Jump to content

Welcome to FutureTimeline.forum
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

I just saw "Interstellar" and I want to know what you think

Interstellar Time Travel Gravity Relativity

  • Please log in to reply
53 replies to this topic

Poll: What do you think of "Interstellar" (23 member(s) have cast votes)

How do you rate the movie "Interstellar"?

  1. The science was just perfect. (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  2. The science was good. (9 votes [14.75%])

    Percentage of vote: 14.75%

  3. The science was good enough. (7 votes [11.48%])

    Percentage of vote: 11.48%

  4. The science was not so good. (2 votes [3.28%])

    Percentage of vote: 3.28%

  5. The science was bad. (1 votes [1.64%])

    Percentage of vote: 1.64%

  6. What science. (2 votes [3.28%])

    Percentage of vote: 3.28%

  7. The story was great. (6 votes [9.84%])

    Percentage of vote: 9.84%

  8. The story was very good. (4 votes [6.56%])

    Percentage of vote: 6.56%

  9. The story was good. (8 votes [13.11%])

    Percentage of vote: 13.11%

  10. The story was not so good. (1 votes [1.64%])

    Percentage of vote: 1.64%

  11. The story was bad. (3 votes [4.92%])

    Percentage of vote: 4.92%

  12. The acting was great. (6 votes [9.84%])

    Percentage of vote: 9.84%

  13. The acting was very good. (6 votes [9.84%])

    Percentage of vote: 9.84%

  14. The acting was good. (4 votes [6.56%])

    Percentage of vote: 6.56%

  15. The acting was not so good. (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  16. The acting was bad. (2 votes [3.28%])

    Percentage of vote: 3.28%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#21
FutureLover1999

FutureLover1999

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 62 posts

Francis Collins is not a serious, respectable, sane scientist. As I'm sure the majority of other scientists will tell you.

I mean America does have to be considered slightly differently than the rest of the first world countries. It's very unusual in how it's somehow maintained a high level of religious belief like it has and I can't really imagine any other country having a person with his beliefs leading a major scientific organisation. His views directly conflict with his understanding of science and he has come out with some absolutely ridiculous comments and quotes that completely discredit him to all reasonable people. I'm almost certain there is a large political aspect to him being in his current position.



#22
Bradley

Bradley

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 862 posts
  • LocationSeattle, WA

Francis Collins is not a serious, respectable, sane scientist. As I'm sure the majority of other scientists will tell you.

I mean America does have to be considered slightly differently than the rest of the first world countries. It's very unusual in how it's somehow maintained a high level of religious belief like it has and I can't really imagine any other country having a person with his beliefs leading a major scientific organisation. His views directly conflict with his understanding of science and he has come out with some absolutely ridiculous comments and quotes that completely discredit him to all reasonable people. I'm almost certain there is a large political aspect to him being in his current position.

 

 

I think we're well within 100 years of developing a super intelligent artificial intelligence. Let that thing chug away for a few millennia and I'm sure it would be able to fulfill every trait man has ascribed to the various gods. Or if a few thousand years seems to short, let's say a few million years super intelligent self guided evolution. 

 

That entity would/will be a god relative to us. And if a multiverse with a large number of universes turns out to be an accurate description of reality then it's possible the entity might decide to create a universe and fill it with life. In which case, it would then fulfill the definition of a creator god.

 

Now, if we can make a god, why couldn't some other race in some other universe also make a god. And once a race made a god, the multiverse is likely to fill up with universes designed to support life, which in turn create gods that make more universes to support life. Cleary, the god made universes would become the dominant form of universe in the multiverse. 

 

Therefore, it is more likely than not that we live in one of the universes created by a god. Unless we are the first life in any universe to ever get this far. 


  • FutureLover1999 likes this

#23
Yuli Ban

Yuli Ban

    Born Again Singularitarian

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,705 posts
  • LocationNew Orleans, LA
I don't care if a scientist believes in a god, as long as it doesn't cloud their reasoning.

And remember my friend, future events such as these will affect you in the future.


#24
FutureLover1999

FutureLover1999

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 62 posts

I don't care if a scientist believes in a god, as long as it doesn't cloud their reasoning.

It's impossible to believe in God and not have it cloud your reasoning. by the very definition of God it means the scientist believes in miracles and multiple other things that go completely against the laws of science. They simply cannot think in a logical, evidence based manner.



#25
TheComrade

TheComrade

    BANNED

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,642 posts

 

It's impossible to believe in God and not have it cloud your reasoning. by the very definition of God it means the scientist believes in miracles and multiple other things that go completely against the laws of science. They simply cannot think in a logical, evidence based manner.

