Revolution: Will Eric Kripke and JJ Abrams Strike Gold?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Fredrik
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Revolution
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The forum discussion centers around the TV show "Revolution," created by Eric Kripke and produced by JJ Abrams, which premiered on September 17. Participants express skepticism regarding the show's premise, where all technology ceases to function, questioning the plausibility of such a scenario. Many users draw parallels to other canceled sci-fi shows like "Flash Forward" and "Terra Nova," predicting a similar fate for "Revolution." Concerns are raised about the lack of scientific accuracy and character development, with some users noting that the show fails to provide a convincing explanation for the technological blackout.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of narrative structure in television series
  • Familiarity with the works of Eric Kripke and JJ Abrams
  • Knowledge of common themes in science fiction
  • Awareness of audience expectations in post-apocalyptic storytelling
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the impact of technological failure on society in post-apocalyptic fiction
  • Explore the narrative techniques used in successful sci-fi series like "The Expanse"
  • Analyze viewer reception and cancellation patterns of recent sci-fi shows
  • Investigate the role of scientific consultants in television production
USEFUL FOR

Fans of science fiction television, writers seeking to understand audience expectations, and producers looking to create compelling narratives in the genre.

  • #31


Evo said:
So, why do some people have electricity?
They don't "have electricity". They have devices that can temporarily reverse the effect of the technology that's causing the blackout.

pantaz said:
I was disappointed the moment they showed the airliner going down in a flat-spin. Basic aerodynamics failed, too?
This sort of thing doesn't bother me much.

pantaz said:
The teacher, in his mini-rant to his students stated that even batteries don't work. So it's not just electrical devices, but specific chemical reactions?
He didn't say anything about chemistry. He just said that batteries don't work. Maybe it's just the metal parts that no longer conduct the current.

Ryan_m_b said:
Tap-dancing past the fact that "nanites" are the modern day folk-law equivalent of spells, demons and djinn it seems a stretch that would be so restricted to draining power from human technology only and still be so successful.
Totally. :smile: But compared to the alternatives...

Ryan_m_b said:
As for changing the properties of metals that sounds like something that would instantly kill most life. Hard to get your metalloproteins to work when their cofactor's properties have significantly changed.
This is something I don't even understand. My knowledge of chemistry is unfortunately negligible. But I'll take your word for it.

Ryan_m_b said:
My bet is that the answer to this show (if it could be called one) is going to be:

WILLING SUSPENSION OF DISBELIEF
I bet that whatever the explanation is, by the time we learn it, we will already have seen at least one episode that contradicts it.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32


senserd said:
Hi, I'm new here. Just watched the premiere and was looking online for some discussion of the physics. After watching the show, I tried to come up with a plausible explanation. I had an idea and wanted others to poke holes in it to see if it was any good.

My hypothesis is that all the electrons and protons have become their antimatter counterparts, positrons and antiprotons. This means that current would still flow, which would allow for chemical reactions, but the charges would be reversed.

Now that I think about it some more, there are some electricity based things that should continue to work even if that were the case.

Thoughts? Any feedback is welcome.
Welcome to the forum.

If every particle in the entire universe was replaced by its antiparticle, I think things would be pretty much the same. I could be wrong, but at least I don't immediately see a problem. If only some particles are replaced this way, e.g. every particle on Earth, but not the rest of the universe, then there would be problems. For example, every meteor would cause a huge explosion. I think they would blow up as the enter the atmosphere, and the radiation from these explosions would wipe out all life on Earth, except maybe deep under ground.
 
  • #33


Fredrik said:
Totally. :smile: But compared to the alternatives...
Lol true.
Fredrik said:
This is something I don't even understand. My knowledge of chemistry is unfortunately negligible. But I'll take your word for it.
Metalloproteins are proteins that have a metal ion cofactor, a cofactor is a chemical compound bound to a protein necessary for it to work (that is not itself a protein). So if the properties of metals changed significantly I guess metalloproteins would alter their behaviour and as the most famous metalloprotein is an oxygen transporter...not looking good for life :-p
Fredrik said:
I bet that whatever the explanation is, by the time we learn it, we will already have seen at least one episode that contradicts it.
Yup. I'm sure it won't be internally consistent.
senserd said:
Hi, I'm new here. Just watched the premiere and was looking online for some discussion of the physics. After watching the show, I tried to come up with a plausible explanation. I had an idea and wanted others to poke holes in it to see if it was any good.

My hypothesis is that all the electrons and protons have become their antimatter counterparts, positrons and antiprotons. This means that current would still flow, which would allow for chemical reactions, but the charges would be reversed.

Now that I think about it some more, there are some electricity based things that should continue to work even if that were the case.

Thoughts? Any feedback is welcome.
Welcome to the forums! With the exception of an odd difference in decay I think it's still unknown how different antimatter is to matter exactly. Conventionally it's thought to be pretty much identical in the way it behaves. But even if there were a substantial difference enough to radically effect the way machines work I'm willing to bet that most other chemistry (and therefore biochem) will be affected in some way too.
 
  • #34


Evo said:
Why does everyone walk? Bicycles, peddle cars, steam engines, etc.. don't work anymore? Even little hand cars on railroad tracks would work for getting around. What happened to the horse and carriage?

Or for that fact, the old fashioned steam engine? Or as mentioned in the last post, the diesel engine (which ignites combustion through compression and not a spark.)
 
