    JabbatheHumanBeing Jedi Grand Master star 6

    Registered:
    Jul 14, 2015
    I spent so much time on those ****ing Power Point slides...
     
    Dagobah Dragonsnake likes this.
  4. TheOneX_Eleazar

    TheOneX_Eleazar Jedi Knight star 4

    Registered:
    Oct 24, 2013
    Yup, until we can figure out a practical way to break the speed of light barrier we will never be out of the galactic scale equivalent of the stone age
     
    Dagobah Dragonsnake likes this.
  5. Dagobah Dragonsnake

    Dagobah Dragonsnake Jedi Master star 4

    Registered:
    Feb 7, 2016
    I cannot recall having read or seen an interstellar travel book or movie, that obeys Einsteinian physics, that did not need to use the suspended animation or generational ship mode as part of the story itself. Which is hugely limiting.
     
  6. Brybe_Daker

    Brybe_Daker Jedi Padawan star 1

    Registered:
    Nov 21, 2015
    Seriously? Assuming that the dialog (and numerous other elements of the films) are non-diagetic is absolutely absurd. You're over thinking this in the extreme. There is no evidence to support this, either in the films, supporting material, or interviews with Lucas himself. You can feel quite free to view the films in this manner, but certainly don't pretend that that extremely obscure and completely unsupported viewpoint has any bearing whatsoever on rational debate as it pertains to these films.

    Edit: And don't dare compare this to Westron in the Lord of the Rings. Tolkien was a linguist with language creation holding equal importance to world building. It is clearly explained in his notes and papers, as well as the appendices to several of his books, that Westron is a unique language wholly separate from modern english.

    Lucas makes no such similar claims and we are never led, in any logical way, to believe that basic sounds like anything other than modern English.
     
  7. TheOneX_Eleazar

    TheOneX_Eleazar Jedi Knight star 4

    Registered:
    Oct 24, 2013
    It is not absurd or over-thinking. It is common in film to take that approach when it comes to space films. The reason the dominant language is represented by English is because if it wasn't no one would understand it, and you would have to use sub-titles throughout the movie significantly reducing potential profit. The reason they have sound effects in space is because it makes everything seem more exciting. They don't have them speak English because they actually think that is what aliens would speak as their native language, and they don't put sound in space because they think there is actual sound in space. They do it to make the film easier for viewers to consume. What is absurd is thinking if we somehow were transported into the Star Wars galaxy there would actually be sound in space. Even as a little kid my assumption was the sound effects were simply there for dramatic effect because that is the most logical conclusion.
     
  8. CEB

    CEB Force Ghost star 5

    Registered:
    Dec 3, 2014
    Well done. That's quite possibly the most joyless yet pretentious way of somehow managing to say "it's just a film" while simultaneously managing to ridicule the opposing argument on the grounds that their point wouldn't stand up if Star Wars were reality.

    It's maybe the most impenetrable, nonsensical point I've seen made.
     
  9. WebLurker

    WebLurker Jedi Master star 4

    Registered:
    Mar 12, 2016
    Am I really overthinking it? These are pretty standard implied pieces of artistic license in sci-fi movies and TV. It's not even that complicated. How different is it from the background music? Are we supposed to assume that everyone in the Star Wars world is just use to hearing fanfares as they go through life, or do we just go with the simple explanation that only we hear that?

    I do dare to compare it to Tolkien because of the evidence in the movies. The films take place years before the English language was invented, much less in a place where people could have contact with English speakers. In Empire Strikes Back, the movies from then on stopped using English text in favor of . The English text in A New Hope was even changed to the new fonts for the Special Editions (meaning that Lucas himself decided that English didn't belong). In movies, having the text in a different language tells us "English is simply representing the real language, so it feels like you're a native speaker." The Legends tie-ins even went out of their way to explain how the use of written English in the franchise was not "really" English. So, yes, I think it's a pretty logical deduction that Basic is not really English, but rendered as such, to create the illusion that we're native speakers of it.

    Besides, Tolkien's background and credentials have nothing to do with whether the language is "translated" or not. Star Trek has virtually no such grounding, yet is clear on what "English" is actually English and what is translated through the Universal Translator in-universe and what is stuff that only the audience is hearing in English (or Spanish, or French). What matters is the intents, and I've explained why I feel that A.) this is the final intent and why it's not too complex a theory.

    (And in my defense, I think trying to explain why there are humans in the GFFA is overthinking it, regardless of if you favor us being their descendants or them being a race of "humans" from a different origin. At that point, I think you're missing the intent, that these are "real" humans, and we don't know if the franchise takes place in our real world or if it's all in a fictional reality -- like the people being told that this was a long time ago are future generations of the GFFA learning the history.)
     
