On 7/25/2016 6:45 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Sun, 24 Jul 2016 07:49:25 +0100, Stephen wrote:
>
>> I have seen Star Wars. It is one of the films that drive me non linear
>> with their orbital mechanics.
>
> Interestingly, we just watched TFA again last night, and my wife and I
> were remarking on the physics of flight they used with the ships.
> Conservation of momentum seemed to be applied in a lot of cases, which
> was interesting to see.
>

But did they use orbital mechanics where thrusting forward goes outwards?

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 7/25/2016 1:06 AM, clipka wrote:
> Am 25.07.2016 um 01:18 schrieb Stephen:
>
>> Except for "Les visiteurs". A 1993 French film that if you liked
>> Blackadder you will love. Or maybe not. :)
>
> I think I've seen it, a while ago. Medieval knights somehow thrown into
> our time, right?
>
> I don't remember if I ever saw the complete movie, but from what I
> remember I did in fact like it.
>

It must have been good. It kept me awake.


>> Or "Le Dîner de Cons" that might suit your humour.
>
> Don't know it.
>

I think it is worth looking up. A French comedy of errors. Worthy of 
Molière.


>>> Oh, and there seems to be a 2009 remake.
>>
>> So I believe. I remember when it came out.
>> I want to keep my (false) memories. ;)
>
> Can't blame you. The remake appears to be more or less the veggie
> variant of the standard Zombie Apocalypse diet they feed you at every
> street corner these days.
>

Good, I'm glad I missed it.

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Am 26.07.2016 um 12:49 schrieb Stephen:
> On 7/25/2016 6:45 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> On Sun, 24 Jul 2016 07:49:25 +0100, Stephen wrote:
>>
>>> I have seen Star Wars. It is one of the films that drive me non linear
>>> with their orbital mechanics.
>>
>> Interestingly, we just watched TFA again last night, and my wife and I
>> were remarking on the physics of flight they used with the ships.
>> Conservation of momentum seemed to be applied in a lot of cases, which
>> was interesting to see.
> 
> But did they use orbital mechanics where thrusting forward goes outwards?

Actually, it's a /lot/ more complicated than that.
In this context, I highly recommend Kerbal Space Program ;)

Post a reply to this message

On 7/26/2016 7:21 PM, clipka wrote:
> Am 26.07.2016 um 12:49 schrieb Stephen:
>> On 7/25/2016 6:45 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>>> On Sun, 24 Jul 2016 07:49:25 +0100, Stephen wrote:
>>>
>>>> I have seen Star Wars. It is one of the films that drive me non linear
>>>> with their orbital mechanics.
>>>
>>> Interestingly, we just watched TFA again last night, and my wife and I
>>> were remarking on the physics of flight they used with the ships.
>>> Conservation of momentum seemed to be applied in a lot of cases, which
>>> was interesting to see.
>>
>> But did they use orbital mechanics where thrusting forward goes outwards?
>
> Actually, it's a /lot/ more complicated than that.
> In this context, I highly recommend Kerbal Space Program ;)
>

I may have understated my definition. :)

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 26 Jul 2016 11:49:48 +0100, Stephen wrote:

> On 7/25/2016 6:45 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> On Sun, 24 Jul 2016 07:49:25 +0100, Stephen wrote:
>>
>>> I have seen Star Wars. It is one of the films that drive me non linear
>>> with their orbital mechanics.
>>
>> Interestingly, we just watched TFA again last night, and my wife and I
>> were remarking on the physics of flight they used with the ships.
>> Conservation of momentum seemed to be applied in a lot of cases, which
>> was interesting to see.
>>
>>
> But did they use orbital mechanics where thrusting forward goes
> outwards?

I'd have to watch again more closely, but I believe so, at least with the 
smaller ships. The capital ships are a lot harder to tell.

Jim



-- 
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and 
besides, the pig likes it." - George Bernard Shaw

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 26 Jul 2016 20:21:39 +0200, clipka wrote:

> Am 26.07.2016 um 12:49 schrieb Stephen:
>> On 7/25/2016 6:45 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>>> On Sun, 24 Jul 2016 07:49:25 +0100, Stephen wrote:
>>>
>>>> I have seen Star Wars. It is one of the films that drive me non
>>>> linear with their orbital mechanics.
>>>
>>> Interestingly, we just watched TFA again last night, and my wife and I
>>> were remarking on the physics of flight they used with the ships.
>>> Conservation of momentum seemed to be applied in a lot of cases, which
>>> was interesting to see.
>> 
>> But did they use orbital mechanics where thrusting forward goes
>> outwards?
> 
> Actually, it's a /lot/ more complicated than that.
> In this context, I highly recommend Kerbal Space Program ;)

+100K ;)

Jim



-- 
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and 
besides, the pig likes it." - George Bernard Shaw

