Christopher Nolan's INTERSTELLAR (11.7.14)

[Tomriddle]

I mean, I did say things like "time travel very likely can't happen," and I guess you can call that speculation, but I mean "very likely" in the sense of "the overwhelming majority of the physics literature suggests/experts in the field believe," not in the sense of "this is my gut feeling."

[Benny003]

Originally Posted by Tomriddle

I mean, I did say things like "time travel very likely can't happen," and I guess you can call that speculation, but I mean "very likely" in the sense of "the overwhelming majority of the physics literature suggests/experts in the field believe," not in the sense of "this is my gut feeling."

You also said wormholes can't exist (but you did later caveat the statement). Regardless, I'm not sure what your point was of your original statement. It sounded like you were disputing the time travel choices that Nolan made in Interstellar because there is some evidence or theories out there that would contradict those choices. The movie wasn't a documentary, so I'm not sure why it matters.

[Absolute34]

Originally Posted by Tomriddle

I mean, I did say things like "time travel very likely can't happen," and I guess you can call that speculation, but I mean "very likely" in the sense of "the overwhelming majority of the physics literature suggests/experts in the field believe," not in the sense of "this is my gut feeling."

Even though there is no sufficient evidence of extra dimensions invisible to the naked eye, I find the literature discussing the possibility of them existing (including time as a 4th and all the way up to a plausible 11) too convincing. Or maybe I just want to believe.

[Tomriddle]

Originally Posted by Benny003

You also said wormholes can't exist (but you did later caveat the statement).

I said wormholes don't exist, which I don't think any serious scientist disputes-- there is no mechanism which results in a wormhole. They can't exist in the sense that if you did have a wormhole, it would vanish instantly, before even light could make it through. Which effectively means they can't exist.

In Kip Thorne's work he investigates what happens if this wasn't the case, but it's sort of just a thought exercise (because it is the case, and everyone including Kip Thorne knows that).

Originally Posted by Benny003

Regardless, I'm not sure what your point was of your original statement. It sounded like you were disputing the time travel choices that Nolan made in Interstellar because there is some evidence or theories out there that would contradict those choices. The movie wasn't a documentary, so I'm not sure why it matters.

Oh no, not at all, I'm not one of those asshole . I truly love everything about Interstellar, it's my favorite movie of last year, but I just think it's important to remember that Interstellar is still science fiction.

Originally Posted by Absolute34

Even though there is no sufficient evidence of extra dimensions invisible to the naked eye, I find the literature discussing the possibility of them existing (including time as a 4th and all the way up to a plausible 11) too convincing. Or maybe I just want to believe.

Extra dimensions are a certainty, but they aren't "spatial" dimensions like the up/down, left/right/, forward/back. Those three dimensions are "classical" dimensions and are geometrically Euclidean. Additional dimensions would be non-Euclidean, which is an entirely different ballgame.

The point is, time isn't just another dimension, like left/right or whatever. It's entirely different.

[Absolute34]

So you are saying time cannot be traversed, correct?

[Tomriddle]

Originally Posted by Absolute34

So you are saying time cannot be traversed, correct?

Obviously time can be traversed forwards, but I'm saying it's very, very unlikely that you can travel back in time.

We can't know for certain because physics is thus far incomplete, but my understanding is there's only a couple (very few, very rare, very "tiny quantum particle in a black hole"-ish) scenarios where physics hasn't already ruled out time travel. And it's expected that quantum gravity will rule these out as well.

[Benny003]

Originally Posted by Tomriddle

Oh no, not at all, I'm not one of those asshole . I truly love everything about Interstellar, it's my favorite movie of last year, but I just think it's important to remember that Interstellar is still science fiction.

Yes, fair enough. I agree that it's valid to not take Interstellar's scientific ideas as fact.

[Absolute34]

Originally Posted by Tomriddle

Obviously time can be traversed forwards, but I'm saying it's very, very unlikely that you can travel back in time.

We can't know for certain because physics is thus far incomplete, but my understanding is there's only a couple (very few, very rare, very "tiny quantum particle in a black hole"-ish) scenarios where physics hasn't already ruled out time travel. And it's expected that quantum gravity will rule these out as well.

So why does time only flow in one certain direction (forward)? What makes reversal so complicated?

[Tiduwho]

What is an idea or theory of what a non-euclidean dimension would be like? Its non-spatial...so what exactly would it be then?

[Absolute34]

Originally Posted by Tiduwho

What is an idea or theory of what a non-euclidean dimension would be like? Its non-spatial...so what exactly would it be then?

This is exactly what has me so perplexed. I cannot even conceptualize something being non-spatial, just like I cannot conceptualize what dark matter actually is.

[Dramageek]

Originally Posted by Absolute34

So why does time only flow in one certain direction (forward)? What makes reversal so complicated?

I'm no physicist, but I found this to be a great article to shed some light on this subject.

http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20150...y-run-forwards

[Absolute34]

Originally Posted by Dramageek

I'm no physicist, but I found this to be a great article to shed some light on this subject.

http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20150...y-run-forwards

Thanks for that link. It provides a great explanation of entropy.

[Tomriddle]

Originally Posted by Absolute34

So why does time only flow in one certain direction (forward)? What makes reversal so complicated?