    Ezon Pin, TheOneX_Eleazar and Valiowk like this.
  10. Xrys T'Ala

    Xrys T'Ala Jedi Padawan star 1

    Registered:
    Jan 13, 2016
    I've not seen mention yet of one bad one and that is energy based blasters blowing people - mostly Stormtroopers - off their feet! Almost all action movies get this wrong, no hand held weapon will cause the person being shot to fall backward - at least not without the firer falling backward too! I realise it's done for dramatic effect, but it seems to be worse in TFA, particularly Chewie's bowcaster. It's also inconsistent because the other energy based weapon, the lightsaber, has no physical force at all and simply cuts through anything like butter. It all does start to remind me of this scene, which isn't a good thing :)

     
  11. Iron_lord

    Iron_lord Chosen One star 10

    Registered:
    Sep 2, 2012
    The bowcaster at least has the excuse of firing metal quarrels enveloped in energy:

    http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Bowcaster
     
    thejeditraitor likes this.
  12. CEB

    CEB Force Ghost star 5

    Registered:
    Dec 3, 2014
    the only "excuse" needed is that it doesn't take place in a world with our rules.
     
  13. WebLurker

    WebLurker Jedi Master star 4

    Registered:
    Mar 12, 2016

    Although the general laws of physics seem to be similar to the real world (at least on the superficial level), excusing where there's obvious scientific advancements to compensate (e.g. hyperdrive, the Holonet, etc.). So, I can see why some people would want to theorize about how some of the sci-fi tech in the series would work to be at least semi-plausible. Besides, the point of this thread is to go beyond the "it's just a movie; it doesn't need to be like real life" argument.
     
    TheOneX_Eleazar likes this.
  14. CEB

    CEB Force Ghost star 5

    Registered:
    Dec 3, 2014
    The point of this thread can be whatever it likes, but for it to be useful it needs to at least come from the starting point of understanding the motives of the people making the films. You're of course correct to say that the laws of physics apply superficially. The science and technology is in service to the story.
    It's fine to analyse deeper, but utterly pointless to use the fake science in Star Wars as a stick with which to beat any of the films
     
    DarthCricketer likes this.
  15. WebLurker

    WebLurker Jedi Master star 4

    Registered:
    Mar 12, 2016

    I feel like you've got it in your head that I'm critical of the series' scientific inaccuracies. I'm actually not since:

    1. I really like this franchise and most of the things that I'm not so fond of are usually in the storytelling.

    2. Just as a spectator, nothing seems "wrong" about the franchise's science. It feels like it complies to the real world (which makes it seem more real) and most of the examples where it doesn't (space travel being like flying in the air, blasters, FTL speeds) can be chalked up to sufficiently advanced tech.

    3. In most cases, I'm pulling out explanations and theories (sound in space being noise only the audience hears, for example) when people are attacking the series.

    4. In some cases, I hate the "official" explanation, for example the plasma ligthtsabers. I don't care how unrealistic it is, I prefer the sabers to be a literal laser sword.
     
    Ezon Pin likes this.
  16. CEB

    CEB Force Ghost star 5

    Registered:
    Dec 3, 2014
    Nah, I wasn't referring to you, more the posts by others who are looking for unrealistic science as a criticism
     
  17. Stoneymonster

    Stoneymonster Force Ghost star 4

    Registered:
    May 8, 2002
    Sure they could. First off, they aren't likely lasers, since we can see them as discrete moving packets, but plasma bolts, which could have significant mass and momentum. Second, they could be ablative (even if pure energy) causing a large and explosive conversion of solid (armor and tissue) to gas, resulting in an equal and opposite reaction from the body. I've worked with lasers that have enough power to make a big boom when they hit a target.
     
  18. Iron_lord

    Iron_lord Chosen One star 10

    Registered:
    Sep 2, 2012
    The writers of Turbolaser Commentaries (which Curtis Saxton consulted when working on Incredible Cross Sections) theorised that the "moving packet" was actually some kind of "tracer" that allowed the gunners to see where they were firing - and the the real work was done by an invisible beam.

    I found the theory a bit dubious though myself. I think the newcanon seems to favor the "plasma bolt" explanation that much of the non-ICS Expanded Universe tended to use..
     
    TheOneX_Eleazar likes this.
  19. Stoneymonster

    Stoneymonster Force Ghost star 4

    Registered:
    May 8, 2002
    It's all pretty silly, but I like the thought experiments this stuff sets off.
     
