MovieChat Forums > Gravity (2013) Discussion > Passengers got it right what Grvity did ...

Passengers got it right what Grvity did wrong


http://www.space.com/35104-passengers-scifi-movie-nails-space-physics.html



In that scene, George Clooney's character is dangling from a broken tether outside the International Space Station as Sandra Bullock's character holds onto the other end. Clooney's character insists that Bullock's let go of the tether to save her own life at the expense of his. In reality, she could have pulled him to safety in the zero-gravity environment by exerting hardly any effort. Instead, Clooney's character lets go and is flung into space by some mysterious unscientific force.

"Passengers" does not make the same mistake of sloppy tethering physics. When the characters, portrayed by actors Chris Pratt and Jennifer Lawrence, exit the ship in their spacesuits and float with their tethers in zero gravity, they don't appear to break any of Newton's laws of motion. The two tug on their tethers with ease while experiencing weightlessness.



While you might think that crying in weightlessness would send teardrops floating around inside an astronaut's helmet, that wouldn't happen. "Gravity" received some criticism for Bullock's floating teardrops, and "Passengers" does not repeat that mistake.

The problem with Bullock's tears in "Gravity" has little to do with a gravitational force. Rather, the producers did not take into account that water molecules stick together because of surface tension. In the case of an astronaut crying in space, surface tension would keep those tears stuck to the astronaut's cheeks. When Chris Pratt sheds tears during a zero-gravity scene in "Passengers," his tears stay stuck to his face — as they should.






Retard... Pussy... Sinister_prig

reply

:sigh: Not this again...

The scenes from Gravity and Passengers were different. Furthermore, 99% of the audience lacks a proper understanding of mechanics in order to judge if the infamous "tether"-scene in Gravity could be accurate to the Laws of Physics, or not.

In Passengers, Jim was practically motionless when Aurora approached him and got hold of his tether. Furthermore, the tethers were fixed quite firmly and securely onto their bodies, they could indeed handle a tug without any concern of becoming loose. You may also have noticed that when Aurora gives a pull on Jim's tether, it causes Jim's body to move towards Aurora but it also gives Aurora a momentum towards Jim (which can be observed from the fact that Aurora's tether becomes taut.) In the "extra-vehicular activity" scenes in Passengers, they also never showed how Jim and/or Aurora managed to move back towards the spaceship.

In Gravity, Kowalski's body was rapidly moving away from the ISS until Dr. Stone managed to get hold of his tether. The resulting total momentum (and apparently the dampening in the parachute ropes, which wasn't present in the tethers in Passengers) apparently caused both astronauts to rotate around some central axis, since the tether and ropes got taut and stayed taut, thereby requiring a continued pull-force (centripetal force) to keep Kowalski from floating away. (The fact that the starfield in the background was moving when we have a closeup on Kowalski's head, supports the idea that they were indeed still moving.) Furthermore, Dr. Stone wasn't secured firmly to the ISS by a tether on her back; she was connected to the ISS only by those parachute ropes wrapped around her leg, and those ropes might easily slide off her leg and come loose if Dr. Stone increased the momentum by giving another tug at Kowalski's weight. And when that happens, then they would both be lost.


______

reply

Who cares? Gravity was a fantastic movie and brilliant filmmaking. Passengers had potential, but it did do it for me.

reply

Didn't do it for me, I mean.

reply

There is so much bullsh!t in your post I hardly know where to start.
Passengers is just as bad when it comes to physics. Like how it tries to portray two entirely different but completely incompatible versions of artificial gravity.

First is the appearance of gravity through Centrifugal force, being that the ships gravity areas were in a rotating ring structure.

But when the ship loses power, all gravity is lost as the gravity was artificially created by some powered source.

And the tear... the mistake with the tear is not that it drifted away (It was accurately shown sticking to his face) but that it was shown running DOWN his cheek.

The article is correct in that surface tension in zero G would have the tear remain stuck to the face. But it fails to explain why it would run down his face. The tear would remains as an amorphous blob in his eye.

I'm not even going to get into the tether scenes Yurenchu did a fine job of that already.


I joined the Navy to see the world, only to discover the world is 2/3 water!

reply

The_Foxcatchertcher

reply

Passengers is a fantastic movie and is way better than this drivel.

reply

i agree,,,//

reply