Hot news -- NO WHOOSH

POSTED BY: Zicsoft
UPDATED: Wednesday, August 7, 2002 10:18
VIEWED: 7480
PAGE 1 of 3

1 2 3 NEXT PAGE

ZICSOFT

Monday, July 22, 2002 2:57 PM

So I run across this article from the Edmonton Journal. The writer is not big on science or science fiction (he says the Serenity "cruises the solar system"!). He's mainly interested in local boy made good Nathan Fillion. While he's at it, he grabs some PR boilerplate from Joss Whedon. Buried in the middle of which is this tidbit: "The scenes in which Serenity ploughs through space are silent."

Yes it's true. They have enough respect for their audience to think they'll understand that there's no sound in a vacuum!

I guess that settles it: Joss Whedon is God!

ZICSOFT

Monday, July 22, 2002 2:59 PM

Oops, forgot the link:

http://www.canada.com/edmonton/edmontonjournal/story.asp?id=%7BEDE8F73
F-87F6-4E64-9D24-28727D5E484C%7D

COMMONSENSEMAN

Monday, July 22, 2002 9:18 PM

Yup it is true, as I said in my post in the Episode Discussion thread, as i have seen an episode already.

I do not think it was the pilot, as it was not the great train robbery episode, but yes indeedie no sound in space!

I think it is a brilliant move.

Out.....................

All are welcome at http://theannex.curvedspaces.com

PANDORA

Monday, July 22, 2002 11:52 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Zicsoft:
Oops, forgot the link:

http://www.canada.com/edmonton/edmontonjournal/story.asp?id=%7BEDE8F73
F-87F6-4E64-9D24-28727D5E484C%7D

Woooooo hoo!

I am most pleased by this news.

Most pleased indeed...

Pandora

"Mrs. Krabappel and Principal Skinner were in the closet making babies and I saw one of the babies
and the baby looked at me." -Ralph Wiggum

MOJOECA

Tuesday, July 23, 2002 12:48 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Zicsoft:

Yes it's true. They have enough respect for their audience to think they'll understand that there's no sound in a vacuum!

There's no oxygen in a vacuum either. Are the big fiery explosions that we see in space movies/shows possible?

I would think that in the instant the ship exploded, the vacuum breaches the hull and quickly surrounds, then the fire is immediately snuffed out. But force of the explosion remains and obliterates the ship. I would love to see that effect put to screen (if my assumption is scientifically accurate).

--- Joe

ZICSOFT

Tuesday, July 23, 2002 1:23 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by mojoeca:
Quote:
Originally posted by Zicsoft:

Yes it's true. They have enough respect for their audience to think they'll understand that there's no sound in a vacuum!

There's no oxygen in a vacuum either. Are the big fiery explosions that we see in space movies/shows possible?

I would think that in the instant the ship exploded, the vacuum breaches the hull and quickly surrounds, then the fire is immediately snuffed out. But force of the explosion remains and obliterates the ship. I would love to see that effect put to screen (if my assumption is scientifically accurate).

--- Joe

An interesting point. I think you're basically right. But it's not like there's no source of oxygen -- there's the life support system of the exploding spaceship. And current spaceships also keep big scads of oxygen around in order to oxidize their rocket fuel. (Roddenbery/Lucas spaceships are more elegant of course!) In any case, I don't believe you'd have those expanding, billowing clouds that Hollywood considers an essential part of an explosion.

In point of fact, most movie/TV explosions are not at all realistic. They always neglect the difference between the speed of light and the speed of sound, no matter how far away the observer is supposed to be. And I don't believe most real-life explosions generate continuing noise or smoke over such an extended period. But I'm talking like I know more than I do.

