Ice Princess: Physics Blunders

In summary: Sorry, I'm not sure where the article you're talking about is from. Are you sure you're looking for something published in a journal? If so, I can't find it. Maybe you're blind? If so, let me know and I can provide a link for you. In general, I think that people who are into science fiction or comic books are more likely to be critical of the physics in movies. It's an escape from reality, after all. I can't speak for everyone, but I believe that the reason why people believe the physics in movies is because the producers try to get it as correct as possible. But as Siddharth has demonstrated
  • #71
ZapperZ said:
I hope you've read this to add to your collection of movie physics mistakes. :)

http://arxiv.org/abs/0707.1167

Zz.
I don't like that link; I think it's very poorly done. It feels like they're trying to make fun of movies, rather than to educate. The Superman section was terrible; once they (for the sake of argument) grant Superman the ability to propel himself through outer space, they
(1) Continue the analysis as if Superman is pushing off of the Earth.
(2) Assert that the director was trying to invoke conservation of angular momentum to reverse the Earth's rotation, instead of, say, friction.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #72
yeah, they pick easy targets... make a bunch of "assumptions", and do math based on their own assumptions (or outside research)... it's funny, I was just reading a thread about why people publish in journals and this sort of captures one of the posts... "publish or perish"
 
  • #73
If you want to read a really great treatise on the Superman situation, check out Larry Niven's article entitled 'Man of Steel; Woman of Kleenex'. It puts ol' Clark's sex life into perspective. (I'm planning to send a copy to Tom Welling sometime. :biggrin:)
 
  • #74
mgb_phys said:
You're trying to understand the plot of Donnie Darko while in a legal state of mind :rolleyes:

that is what normal public, who goes for that movie, is not supposed to do:rofl:
 
  • #75
Danger said:
If you want to read a really great treatise on the Superman situation, check out Larry Niven's article entitled 'Man of Steel; Woman of Kleenex'. It puts ol' Clark's sex life into perspective. (I'm planning to send a copy to Tom Welling sometime. :biggrin:)
One of his best!
 
  • #76
SpitfireAce said:
..."What the bleep do we know"... I thought that movie was garbage... turned quantum mechanics into some kind of mysticism/philosophy/self-empowerment thing
I realize that this movie is anathema to PF'ers and presents many unproven ideas as fact (a quality that can lead to a thread being locked)...but do you think that it has any redeeming qualities at all? Is it total BS from beginning to the end?
 
  • #77
Esnas said:
I realize that this movie is anathema to PF'ers and presents many unproven ideas as fact (a quality that can lead to a thread being locked)...but do you think that it has any redeeming qualities at all? Is it total BS from beginning to the end?

Well I think it was unique, it was panned and bombed on first release and only really did well in becoming a cult classic on it's second release. I can understand why some people thought it was daft, but I loved it personally :smile:
 
  • #78
the director tries to use the principle of conservation of angular momentum when superman flies around the Earth the other way to slow it down and then somehow relates it to time going backwards.
The idea here is that Superman is orbiting faster than the speed of light, and the point of the Earth rotating backwards is to show time moving backwards so the audience expeiriences what Superman is experiencing time wise.

Personally the movies I have issues with are ghost stories, the most common problem is why ghosts can go through walls, but don't fall through the floor. Seems like Casper was one of the few to get this right.
 
  • #79
The Edge (1997) with Anthony Hopkins as a millionaire with a photographic memory, surviving in the Alaskan wilderness with the knowledge he'd gained by reading. The writer didn't bother learning anything about wilderness survival before writing a movie about it, and obviously nobody bothered to check any of his assumptions. Intellectually lazy to an absolutely inexcusable degree. Never mind the silly portrayal of the grizzly as the ultimate carnivore, never mind its psychopathically playing with its prey for days, the smell of blood, etc etc. This thread deals with physics so I'll stick to that.

