Does Star Wars fail at science?

Came across this article on Screen Rant nitpicking the ways the franchise missed the mark on scientific accuracy.

Here's the article: 15 Ways Stars Wars Failed at Basic Science

Not that it really matters since the films are in actuality sci-fi fantasy so no one expects them to be accurate but....

Is there anything that really bugs you about the movies use of science?

My pick would have to be Starkiller Base. And the fact all the Ewoks should have died after the Death Star blew up.

 

Me thinks this should probably go in the Saga in-depth section

Once you've got sound in space, anything goes really IMO.

 

12. Mars, Europa, The Moon, various bodies in our solar system are simplistic. Perhaps active geology would make a difference.

11. Ok well, we don't know do we? Besides, in a GFFA there fiction might be a common spreading of life from a precursor, like the Whills, that spread similar material for a dominate, basic humanoid shape.

10. "Sound in space" is you in a theatre being shown a story with dramatic presentation.

9. Ok, I guess.

8. Well, if they are allowing for the tech to suck a star within, antigravity, FTL, forcefields, etc, then why is waste heat a thing they can't manage?

7. Right but again, fictional tech with massive energy expenditure.

6. Wormholes are allowed by Einstein. Unfortunately they not only require planet busting energy levels no one knows how you emit a thingamajig to do so.

5. I think most of the mass of the DS2 explosion imploded to hyperspace rather than exploded enough to kill everyone instantly . Surely they had enough time to get everyone offworld.

4. Blaster are not lasers so this is way off so this is not even criticizing the right thing.

3. Yeah yeah, GL wanted it to sound "spacey" and used parsecs the wrong way. Of course, maybe they label time some other way than with seconds and months and such.

2. Read this wonderful page and go with Model 6, Again they are calling it lasers when it's not lasers.

1. So how could midis get The Force? I mean, sure it's BS but why not take a nod from say The Fifth Element? A lifeform to complicated so as to be beyond technology, maybe touch the Planck length? Yeah, pseudo-science but why blow it off just because you didn't like a scifi science thing in your space fantasy?

 

Star Wars is bad at science

The general rule is "if it doesn't **** with the laws of physics too much, then do it if it seems cool"

 

To fail at something, you have to try. SW doesn't try to science.

 

That would only be true if it were another universe, Other galaxies within this universe are mostly comparable to ours. For example, the relative strength of electromagnetic forces are greater or lesser in some parts of this universe, but the general nature of the force is the same.

 

star wars really has nothing to do with science.

reminds me when i was watching a documentary on the star trek 2 dvd years ago and this production designer is talking about dog fights in space, all upset. 'no you can't do that, the ships are moving way too fast.' i'm thinking dude get over yourself. it's a movie. it's not real life.

 

Well, if it is a different universe, then it is definitely a galaxy VERY FAR away.

 

I'd like to see more planets where they would need to wear breathing apparatus a bit more, and I do go "huh" that every planet seems to have the exact same gravitational pull but it's not enough to take me out of the movies. I try not to think about it too much.

 

Star Wars is not sci-fi.

 

There are few things more scientifically inaccurate/impossible than this in SW

 

Most of the time yes, but SW is not a sci fi its fantasy.

 

#11: My theory is that all "Humanoid" species in Star Wars were artificially created by the Rakatans, for slave labor.

#5: Another theory I have, is that the Empire had a second shield generator, that shielded Endor's surface. It would explain why Endor wasn't fried, and why the Rebels couldn't just bomb the bunker.

#4: Blasters aren't lasers, they're plasma.

I can't really explain the rest, but don't get my wrong, science does matter in Star Wars.

 

#8: Scalar energy weapons have been around since the 30s, and can cause exothermic (extremely hot) or endothermic (extremely cold) reactions, but yes, for every action there is a reaction. However, with scalar energy, it can pass harmlessly through the earth itself, and be "vented" elsewhere (the subject of conspiracy theories about HAARP and mysterious cloud plumes over the oceans). The reasons the Russians quit tinkering with it (according to strategists) is because the solar system is a finely balanced electrical circuit, and the sun's energy output is affected by using scalar weaponry on a large scale, so if that's not accounted for, a solar flare could in theory result, flash frying the globe. So the Star Killer base is, hypothetically, correct in that it's drawing off massive amounts of energy. The waste heat, using the scalar energy reference, could be vented in space. See: http://www.angelfire.com/oz/cv/scalarweapons.html

#7: Ships can and do move quickly and angularly in space, though, again, we dip into the realm of fringe science. Counter-Bary, or anti-gravity technology, has been around since the 30s thanks in large part to TT Brown (despite the mainstream claiming his stuff was debunked, which is, in itself, crap). TT Brown drew from Tesla's research heavily, but essentially, noticed that a capacitor with a high dielectric coefficient would produce thrust when pulsed DC was run through it, and not just a little. He called this electrogravitics. In fact, much of the B-2's flight capability comes directly from Brown's research (ever wonder why the leading edge of the plane is different looking?). Basically, it creates an artificial gravity well in the direction of the positive charge, and when a capacitor constructed in a triarcuate ballistic shape (a flying saucer shape) is electrified, movement in three dimensions is possible, with 90 degree turns instantly being feasible as there is no inertia. That is, you are essentially, just changing the direction you are falling in. You're not being pushed, you're falling. Brown found the flying saucer shape was the most efficient shape to transmit this toroidal vortex gravity well 10+ years before the first UFO was seen in 1947. Oops. See: Secrets of Anti-Gravity Propulsion by Dr. Paul LaViolette. See also: http://starburstfound.org/advanced-propulsion-electrogravitics/

 

Star Wars often defies science as we know it. I don't care because it's a different galaxy and it's fictional.

 

Star Wars is fantasy, not science fiction. It doesn't try to be scientifically accurate, nor need to be as it is in this genre. Mute point IMO.

 

Science fiction is the wellspring of imagination, and imagination is the mother of invention.

Besides, it's interesting to see how Star Wars really does confirm to fringe science and bleeding edge theories, inadvertently or not.

 

Hey now......

 

Oh, I don't mean you, Mr. gigantic worm. I mean the mere fact that everyone steps outside with only oxygen masks on. I suppose you could say the Falcon generates heat. And pressure. And gravity within a short range or something. But there are so many factors there it's not in it

 

Well, the gravity is unforgivable, but the oxygen masks, not so much. Pressure at sea level is only 14.7 psi. So space's vacuum is the equivalent of the suction of a Kirby with the hose on your skin. NASA has shown that level of vacuum is not terribly harmful so long as the mouth and nose are covered. You'd feel your ears pop, and your eyes might dry out a bit. Vacuum like you see at the end of the Alien Resurrection movie where the beast gets sucked out is pure Hollywood, and would require negative vacuum many orders of magnitude greater than is found in space. The other issue, though, is the extreme cold. They would have froze to the ground instantly unless the worm was mammalian/warm blooded and generating its own heat.

Sent from my LGUS992 using Tapatalk

 

The comments about the moisture in the cave do make that seem likely.