    TheOneX_Eleazar likes this.
  20. WebLurker

    WebLurker Jedi Master star 4

    Registered:
    Mar 12, 2016

    Okay, sorry if I was oversensitive.

    Yeah, I agree; the idea of an invisible beam with a visible case is a fun piece of speculation, but I prefer the idea that the visible bolt is the real beam, however they want to explain that.
     
    Iron_lord likes this.
  21. Valiowk

    Valiowk Chosen One star 6

    Registered:
    Apr 23, 2000
    Since the focus of this discussion is presently on what general sort of compromises the audience should find reasonable to accept rather than judging individual examples by holding them against other examples, I'll stick a few words in.

    You're right about the bolded parts, which is why everyone who watches Star Wars is willing to accept the existence of lightsabres and faster-than-light travel: because lightsabres are the weapon Lucas uses to convey the idea of "an elegant weapon for a more civilized age" in a more technologically-advanced galaxy, and because Star Wars would not be a story on a galactic scale without some form of faster-than-light travel. That being said, the audience is willing to make this compromise because they understand that this compromise is necessary to tell the story. If the creators of a science fantasy film start to bend the laws of physics without care for whether it's significant to the overarching point that they're trying to get across, then the audience has less of a reason to be willing to make this compromise. If Star Wars starts bending the laws of physics for no reason apart from "we've always bent the laws of physics to some extent, so let's bend the laws of physics like crazy here even though I can easily think of a way to tell roughly the same story without bending the laws of physics so much or having things look awkward on screen", then I would start criticising the "science" in the relevant scene.

    Same here. One of my majors at university was physics and it's fun to do some thought experiments inspired by scenes in Star Wars just to practise what one has learnt, even if the audience is perfectly aware that the films take a lot of artistic licence.
     
  22. Xrys T'Ala

    Xrys T'Ala Jedi Padawan star 1

    Registered:
    Jan 13, 2016
    I wasn't aware of the metal part, but the same applies to guns or other projectiles, pure energy weapons are just even wronger if they seem to cause that effect. What knocks someone backward like we see in the films is kinetic energy. If you give something enough kinetic energy to knock someone backwards off their feet then firing it would do the same to you! This is Newton's third law. Something containing a lot of chemical energy that hits someone can cause them to disintegrate or blow apart due to gas expansion - that is realistic. But that's not what we see. What we see is them always flying backwards away from the shooter in one piece.

    And before someone says "this is a universe where Newton's laws don't apply" the fact that people and objects generally behave like they do in our world means they do apply, or at least are meant to.

    The title of this thread is "the bad science of Star Wars" which is what we are trying to discuss. I'm not a hater, I loved TFA for all its flaws. All the films are full of bad science. Some of it is minor (like why doesn't stormtrooper armour protect you against Ewoks) and some is major (like making lightspeed infinite in normal space, or breaking Newtons laws at human size scale). It's all interesting and worthy of discussion though as the bowcaster reply shows. It shouldn't be taken as criticism of the movie itself.
     
  23. Stoneymonster

    Stoneymonster Force Ghost star 4

    Registered:
    May 8, 2002
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laser_ablation

    See "propulsion".
     
  24. Dagobah Dragonsnake

    Dagobah Dragonsnake Jedi Master star 4

    Registered:
    Feb 7, 2016
    The entire discussion about kinetic affect of plasma is moot since the entire concept of a plasma weapon in not only Star Wars, but any other story that uses it, is a total misunderstanding of plasma characteristics. The force necessary to keep a blob of plasma together while it flies through the air is huge. A plasma that has a self containment component would not then be a plasma. An outside containment would be some secondary field that takes a huge amount of energy and if that kind of energy is available, why are you trying to shoot contained plasma anyway? Plasma is very hot and is not very dense and dissipates quite rapidly unless contained. If you would make it cooler to reduce the containment energy needed, and say about as dense as the surrounding atmosphere, it would be like shooting a balloon.

    So what we see, call it what you may, just does not have a good explanation yet. It is stuff that comes out in hot packets, has high kinetic energy (we need to assume some kind of recoil dissipation in the weapon that absorbs and re-channels the reactive energy), and penetrates, causes some kind of explosive reaction on contact, and has enough mass that at the velocity shown, can knock creatures and humans ass over tincup. We just have not figured out what they have come up with yet, but it is cool.
     
  25. Iron_lord

    Iron_lord Chosen One star 10

    Registered:
    Sep 2, 2012
    The "explosive reaction on contact" might provide the energy needed to throw a target back, even with a fairly low mass and kinetic energy for the projectile.
     
    TheOneX_Eleazar likes this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.