Once again, instead of citing credible sources (which according to you should exist) you point to a random fucking forum that no one gives a shit about.

There are many popular physicists that at first were unsure about the scientific accuracy about the smbh until it was explained to them that if it was spinning quickly enough then it works, said scientists then conceded and agreed.

Either way there is reason to talk to you about it, especially if the science behind gravity didn't make you instantly hate the movie (not to mention the acting, script, etc). Also you don't seem to have any scientific background other than angsty cunts on random forums. Try actually looking into real scientific sources such as academic papers and learning for yourself.

^wow your exhausting, so much better at arguing than actually understanding
first you criticize everything i say even though it's based on a fairly good understand of all the relevant concepts citing a book that i don't think either of us head read that can't possible explain all this stuff.
is this book you're talking about the one from the guy who did all the science for the movie? you don't think it might be biased at all? and he admits that a lot of it is speculation and guesses and must be taking with a grain of salt. Do a bit of research it's quite well know what parts could and couldn't be possible

then when I go and do some research and look at what professionals think with a far better understand than any of us you tell me I have to learn about all the theories around black holes etc myself? btw they're still trying to work out if the whole planet would get ripped to shreds that close to a black hole, the maths is ridiculous
So ill spend years learning about astrophysics/doing maths just so maybe I can finally tell you to stfu about interstellar?

This post was edited by dakariii on Sep 27 2016 08:29am

Your main argument is the water planet near the smbh could never happen, but it has been shown many times by many different scientists that the calculations work. You can have a habitable planet in the safe zone around a smbh, and that amount of time dilation is possible if the smbh is spinning very quickly, which is also possible.

There are other things in the movie way more fantastical than the smbh planets. Like who knows what would happen if we discovered a unified theory of physics, maybe nothing or maybe we could fly mountains into space? Those aspects of the movie lean more towards the fiction side of sci-fi than the things you are complaining about.

Also random forum nerds = professionals to you? Lolk.

Plus the science behind gravity is like so so so so much worse than interstellar. To complain about the science of interstellar and then say you like the movie gravity makes no sense.

This post was edited by Blah58 on Sep 27 2016 04:24pm

I'm not saying gravity was any better but interstellar tried to present itself as having working it all out with real science which Is why I felt a few things were a bit random. I guess you had the same problem with gravity

I haven't even mentioned the most unlikely stuff because I put them it safely in the realm of sci-fi. Being able to solve gravity is theoretically possible but I think it would take a very long time to convert it into such useful practical application, I guess you could say their science/preparation was already there they just needed the final step. Or survive falling into a black hole (although I explain this by saying they took him away to bulk before he crosses the event horizon but it doesn't look like that in the movie)

And yes I find that forum rather useful there are a lot of professionals university lecturers etc posting there. Physicists need a place to congregate and share idea online just like us but it isn't here

Ok with the waves it could theoretically work but they've had to do a lot of fudging, apparently the waves stay still and the planet moves under them but it's also rocking backwards and forwards (for exactly the one hour they spend on the planet in the movie so you don't see it change direction) Then they have to on a flat island or something to cause tsunami effects
As for lots of scientists having done the calculations that's rubbish, this is hugely theoretical and no-one knows if it could actually work
And my biggest problem was it being able to end up in that situation in the first place that close to the black hole and still be habitable, apparently it's using the black hole for heat/light also
Then there's stuff that's known not to be true even by thorne like landing on the planet, in the film they slingshot around a neutron star but couldn't work like with the speed change needed to land on planet apparently, needed an earth size black hole but nolan didn't want to use it or something


Like i said I appreciate the effort but it's better for the 'omg wormholes and time travel!' people as a lot of the relatively stuff etc is done very well but not so much with the planets

Blah isn't happy in this forum unless he's writing argumentative essays is he