The group needs to find north on a rainy day. Hopkins' character asks someone for a pin, which he rubs on a piece of cloth to magnetize it, then floats it on a leaf to use it as a compass.
I don't mind mistakes. And I can ignore a cheerful disregard for historical accuracy as practiced, for example, by Shakespeare. But for a writer to not bothering checking his inexpert assumptions . . . it's lazy, it's arrogant, it discredits the art.
 
  • #80
How dare you! You mean Richard III was not a hunch back tyrant who ruled with cruelty and overt menace. It was just a propaganda exercise commissioned by the Tudors to discredit the Yorks? I can't accept that :smile::wink:

The sun rising in the West in Troy, I've done that before, I'm sure the astrologers of the time would have been mighty confused not to mention the men but nary a murmur. That's patently just lazy by the director, no one can make that mistake by accident.
 
  • #81
BillJx said:
The group needs to find north on a rainy day. Hopkins' character asks someone for a pin, which he rubs on a piece otf cloth to magnetize it, then floats it on a leaf to use it as a compass.
I don't mind mistakes. And I can ignore a cheerful disregard for historical accuracy as practiced, for example, by Shakespeare. But for a writer to not bothering checking his inexpert assumptions . . . it's lazy, it's arrogant, it discredits the art.

What's strange (and slightly worrisome) is that a google query for the edge movie needle silk compass yields several sites telling users that silk magnetization really works...
 
<h2>1. What is the premise of "Ice Princess: Physics Blunders"?</h2><p>The premise of "Ice Princess: Physics Blunders" is a fictional story about a young ice princess who discovers her magical powers and must use her knowledge of physics to save her kingdom from an evil sorcerer.</p><h2>2. Is the physics in the story accurate?</h2><p>No, the physics in "Ice Princess: Physics Blunders" is not entirely accurate. While the story incorporates basic principles of physics, it also includes fantastical elements that are not scientifically possible.</p><h2>3. How does the ice princess use physics in the story?</h2><p>The ice princess uses her knowledge of physics to control and manipulate ice and snow. She also uses concepts like force, momentum, and energy to create powerful spells and defeat her enemies.</p><h2>4. Can kids learn about physics from reading this story?</h2><p>While "Ice Princess: Physics Blunders" is not meant to be an educational resource, it can introduce kids to basic concepts of physics in a fun and imaginative way. However, it is important to note that the physics in the story may not be entirely accurate.</p><h2>5. Is "Ice Princess: Physics Blunders" appropriate for all ages?</h2><p>Yes, "Ice Princess: Physics Blunders" is appropriate for all ages. However, younger children may need some guidance to understand the more complex physics concepts presented in the story.</p>

1. What is the premise of "Ice Princess: Physics Blunders"?

The premise of "Ice Princess: Physics Blunders" is a fictional story about a young ice princess who discovers her magical powers and must use her knowledge of physics to save her kingdom from an evil sorcerer.

2. Is the physics in the story accurate?

No, the physics in "Ice Princess: Physics Blunders" is not entirely accurate. While the story incorporates basic principles of physics, it also includes fantastical elements that are not scientifically possible.

3. How does the ice princess use physics in the story?

The ice princess uses her knowledge of physics to control and manipulate ice and snow. She also uses concepts like force, momentum, and energy to create powerful spells and defeat her enemies.

4. Can kids learn about physics from reading this story?

While "Ice Princess: Physics Blunders" is not meant to be an educational resource, it can introduce kids to basic concepts of physics in a fun and imaginative way. However, it is important to note that the physics in the story may not be entirely accurate.

5. Is "Ice Princess: Physics Blunders" appropriate for all ages?

Yes, "Ice Princess: Physics Blunders" is appropriate for all ages. However, younger children may need some guidance to understand the more complex physics concepts presented in the story.

Similar threads

  • Other Physics Topics
Replies
4
Views
6K
  • Other Physics Topics
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Mechanics
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • Sci-Fi Writing and World Building
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
5K
Replies
1
Views
724
  • General Discussion
3
Replies
90
Views
15K
  • General Discussion
Replies
1
Views
8K
  • Art, Music, History, and Linguistics
Replies
1
Views
1K
Back
Top