J

Tuesday, July 23, 2002 1:42 AM

It's actually a female writer, isn't it? But I agree she doesn't seem to be big on SF. Still, I'm not so sure she didn't grasp an essential point with this. I tend to be a sort of purist with SF and see almost no media SF that qualifies as anything but science fantasy. I'm still looking forward to this show, but I'm not sure real hard SF nitpickers will be pleased with it if that's what they're looking for. I'm not sure that the ship doesn't whoosh just because (1) almost all other TV starships do and (2) it lends itself aesthetically to an unromantic quietness. The principle seems to be on cliche-busting and mood setting, more than scientific accuracy. On the one hand, Buffy is obviously a fantasy, yet it's extremely realistic a level deeper down. Yet it's unrealistic all over again when you get to the mechanics of one Slayer spending 6 years at a hellmouth to fight evil that must roam the globe, with a Watchers Council based in England primarily focused on this one girl, etc. etc. I suspect Firefly will follow the same basic structure. It's obviously going to be SF but realistic in its character portrayals regarding how people would behave in the world depicted, which will shed light on our own - but I'm not sure the fundamentals of that world will be logically and scientifically airtight.

CHARLIEBLUE

Tuesday, July 23, 2002 12:00 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by mojoeca:
Quote:
Originally posted by Zicsoft:

Yes it's true. They have enough respect for their audience to think they'll understand that there's no sound in a vacuum!

There's no oxygen in a vacuum either. Are the big fiery explosions that we see in space movies/shows possible?

I would think that in the instant the ship exploded, the vacuum breaches the hull and quickly surrounds, then the fire is immediately snuffed out. But force of the explosion remains and obliterates the ship. I would love to see that effect put to screen (if my assumption is scientifically accurate).

I'm not a physicist by any stretch, but it always made sense to me. It's the stuff (oxygen, fuel) in the ship itself that combusts. That's why they don't leave smoldering remains--they explode, and as soon as the combustibles are finished doing their thing, you've just got plain old debris.

INARASNEWTOY

Tuesday, July 23, 2002 7:40 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Zicsoft:
Buried in the middle of which is this tidbit: "The scenes in which Serenity ploughs through space are silent."

Sounds kinda.....dull to me.

I'm willing to wait and see but i don't know about this.

It worked in 2001 with the full orchastra behind it but those shots were always just establishing shots, setting up a scene not BEING the scene.

Firefly is a whole different beast. It's a war story, heck it's a Star War

if you want to get technical.

How can you have a dramatic battle scene with no sound?

Sure hope Joss knows what he is doing!

INT

One evil at a time, that's the best i can do - Farscape

TINYTIMM

Tuesday, July 23, 2002 8:30 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by mojoeca:
Quote:
Originally posted by Zicsoft:
Yes it's true. They have enough respect for their There's no oxygen in a vacuum either. Are the big fiery explosions that we see in space movies/shows possible?

I would think that in the instant the ship exploded, the vacuum breaches the hull and quickly surrounds, then the fire is immediately snuffed out. But force of the explosion remains and obliterates the ship. I would love to see that effect put to screen (if my assumption is scientifically accurate).
--- Joe

You forget, the ship must carry oxygen in various forms as well as other gas supplies. Chemicals for air/water purification and recycling. A spaceship will be an explosion waiting to happen.

A vacuum cannot breach the hull. The hull must be breached by something, not nothing. ;-> Then the atmosphere IN the ship must BLOW OUT. Depending on the pressure maintained in the hull, somewhere between 7 and 15 psi I presume, 7 being the lowest I can recall being used so far and 15 being roughly earth normal pressure near sea level, and the size of the hole and the total size of the ship, allowing for pressure doors, emergency systems and such, it could be a long time before anything happened.

More likely, in combat a projectile of some kind would penetrate the hull, hit vital tanks of fuel and oxygen and ignite an explosion. This could result in a rather spectacular display of fireworks. For examples look at the pictures of exploding stars at http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/astropix.html
and consider a much smaller scale.

Jeff Timm
Who thinks inexpensive access to space, some balloons filled with hydrogen and oxygen and some chemicals to make pretty colors would give rather unusual and spectacular fireworks.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME