bad science
How is a being composed of atoms supposed to shrink down to the subatomic level. Just teaching kids bad science.
shareDude, really?
share
MovieChat Forums > Ant-Man and the Wasp (2018) Discussion > bad science
Bad fiction movie viewer. Time for your time out!
shareBad Science
It may be Faux Science.
It may be Pseudo Science.
It may be Comic-Book Science.
But your own very non informed post fails the very scientific principles used in the most simplistic way:
Science is a systematic enterprise that creates, builds and organizes knowledge in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the universe. Contemporary science is typically subdivided into the natural sciences which study the material world, the social sciences which study people and societies, and the formal sciences like mathematics.Try again! share
Ever notice that whenever there's a big new find or development from a scientist these days it's a person who grew up outside the US and came to school here? Start to understand why. The state of appreciation and understanding of science here among the natives tends to suck.
shareExcuse me as a Brit for agreeing with you but I was looking at a chart the other day that had counts by country of Nobel Laureates and two things occured to me. (1) How many of those winners grew up in the USA. (2) If you look at the figures relative to population then the USA is somewhere behind the UK whilst the Scandinavian countries are far ahead of both of us. Which I thought interesting.
I'm tempted to conclude that both countries are on the road to ignorance and total emersion in Reality TV but once again America is leading the way.
Also, before any one else points it out, I expect a fair number of UK Laureates grew up elsewhere as well.
Yah, good points. How far back did your data go? Could be the Scandinavians piled up a lot of prizes in the early days.
shareIt was just a couple of Wikipedia pages https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Nobel_laureates_per_capita . I guess yet another way to look at this is Scandinavian countries don't have that many prizes but the populations are so tiny.
shareIt's a superhero movie. It takes place in an alternate reality with different physics
shareIf you want to do that, fine. But then set it up. Explain how the physics work in your world. But of course they couldn't be bothered.
It wasn't really smart either. This movie was supposed to appeal to non-traditional fans. I think in a recent poll of which Avenger would you least care if they were deleted from the group Ant-Man won. So they were going for the smarter viewer, but then do things like this that just undercut their own goal.
Yes, a physics discourse will put audiences into the seats.
In any movie of this type, SF, Fantasy, Horror; the best way to teach the physics of the fictional universe is to show it; and this film shows it.
It could have been explained and in surprisingly few words. But they didn't even try.
These superhero movies are a wasteland. I've walked away.
I've said this before in other boards; in a film it is always better to show than to tell. It is unnecessary to tell if it is shown. The film shows that shrinking into a subatomic world is possible. Hence the physics is shown to be possible. One does not need to know the mathematical formulae to understand it.
Show vs. tell is orthogonal to what I'm talking about here. What I'm suggesting could have been shown rather than told. That's off the point.
shareIt was shown. He shrank. What else would you like?
The is a superhero universe. The laws of physics are warped by its very existence. Enjoyment of the medium does not require a dissertation or even a few lines to explain why it works.
While it can be fun to analyze that sort of thing, those discussions belong in reference material, for which there is a wealth in print or on-line.
DO YOU TAKE ANY MEDICATIONS FOR THICK HEADEDNESS?
shareThis conversation is hilarious. Setting aside the fact that it's all wildly speculative fiction, the attempt to apply "logic" to this non-issue fails immediately. The OP seems to be able to accept that a person composed of atoms can shrink, but that the building blocks of the atom cannot.
Really?
It's always amusing to see people who think they've figured some essential truth out, and want to club people over the head with it, in a frenzy of superiority. Priceless.