 

I don't think so. Many/most of modern "religious" scientists are actually deists:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deism

 

 

Deism holds that God does not intervene with the functioning of the natural world in any way, allowing it to run according to the laws of nature. For Deists, human beings can only know God via reason and the observation of nature, but not by revelation or supernatural manifestations (such as miracles) – phenomena which Deists regard with caution if not skepticism. Deism is related to naturalism because it credits the formation of life and the universe to a higher power, using only natural processes.

 

In this philosophy, there is no real difference does God exist (but not intervene in our material Universe) or not. This is just the "polite form" of atheism, so to say.


#26
Yuli Ban

Yuli Ban

    Born Again Singularitarian

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,705 posts
  • LocationNew Orleans, LA
That, or Simulationism.
Yes, that's a thing now.

And remember my friend, future events such as these will affect you in the future.


#27
FutureLover1999

FutureLover1999

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 62 posts

Yea, I was excluding Deists from my definition of 'believing in god', cos I think it's far to vague to really call that a god. Inmy view someone who believes in God believes in direct intervention (miracles etc) and also believe in the concepts of an afterlife of some description.

To clarify, Francis Collins couldn't be any further form being a Deist. 



#28
Bradley

Bradley

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 862 posts
  • LocationSeattle, WA

Yea, I was excluding Deists from my definition of 'believing in god', cos I think it's far to vague to really call that a god. Inmy view someone who believes in God believes in direct intervention (miracles etc) and also believe in the concepts of an afterlife of some description.

To clarify, Francis Collins couldn't be any further form being a Deist. 

 

Francis Collins affirms theistic evolution, which is indistinguishable from biological evolution in terms of both content and praxis. Therefore, his science is exactly consistent with deism



#29
Bradley

Bradley

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 862 posts
  • LocationSeattle, WA

 

With the film being so heavily overtoned with explorations of human nature, it seemed as though Nolan wanted to say that love is a useful trait in our species, 

 

That's often overlooked in films. Entertainment value seems to take center stage. I look forward to watching this movie in a few months. 



#30
Jakob

Jakob

    Stable Genius

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,123 posts

 

 

Seriously though, I really cannot explain just how awful this film is. I just don't have the words to express my disappointment and anger.

 

This reaction after having spent $20 at the movie theater is why I now patiently wait for the torrent. In Hollywood time, I'm living three months in the past. 

 

That's probably illegal.



#31
OrbitalResonance

OrbitalResonance

    Cosmic Emperor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,233 posts
  • LocationDeep Space

 

I don't care if a scientist believes in a god, as long as it doesn't cloud their reasoning.

It's impossible to believe in God and not have it cloud your reasoning. by the very definition of God it means the scientist believes in miracles and multiple other things that go completely against the laws of science. They simply cannot think in a logical, evidence based manner.

 

 

the one who created the laws of nature can suspend the laws of nature in any manner or time period they want to, even to the point of puprosly avoiding detection


We make our world significant by the courage of our questions and the depth of our answers. - Carl Sagan


#32
Jakob

Jakob

    Stable Genius

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,123 posts

So today I finally got around to seeing Interstellar.

 

I liked the plot, but the science wasn't great. It seems like they came up with a story (a good one, mind you) and bent the laws of nature in whatever way was necessary to get it to work. I didn't let the science issues stop me from enjoying it though.



#33
OrbitalResonance

OrbitalResonance

    Cosmic Emperor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,233 posts
  • LocationDeep Space

my favorite part was seeing the American flags at the basecamps..

 

i love claiming sovereignty 


We make our world significant by the courage of our questions and the depth of our answers. - Carl Sagan


#34
FutureLover1999

FutureLover1999

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 62 posts

 

Yea, I was excluding Deists from my definition of 'believing in god', cos I think it's far to vague to really call that a god. Inmy view someone who believes in God believes in direct intervention (miracles etc) and also believe in the concepts of an afterlife of some description.

To clarify, Francis Collins couldn't be any further form being a Deist. 

 

Francis Collins affirms theistic evolution, which is indistinguishable from biological evolution in terms of both content and praxis. Therefore, his science is exactly consistent with deism

 

Some Francis Collins quotes. Are you really saying this guy is a Deist? Seriously?

 

 On a beautiful fall day, as I was hiking in the Cascade Mountains during my first trip west of the Mississippi, the majesty and beauty of God’s creation overwhelmed my resistance. As I rounded a corner and saw a beautiful and unexpected frozen waterfall, hundreds of feet high, I knew the search was over. The next morning, I knelt in the dewy grass as the sun rose and surrendered to Jesus Christ

 

 

After evolution had prepared a sufficiently advanced “house” (the human brain), God gifted humanity with the knowledge of good and evil (the Moral Law), with free will, and with an immortal soul.



#35
TheComrade

TheComrade

    BANNED

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,642 posts

 

This reaction after having spent $20 at the movie theater is why I now patiently wait for the torrent.