Post a reply to this message

On 7/27/2016 12:26 AM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Jul 2016 11:49:48 +0100, Stephen wrote:
>
>> On 7/25/2016 6:45 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>>> On Sun, 24 Jul 2016 07:49:25 +0100, Stephen wrote:
>>>
>>>> I have seen Star Wars. It is one of the films that drive me non linear
>>>> with their orbital mechanics.
>>>
>>> Interestingly, we just watched TFA again last night, and my wife and I
>>> were remarking on the physics of flight they used with the ships.
>>> Conservation of momentum seemed to be applied in a lot of cases, which
>>> was interesting to see.
>>>
>>>
>> But did they use orbital mechanics where thrusting forward goes
>> outwards?
>
> I'd have to watch again more closely, but I believe so, at least with the
> smaller ships. The capital ships are a lot harder to tell.
>

I imagine it would be hard to see. Unless it is a set scene.



-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On Wed, 27 Jul 2016 07:11:22 +0100, Stephen wrote:

> On 7/27/2016 12:26 AM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> On Tue, 26 Jul 2016 11:49:48 +0100, Stephen wrote:
>>
>>> On 7/25/2016 6:45 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 24 Jul 2016 07:49:25 +0100, Stephen wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I have seen Star Wars. It is one of the films that drive me non
>>>>> linear with their orbital mechanics.
>>>>
>>>> Interestingly, we just watched TFA again last night, and my wife and
>>>> I were remarking on the physics of flight they used with the ships.
>>>> Conservation of momentum seemed to be applied in a lot of cases,
>>>> which was interesting to see.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> But did they use orbital mechanics where thrusting forward goes
>>> outwards?
>>
>> I'd have to watch again more closely, but I believe so, at least with
>> the smaller ships. The capital ships are a lot harder to tell.
>>
>>
> I imagine it would be hard to see. Unless it is a set scene.

True.  We were just happy to see conservation of momentum in play as the 
Falcon changed its thrust vectors. :)

Jim



-- 
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and 
besides, the pig likes it." - George Bernard Shaw

Post a reply to this message

Worst thing for me about SciFi movies is the obligatory inclusion of romance, if
that's the right word to use.

The idea of romance, circa 13th century, was originally about adventures of
knights and their heroics, so I'm not sure who to blame on the later meaning.

Although movies like Metropolis (a favorite of mine) and Forbidden Planet
probably couldn't exist without the romance side. The latter I could imagine
possible without, I guess.

I went to see Star Trek Beyond last week and of course immediately there was the
Spock and Uhura thing going on. I'm used to ignoring the romance factor, but it
was an integral part of the story so ignoring that was impossible. Especially
when I heard whimpering cries from a young girl behind me during the rescue of
Uhura by Spock.

The Day The Earth Stood Still also a classic to me yet so close to being bad
just because of the woman meets alien idea there. Well, more so because there
was another man in her life to begin with. Ugh. The remake really lost me in
that regard and so I was depending on the special effects to balance it out.
Whereas special effects were only rudimentary in the original.

Seriously though, it's as if every movie must be made with a relationship in it.
Not what I'm thinking concerning science fiction.

There was an old SciFi movie The Monolith Monsters about rocks growing out of
control after a meteor hit, now that really had my interest as a kid because of
a more realistic idea of bizarre interactions between space rocks and Earth.
Very plausible to me.

And another movie of the same time, The Blob was likewise of interest for that
reason. The boyfriend+girlfriend relationship in that wasn't anything to me but
maybe it was meant to be crucial for the humanity against monster thing. I
believe it was overshadowed by it being a whole town instead of their
relationship, or "romance".

2001: A Space Odyssey really set aside any romantic notions for that story, not
quite so for the sequel 2010.

Obviously I expect movie genres to stay true to their status, SciFi being only
science and fiction, and unfortunately Metropolis probably didn't help divide
out the current concept of romance.

Another movie, Andromeda Strain was very sterile. Pardon the pun!

Post a reply to this message

Am 02.08.2016 um 19:39 schrieb omniverse:

> Seriously though, it's as if every movie must be made with a relationship in it.
> Not what I'm thinking concerning science fiction.

Most movies you've ever heard of are produced to fit the broadest
possible audience, so you have a bit of everything in there: A
non-everyday background setting (in this case SciFi), action, romance,
mystery, witty dialogs, famous actors, special effects, and nowadays of
course a zombie horde or two.

The trick there is to cater to the legion of people who fall outside the
primary target audience, but would be willing to watch the movie
nonetheless for the sake of accompanying a friend, provided the movie
won't bore them to death entirely.

Now consider that one big share of this secondary target audience is
motivated by love, and it should be no surprise that romance is
ubiquitous in major movies of all genres -- /especially/ in brain-heavy
ones like genuine SciFi.

Post a reply to this message