I think it just follows from the general relativity equations/principles? I don't know exactly what the problem is though

Originally Posted by Tiduwho

What is an idea or theory of what a non-euclidean dimension would be like? Its non-spatial...so what exactly would it be then?

It's just a mathematical construct... the best way to understand it is that "non-euclidean space" doesn't really describe a variety of space, it describes a variety of equations.

Space is three dimensional because you need three coordinates to specific a point in space. But that's not all you can do-- given two triplets of coordinates, I can find the distance between them, using the distance formula. I can also find angles between lines, using the angle formula. You get the idea.

If I wanted to make my space non-euclidean, all I would just change the formulas for the distance between two points, or the formula for the angle between two lines, into some other kind of formula. So I would still have all the same triplets of coordinates, but my computations for the relationships between them would be different.

[Benny003]

Originally Posted by Dramageek

I'm no physicist, but I found this to be a great article to shed some light on this subject.

http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20150...y-run-forwards

Originally Posted by Absolute34

Thanks for that link. It provides a great explanation of entropy.

Yeah, that was interesting. The linked article from there that discussed the Large Hadron Collider starting back up this spring was also interesting.

http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-31162725

[TheLastStop123]

just watched this again for the second time. such a great movie, liked it even more on the re-watch. do you guys think that Nolan is planning a sequel?

[javierm27]

Originally Posted by TheLastStop123

just watched this again for the second time. such a great movie, liked it even more on the re-watch. do you guys think that Nolan is planning a sequel?

I would say no, Nolan doesn't really do sequels.

[TwoStep2888]

yeah aside from the Batmans, he seems to like standalone projects

[Tomriddle]

I'd rather see him pursue another original project, and I think that would be his preference too

[GSUdawg521]

FYI, I've had the bluray on my Amazon wishlist since it came out just thinking I'd eventually get it. Just noticed today it's dropped down to 12.99, so I bought it.

[Benny003]

Originally Posted by GSUdawg521

FYI, I've had the bluray on my Amazon wishlist since it came out just thinking I'd eventually get it. Just noticed today it's dropped down to 12.99, so I bought it.

Yeah, about to do the same. Got the alert on Sunday.

[jrkarger]

Originally Posted by mthawk07

If we want to get technical here, Cooper DID try to end his life by sacrificing himself into the black hole so that Anne Hathaway could make it to the next planet.

I just finally saw this for the first time. I like it up until I figured out that they were going to have Coop somehow signal Murph back at the house.

Was I the only one that thought Coop actually died at some point in the black hole and everything after (which the exception of Hathaway on Edmund's planet) was him hallucinating?

Otherwise, why would Matt Damon have gone on that whole repeated diatribe RE seeing your kids before you die? I thought that was Nolan's foreshadowing device.

[recentlyJTR41]

Originally Posted by jrkarger

I just finally saw this for the first time. I like it up until I figured out that they were going to have Coop somehow signal Murph back at the house.

Was I the only one that thought Coop actually died at some point in the black hole and everything after (which the exception of Hathaway on Edmund's planet) was him hallucinating?

Otherwise, why would Matt Damon have gone on that whole repeated diatribe RE seeing your kids before you die? I thought that was Nolan's foreshadowing device.

Weebey.gif


Never thought of it like that. Could I say that Murph actually was dead when they met again and they were in "heaven" or he was greeting her as she died of old age?

[jrkarger]

Originally Posted by recentlyJTR41

Weebey.gif


Never thought of it like that. Could I say that Murph actually was dead when they met again and they were in "heaven" or he was greeting her as she died of old age?

I took it as him hallucinating greeting her as she died of old age. But, that's an interesting take with the heaven perspective. The view from the porch of the house did have a very "go toward the shining light" aspect to it.

[recentlyJTR41]

Originally Posted by jrkarger

I took it as him hallucinating greeting her as she died of old age. But, that's an interesting take with the heaven perspective. The view from the porch of the house did have a very "go toward the shining light" aspect to it.

Indeed. This movie has some interesting theories. I think he still lived, but it's still fun to talk about.

[dobyblue]

Agreed that he lived, I think the fact they took the time to explain the science on the aging issue shows that's what they intended.

[Route_2]

Not for everyone, but if you're interested this is a good read (if not a little dense for my measly brain at times) on the science behind the movie. Everything past the black hole is just theory (obviously), but it may help to make sense of what they were thinking when telling the story. It's been too long since I've read it to offer my synopsis, unfortunately.

https://www.amazon.com/Science-Inter...+by+kip+thorne

[recentlyJTR41]

Originally Posted by Route_2

Not for everyone, but if you're interested this is a good read (if not a little dense for my measly brain at times) on the science behind the movie. Everything past the black hole is just theory (obviously), but it may help to make sense of what they were thinking when telling the story. It's been too long since I've read it to offer my synopsis, unfortunately.

https://www.amazon.com/Science-Inter...+by+kip+thorne

Thanks for posting!

Still a top 5 maybe 3 movie for me all time (outside of comedies). Odd to think two of my top 5 movies of all time are fairly recent (Interstellar and Mad Max Fury Road). Been lucky lately