That's probably illegal.

 

But who cares? This is exactly how i get 99% of my films, my games, my music and my books. And i suspect i'm not alone here...


  • DJKiran likes this

#36
Jakob

Jakob

    Stable Genius

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,123 posts

 

 

This reaction after having spent $20 at the movie theater is why I now patiently wait for the torrent.

That's probably illegal.

 

But who cares? This is exactly how i get 99% of my films, my games, my music and my books. And i suspect i'm not alone here...

 

I would never break the law in such a serious manner. If everyone did that, the pirates would become rich and the filmmakers would lose money.



#37
Bradley

Bradley

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 862 posts
  • LocationSeattle, WA

 

Are you really saying this guy is a Deist? Seriously?

 

 

Strawmanning is always annoying but not always intentional, sometimes it is caused by a simple failure of reading comprehension. 



#38
Cosmic Cat

Cosmic Cat

    Hibernating

  • Validating
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,345 posts
  • Location-

 

 

 

This reaction after having spent $20 at the movie theater is why I now patiently wait for the torrent.

That's probably illegal.

 

But who cares? This is exactly how i get 99% of my films, my games, my music and my books. And i suspect i'm not alone here...

 

I would never break the law in such a serious manner. If everyone did that, the pirates would become rich and the filmmakers would lose money.

 

 

No. Pirates will just get shit for free, we aren't getting any money at all. Plus, the filmmakers have enough customers to keep them in check and many pirateers go buy the film if they like it. It's why I bought the hobbit DVD to support Peter Jackson after torrented it earlier.

 

We aren't really pirates, just people who don't want to waste money on stupid shit such as bad movies or $10 each for each book of 12 book saga, that's fucking outrageous! You know how heartbreaking it was for me to know that there won't be a 3rd season for Spice and Wolf in quite some time, and then to crush my heart to know that the light novels cost $120 for the whole series if I were to buy! Then to know that me conservative Islamic parents will kill me if they even see a cover of that book! It killed me. There aren't even that many torrents that provide the light novel, so I was only able to obtain book 6 and 7 which was good enough for me because that was when the anime series short-stopped. I can't wait to get a job, I'm going to go volunteer harder now.


  • DJKiran and Eyalin like this

#39
FutureLover1999

FutureLover1999

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 62 posts

 

 

Are you really saying this guy is a Deist? Seriously?

 

 

Strawmanning is always annoying but not always intentional, sometimes it is caused by a simple failure of reading comprehension. 

 

 

Can you explain to me how someone who believes evolution was planned by god and that there was a set goal (humans with big brains) has an identical view of genetics as someone who thinks evolution is random and unpredictable? His beliefs directly affect how he views his field, he doesn't think that evolution could have gone any other way then making humans. How does this not affect his science.

 

Would hardly call my comment strawmanning. When you equate someones views in the main part of their life (his job as a scientist) with that of a certain group of people without specifying that the rest of his life is different it's reasonable to assume you may be inferring the rest of his views are similar to that certain group. Especially when the context (see previous comments) was the idea that most religious scientists are deists. Add to that the fact that technically my comment was an attempt to clarify if that was indeed the case (note the question mark).

 

Example.

Me - Stalin was a bad man

You - His treatment of prisoners of war was very humanitarian

Me - Are you really saying Stalin was a great humanitarian guy?

You - Stop strawmanning.



#40
Eyalin

Eyalin

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 127 posts

I just want to point out that "They" weren't future Earthlings, but the future plan B embryos in case that wasn't clear to anyone.

I came across this explanation on YouTube:

 

"Everyone keeps suggesting there is a paradox concerning the 5D future humans and their ability to save humanity in the past. It's really not a paradox at all. Everyone assumes humanity survived to ascend to the 5th dimension but how could humanity exist in the future if not for the actions of Cooper.. who was guided by future humans (begin endless loop).


Did anyone ever consider the other important character in the movie? Amelia Brand carried on with the rest of her mission (thanks to Cooper). I postulate that Brand used the human seeds as intended and set up a colony. A colony that would thrive and eventually evolve beyond human. Thus Earth is of little importance, and may have indeed died. These colonists, and the generations that followed, would have been told the story of a great man (Cooper) who saved them from extinction. With the ability to manipulate space-time, they would pay homage to their hero "God" by helping him in the past so he may fulfill the mission most important to him, to once again see his daughter. Plan B worked beautifully. But the 5d humans, having the power to bend space-time, decided there's no reason why Plan A had to fail."

 

This would be a beautiful theory but, as someone else pointed out, it all falls apart because the fifth dimensional beings are the ones who placed the wormhole in the first place, which again leads to a paradox.







Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Interstellar, Time Travel, Gravity, Relativity

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users