• lawrence
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    50
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    In Interstellar movie I almost had a syncope when Dr. Romilly explains how a wormhole works to Cooper as if he were a 5-year-old child and not a former NASA astronaut.

    • thisbenzingring@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      27
      ·
      9 months ago

      I have been in the room where seasoned doctors are talking to junior doctors like this, I think its normal. Sometimes people that are really smart can dumb down their subject of expertise in a way that an outsider might seem like they are talking down to someone

      • BearGun@ttrpg.network
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        26
        ·
        9 months ago

        i think it’s partly because it’s often very easy for experts to overestimate what non-experts know, even people with some knowledge in the field (relevant xkcd as usual), so it’s probably easier to just dumb it down as much as you possibly can. That way you’re sure most people can actually understand.

    • Naz@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      9 months ago

      She was actually explaining it to the movie going audience, in a break of the fourth wall indirectly, but y’know

      ;)

    • 2deck
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      9 months ago

      Do NASA astronauts have a course on wormholes? You know… just in case.

  • Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    9 months ago

    It’s cute how humans always think they are capable of explaining such things as these.

    I 100% support theoretical investigation, and the pursuit of scientific examination… But we don’t KNOW a whole lot about wormholes. We can only GUESS based on visual evidence.

    • 0ops@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      If we’re really being pedantic, that’s technically true about everything. For all you know you’re hallucinating me right now

      • Ephera@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        No, it’s different. With you, there’s at least something that we observe that we might be hallucinating.

        With worm holes, we’re taking mathematical equations that were modelled to reflect what we’ve observed of reality and then we’re pushing them to extreme cases where they’re likely to not anymore model reality correctly, and that is where we’re seeing the theoretical possibility of worm holes. No one has observed nor hallucinated worm holes.

    • Anticorp
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      Pretty sure this explanation came from Event Horizon first.

      • aeronmelon
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        9 months ago

        It is by no means an exhaustive list. Those are just the ones that sprang to mind.

        I wonder if anyone has posted a supercut of this trope on YouTube…

        • Jo Miran@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          9 months ago

          I think remembering that, at least in movies, it originated with Event Horizon is critical because it is the only one that takes into account any downside to transdimensional travel…and what a downside it was.

          I will always mourn the loss of any possible director’s cut of Event Horizon where the footage was so insanely over the top that the execs almost shit their pants.

  • rasensprenger@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    9 months ago

    I don’t like this explanation, because if you don’t know what wormholes are before, you might think wormoles are represented by the hole stabbed through the paper by the pencil.

    Correctly stretching the paper to make a 2D wormhole is hard, but maybe you should just use a bagel or something

    • Promethiel
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      9 months ago

      People are supposed to include the fact that the pencil can go through because (layman terminology abuse ahead) of the “shape” the space-time topology is presenting (or I guess being induced to present as, if Sci-fi hypothetical) before you get to the explanation of the pencil as craft/observer and how the hole is how that shortened path through the wormhole appears from frames of reference not the pencil.

      I like the bagel idea but then you have to hold it all horizontal while explaining so they don’t see the hole too early and you’re then just left intently staring at your audience across a bagel held at eye height like a slowly hungering loon. Or so I’ve heard.

  • niktemadur
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    9 months ago

    Do the bottom one first. Then as next step, do the math of singularities with a paper cylinder and a paper cone, falling through curved spacetime. That’ll take a little more time and effort but you might just start blowing their minds a little deeper with the same pencil and paper folded in 3D.

  • credo
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    Pfft, I got it the first time.

    The “math” is repeated with horizontal symmetry too; these explanations are the same.