  • #35


I'm more concerned if electricity is out completely as in zero electricity on Earth, how does it affect the atmosphere and magnetic field? And, doesn't the gravitational ability of Earth allow for more electrical particles to move downward towards Earth from space to the surface? Is it possible to produce some sort of electricity from a wire and movement because of the magnetic field? (physics background is mediocre at best so I may be misguided in my questioning)

... In any case, this may just be a devastating black out. (I am about to watch the first episode).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #36


Mentalist said:
I'm more concerned if electricity is out completely as in zero electricity on Earth,
Zero electricity on Earth would instantly end all life, since some of the processes that keep us alive involve electricity.
 
  • #37


Fredrik said:
...I personally don't need shows in the sci-fi/fantasy genre to be scientifically accurate, but I wish they could at least make an effort to get the simplest stuff right.

I recall one of the old and great sci-fi authors, maybe Azimov(?), said the trick to good sci-fi was to the limit the break-the-rules changes, one or two items and no more. Everything else stays the same or follows logically from the change made by the author.

Otherwise I think the reader/audience feels jerked around in a kid's game. I imagine following Azimov's guidance is hard work, essentially creating and thinking about a new reality where the author can not simply conjure a new trick (the demon did it) to cut to the chase when reality grows too complex to fathom, as it always does.
 
  • #38


mheslep said:
I recall one of the old and great sci-fi authors, maybe Azimov(?), said the trick to good sci-fi was to the limit the break-the-rules changes, one or two items and no more. Everything else stays the same or follows logically from the change made by the author.

Otherwise I think the reader/audience feels jerked around in a kid's game. I imagine following Azimov's guidance is hard work, essentially creating and thinking about a new reality where the author can not simply conjure a new trick (the demon did it) to cut to the chase when reality grows too complex to fathom, as it always does.
I think it's done a lot better in literature. TV and film tends to be far less experimental and go for spectacle.
 
  • #39


Ryan_m_b said:
I think it's done a lot better in literature. TV and film tends to be far less experimental and go for spectacle.
Agreed, with some exceptions. The Matrix, Blade Runner, Star Trek TV come to mind. They managed to get by with inventing demons or other new tricks w/ every plot twist.
 
  • #40


Mech_Engineer said:
I refuse to watch this show for this exact reason. All electronics stopping working is one thing (giant space-born EMP blast, tiny engineered nano bacteria that prevent it, whatever), but gunpowder and combustion engines not working is to say the fundamental laws of chemistry have been upended, yet they're able to have camp fires...

Dumb.

Now think; what do cars (that use gasoline) need to run? An electric spark. You read to much into the trailer or went off of someone else post.
 
  • #41


Well steam engines and guns still work but combustion and electronics doesn't. Combustion engines rely on an electrical ignition system. So cars not working does actually follow the logic.

However if even light bulbs don't work then it means one thing. Rotating magnets do not induce a current in nearby wire. But if that's the case why does the Earth still have a magnetic field? Clearly in this case we have to make Magnets unable to work while a molten core spinning still work.

Therefore it must be that Iron's dipole alignments had to be reset somehow(the Earth's magnetic field is caused by nickel I beleive)

What about batteries? Thats where the real problems comes in for me.

What i suspect the answer will be is some terrible ad hoc manipulation of the Earth's magnetic field to do whatever
 
  • #42


Fredrik said:
But I suspect that most people don't care at all about these details.

Nah. Most SF readers aren't really interested in science.
 
  • #43


ImaLooser said:
Nah. Most SF readers aren't really interested in science.
Is that sarcasm? I can't tell. What I said (that most viewers of sci-fi TV shows don't seem to care if the writers get the simple stuff right) is based on discussions I've had with people at other web sites. When I point out that some specific detail doesn't make any sense (for example that the superpower that we've been told that a character has wouldn't enable him to do what we just saw him do), I'm usually told that I'm a fool for thinking that anything should make sense in a sci-fi show.
 
Last edited:
  • #44


Fredrik said:
Is that sarcasm? I can't tell. What I said (that most viewers of sci-fi TV shows don't seem to care if the writers get the simple stuff right) is based on discussions I've had with people at other web sites. When I point out that some specific detail doesn't make any sense (for example that the superpower that we've been told that a character has wouldn't enable him to do what we just saw him do), I'm usually told that I'm a fool for thinking that anything should make sense in a sci-fi show.


Yeah. Just like I said.
 
  • #45


Well, it's now been "explained". Scientists were working on a way to generate cheap electricity, but, whoops! Instead they built a device that suppresses it.

Very disappointing. In this article in the Hollywood Reporter last July, we read that
[Series creator Eric] Kripke says a physicist was brought into the writers room early in the story breaking process to verify the series' plausibility. "We did our homework, and we came up with something that actually is quite possible," said Kripke. "We pitched him the secret as to why all of the power went out, and his face just lit up. He said, 'That's absolutely possible'."

Hard to believe a real physicist bought into what's been said onscreen so far, so maybe there's more to come. But I doubt it.
 
  • #46


I don't consider that an explanation, so I hope that's not what Kripke was talking about. But I very much doubt that he found a physicist that said that his explanation (whatever it is) is "absolutely possible". Kripke is probably bending the truth there. Maybe he was able to find one that said that the explanation isn't any crazier than the science of Fringe. Maybe he was even able to find one that said that it's not crazier than the science of Star Trek. But "absolutely possible"...I don't think so.
 
  • #47
The explanation was included in this week's episode.

If you said "power-draining nanites", you win. Apparently there are quadrillions of nanites/nanobots/nanoprobes all over the place, that are programmed to replicate and to absorb electricity.
 
  • #48
Along the lines of coincidences that hold the show together like so much glue: When the blackout first hits, all cars on the freeway slow down all gentle like and come to a smooth stop, all at the same time. this is fortunate because if Newton's first law stayed in effect then there would have been a massive pile up that would have flattened the main antagonist and protagonist in the first episode.