Is the physics in Angels & Demons completely off the mark?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter DaveC426913
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Angels Book
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the portrayal of physics in Dan Brown's novel "Angels & Demons," examining its accuracy and the implications of its fictional elements. Participants critique the scientific concepts presented in the book, particularly regarding antimatter and the Big Bang, while also reflecting on the overall quality of the writing and its reception in popular culture.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Exploratory
  • Meta-discussion

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express skepticism about the plausibility of a powerful bomb being contained in a small cannister, questioning the narrative's reliance on unrealistic technology.
  • Concerns are raised about the depiction of particle physics, with some arguing that the book misrepresents the Big Bang as a creation of particles from energy, while others suggest this fits within the realm of science fiction liberty.
  • One participant calculates the explosive force of the bomb differently than the book suggests, indicating a potential discrepancy in the narrative's scientific accuracy.
  • There is a discussion about the expectations of realism in popular fiction, with some asserting that readers should not expect scientific accuracy in thrillers.
  • Several participants critique the writing style and narrative consistency of Dan Brown, suggesting that his novels tend to repeat themes and concepts.
  • Some express enjoyment of the book despite its flaws, indicating a willingness to overlook scientific inaccuracies for the sake of entertainment.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally disagree on the quality of the physics presented in the book, with some finding it severely lacking while others are more forgiving. There is no consensus on the overall merit of the novel, as opinions vary widely regarding its entertainment value versus its scientific fidelity.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the portrayal of physics and technology in the book may not align with established scientific understanding, and there are unresolved questions about the implications of the fictional elements presented.

Who May Find This Useful

Readers interested in the intersection of fiction and science, particularly in the context of popular literature and its portrayal of scientific concepts.

  • #31
TheStatutoryApe said:
It is the eternal suffering of we the literary geeks to see that common people prefer common literature! ;-p

HAHAHA! That's brilliant! :biggrin:

My apologies to Mr. Pratchett!
I am only about halfway through the discworld series. Which is your favourite?
So far my favourite has been Small Gods and Good Omens, of course, is my favourite collaborative effort.

All of the ones that have Sam Vimes in them! I love his cliche'd "super-sergeant" image. :smile:
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
GeorginaS said:
My cat is adept at reading in low light. It's a talent I value highly while I'm driving. ;)

It seems that you have a resourceful, talking cat; must be a descendant of Puss from Puss in Boots.
 
  • #33
George Jones said:
It seems that you have a resourceful, talking cat; must be a descendant of Puss from Puss in Boots.

She's a marvel. And she isn't a fan of Dan Brown's either.
 
  • #34
Well Dave, if you disliked the book, try the movie, there's much less about the physics (faulty or not) and, best of all, no digital countdown.
 
  • #35
binzing said:
Well Dave, if you disliked the book, try the movie, there's much less about the physics (faulty or not) and, best of all, no digital countdown.

Assuming that Dave is really, really determined to like it one way or the other?
 
  • #36
I thought I might like the Da Vinci Code movie but couldn't even finish watching it.
 
  • #37
GeorginaS said:
Assuming that Dave is really, really determined to like it one way or the other?

I enjoyed both, but hey, that's just me. If I wanted to read about physics, or religion, I'd grab a physics book, or Bible (insert Quran, Torah, ancient Mayan codices, lol)
 
Last edited:
  • #38
GeorginaS said:
Assuming that Dave is really, really determined to like it one way or the other?
I expect a lot more from a book, but I can see it being an enjoyable action romp. Well, except for the stupid timer device. That'll just tick me off.
 
  • #39
DaveC426913 said:
Well, except for the stupid timer device. That'll just tick me off.

:smile:
 
  • #40
DaveC426913 said:
tdVC

Nice use of upper and lower case! :)
 
Last edited:
  • #41
I enjoyed the book even though the physics behind it is a bit silly.

The countdown on the canister however is the worst bit of the book in my opinion. It makes no sense to have a battery that dies in exactly 24 hours. How easy would it have been to have had the bad guy put the canister in a device that emits a magnetic field in exactly 24 hours, disrupting the magnetic bottle and thus causing the same explosion?

In the movie, it's even worse. There is no countdown on the timer (only a few bars showing how much battery life left), but they still somehow know exactly when the canister is going to explode... What??

But let's not get started on the movie, it is so much worse... They leave out half the plot!
In the book, the camerlengo (bad guy) is the bad guy because he found out he is the Pope's son (of course, being a Pope he should not have been able to get a son). He murdered the pope for that and had the anti-matter canister stolen... In the movie, there is no mention of this. The camerlengo has NO motive at all to do what he did, and that is not even explained...
 
  • #42
Nick89 said:
I enjoyed the book even though the physics behind it is a bit silly.

The countdown on the canister however is the worst bit of the book in my opinion. It makes no sense to have a battery that dies in exactly 24 hours. How easy would it have been to have had the bad guy put the canister in a device that emits a magnetic field in exactly 24 hours, disrupting the magnetic bottle and thus causing the same explosion?

In the movie, it's even worse. There is no countdown on the timer (only a few bars showing how much battery life left), but they still somehow know exactly when the canister is going to explode... What??

But let's not get started on the movie, it is so much worse... They leave out half the plot!
In the book, the camerlengo (bad guy) is the bad guy because he found out he is the Pope's son (of course, being a Pope he should not have been able to get a son). He murdered the pope for that and had the anti-matter canister stolen... In the movie, there is no mention of this. The camerlengo has NO motive at all to do what he did, and that is not even explained...


Actually, in the movie, the camerlengo is in it to become the Pope, so they changed and shortened it to fit in a movie.
 

Similar threads

New, on a physics hiatus, , really any physics psychologists?
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Mathematica This Week's Finds in Mathematical Physics (Week 246)
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
PF Fan Fiction: Mathematicians in Love
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
Do Movies Teach Us Realistic Life Skills?
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
10K
Graduate Hydrogen-Boron Plasma Toroid Fusion
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
7K
Graduate Hydrogen-boron High Density Plasma Toroid Fusion
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K