My "scientific" opinion about the film "Interstellar"
Good day, dear readers. I will say right away that I am not a physicist, not a theorist, or anyone else who understands the scientific side of the film. And my post can be "anti-social" among the visitors of this site.
I will not rush words and terms from Wikipedia, scientific THEORIES and formulas, I am not here for that. The post holds for the basis of "I like" and "I think," capital letters mean that this is my opinion (I explained this because in discussions many, for some reason, do not understand this and in order to understand my painfully simple point of view, I did this is a digression). I think you, dear reader, do not understand why I even wrote this post at all and in order not to torment you with guesses - let's start!
Little backstory
')
I saw a poster with this movie on a billboard, I did not hear about it from friends or acquaintances. I thought it would be some kind of blockbuster with a boring whole plot. I try not to watch the trailers and not to read the plots of the films because the initial opinion is made up of these two actions. I like the soul to be a mystery, you go to the film and you do not know what you will get at the end! Yes, maybe, coming out of the hall, I will not like the film, but, in my opinion, this is the most objective position. After seeing the trailer, you, figuratively speaking, watched the movie and then there is no sense to go to the movie itself.
So, going into the hall and sitting comfortably, we (the hall) began to view this masterpiece. The whole movie, I repeat, the whole movie I sat in suspense, at some points I almost tore off the armrests, clinging to them from the tension. And after watching the movie I was interested in astronomy and I read more than one article about it. And after reading the “hot” discussions of this film, I decided to write an article.
Let's go to my "scientific opinion"
There are controversial moments in the film, we will not discuss them, this has long been done . As for the black holes, the main "chips" of the film. On my first request to Wikipedia on the black hole, I read: " Theoretically, the possibility of the existence of such areas of space-time ... ", "The question of the real existence of black holes ... ". Friends, does it seem to me or is it a theory? Hmm, yes, black and white. But on the Internet there is a heated discussion of the moments of this scientific and FANTASTIC film. Excuse me, maybe I am stupid and do not understand something, but people who know astronomy, physics and who do not know, argue on the basis of theories and conjectures. In my opinion, this is absurd ... to argue on the basis of what people have never seen or know. I think this is the same as talking about the emergence of the universe, without having reliable information about how it appeared. In my opinion, there are things that cannot be comprehended by humanity. Films and theories of the type of GTR have inspired the idea that everything in the universe can be comprehended - alas, I have a different opinion.
The same model of Gargantua, for that she and the model, in order to give us any idea of black holes, because we have never seen them, it does not give us a reliable picture of a black hole. The film is based on theories and fiction scriptwriter, the director chose the most attractive, for the viewer, the scenario, and gave this mixture of science and fiction to the viewer. The simpler, the clearer, not all the viewers have doctoral degrees in science and physics. Of course, the film could have been filed entirely from the other side, we could have been given a bunch of scientific theories, formulas and figures, but then the number of views would drop significantly, which would not be beneficial for Nolan. Therefore, the film was released the way we see it. I do not understand people who discuss and criticize films - this is creativity, but in my opinion, it does not have an assessment. Suppose the critic wrote a negative review, the reader read it, and if the film appeals to him, the review does not carry any useful information for the viewer, because he does not agree, and if the viewer agrees with the critic's reply, then again, this gives the viewer ? Unclear. The feeling of satisfaction that someone thinks the same as he? There are no identical people with the same points of view, just as there are no two identical creative ideas, it is impossible to please everyone, these are people. That's why I consider the film to be sci-fi , and not scientific, as I think its opponents see the controversy.
We were perfectly shown how some theories looked like in action, what a black hole would look like and what would happen if we fell into it, we were given reason to think about the fifth dimension. All this is a mixture of theory and fiction. Why do you flood each other with models and theories, and argue on their basis - I just can not understand. I hope it is you, dear reader, that will help me to figure it out; feel free to comment on the article, perhaps you will convince me! Go for it!
I will not rush words and terms from Wikipedia, scientific THEORIES and formulas, I am not here for that. The post holds for the basis of "I like" and "I think," capital letters mean that this is my opinion (I explained this because in discussions many, for some reason, do not understand this and in order to understand my painfully simple point of view, I did this is a digression). I think you, dear reader, do not understand why I even wrote this post at all and in order not to torment you with guesses - let's start!
Little backstory
')
I saw a poster with this movie on a billboard, I did not hear about it from friends or acquaintances. I thought it would be some kind of blockbuster with a boring whole plot. I try not to watch the trailers and not to read the plots of the films because the initial opinion is made up of these two actions. I like the soul to be a mystery, you go to the film and you do not know what you will get at the end! Yes, maybe, coming out of the hall, I will not like the film, but, in my opinion, this is the most objective position. After seeing the trailer, you, figuratively speaking, watched the movie and then there is no sense to go to the movie itself.
So, going into the hall and sitting comfortably, we (the hall) began to view this masterpiece. The whole movie, I repeat, the whole movie I sat in suspense, at some points I almost tore off the armrests, clinging to them from the tension. And after watching the movie I was interested in astronomy and I read more than one article about it. And after reading the “hot” discussions of this film, I decided to write an article.
Let's go to my "scientific opinion"
There are controversial moments in the film, we will not discuss them, this has long been done . As for the black holes, the main "chips" of the film. On my first request to Wikipedia on the black hole, I read: " Theoretically, the possibility of the existence of such areas of space-time ... ", "The question of the real existence of black holes ... ". Friends, does it seem to me or is it a theory? Hmm, yes, black and white. But on the Internet there is a heated discussion of the moments of this scientific and FANTASTIC film. Excuse me, maybe I am stupid and do not understand something, but people who know astronomy, physics and who do not know, argue on the basis of theories and conjectures. In my opinion, this is absurd ... to argue on the basis of what people have never seen or know. I think this is the same as talking about the emergence of the universe, without having reliable information about how it appeared. In my opinion, there are things that cannot be comprehended by humanity. Films and theories of the type of GTR have inspired the idea that everything in the universe can be comprehended - alas, I have a different opinion.
The same model of Gargantua, for that she and the model, in order to give us any idea of black holes, because we have never seen them, it does not give us a reliable picture of a black hole. The film is based on theories and fiction scriptwriter, the director chose the most attractive, for the viewer, the scenario, and gave this mixture of science and fiction to the viewer. The simpler, the clearer, not all the viewers have doctoral degrees in science and physics. Of course, the film could have been filed entirely from the other side, we could have been given a bunch of scientific theories, formulas and figures, but then the number of views would drop significantly, which would not be beneficial for Nolan. Therefore, the film was released the way we see it. I do not understand people who discuss and criticize films - this is creativity, but in my opinion, it does not have an assessment. Suppose the critic wrote a negative review, the reader read it, and if the film appeals to him, the review does not carry any useful information for the viewer, because he does not agree, and if the viewer agrees with the critic's reply, then again, this gives the viewer ? Unclear. The feeling of satisfaction that someone thinks the same as he? There are no identical people with the same points of view, just as there are no two identical creative ideas, it is impossible to please everyone, these are people. That's why I consider the film to be sci-fi , and not scientific, as I think its opponents see the controversy.
We were perfectly shown how some theories looked like in action, what a black hole would look like and what would happen if we fell into it, we were given reason to think about the fifth dimension. All this is a mixture of theory and fiction. Why do you flood each other with models and theories, and argue on their basis - I just can not understand. I hope it is you, dear reader, that will help me to figure it out; feel free to comment on the article, perhaps you will convince me! Go for it!
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/366207/
All Articles