Six scientific myths from Interstellar

Astrophysicists and cosmologists say that what was shown in the popular Christopher Nolan film is not true

After the premiere of the film “Interstellar,” which before hitting the big screens was actively promoted for its authentic depiction of various cosmic phenomena, many media outlets published thorough analyzes of what was shown in the film, inviting real scientists as consultants.

TJournal publishes a selection of quotes from astrophysicists and cosmologists about what is shown in the film that is not true, as well as the reaction of director Christopher Nolan himself to such criticism.

Myth #1: “Free” wormhole

It would take an object of enormous mass to create a gravitational field large enough to bend space and time in half, and the version shown in the film is equivalent to a hundred million of our suns. Depending on the location of a body of this mass in the universe, it could create serious chaos in the surrounding space, but this does not happen in the film. Richard Gott, cosmologist

Myth #2: Radio transmission from inside a black hole

The generally accepted idea of ​​a black hole is that its gravitational compression is so strong that not even light can escape, which is how it gets its name. But even in physics there are loopholes, one of which is called Hawking radiation, discovered by who knows. When a particle falls into a black hole, it creates another form of negative energy. But nature hates it when her papers are out of order - a minus without a reciprocal plus is the same as a debit without a credit. Therefore, the black hole emits a particle to maintain balance. A huge number of these particles create outgoing streams of energy, which in theory can carry encoded information for communication. It's not the same as radioing Houston from a black hole, but it's at least a step in the right direction. From Time

Myth #3: To a black hole and back

As Time notes, scientists are competing to choose the best term that could describe what will happen to a person who passes through the so-called event horizon of a black hole. Cosmologist and bestselling author Brian Greene believes the human body will be “spaghettified”—stretched into ultra-thin strands of protoplasm.

Most people would agree that a person who falls into a black hole is doomed. But if you fall into a big enough black hole, you won't be spaghettified right away. Brian Greene, cosmologist

Myth #4: Human explorers

My favorite scientific thing to grumble about is what happens when a crew arrives in another galaxy. They visit planets on their own, even if they don't have enough fuel to land on each one. This creates interesting discussions between crew members about which planets to visit and in what order. Time is of the essence because some of these celestial bodies are deep in the black hole's gravity well (which is scientifically ludicrous). The slower relative passage of time means that while visiting these planets, the crew will age much more slowly than people on Earth. This gives rise to moral dilemmas, because we are talking about the salvation of humanity. In reality, future astronauts would simply deploy telescopes to study planets from afar. Using spectral analysis, they could more quickly and efficiently determine which worlds would be most promising for human settlement. Robert Nighy, Sky & Telescope editor

Myth #5: Habitable planets near a black hole

In reality, traveling this close to these “beasts” would be deadly. The film [near the black hole] shows a glowing accretion disk of gas, although there are no obvious sources for accretion of matter nearby (the process of particles falling onto a cosmic body - TJournal). In any case, the powerful X-rays from the disk would literally fry the ship's crew and people on nearby planets. Robert Nighy, Sky & Telescope editor

Myth #6: The answers are inside a black hole

The film has a good depiction of mathematics: for example, the equations shown from the general theory of relativity are quite suitable to satisfy a scientific geek. The authors subsequently suggest that the equations don't work because scientists don't understand how gravity and quantum mechanics interact, which is also quite plausible. But the movie solves this issue by sending a robot into a black hole to retrieve “quantum data,” which doesn’t really make any sense. It sounds like they came up with a plot device that has no physics behind it. Roberto Trotta, astrophysicist

Nolan on criticism

My films are always subject to particularly high demands in those matters that are forgiven for other films, and I am not against this. The science portion of the film is ready to hold its own, Kip (Thorne - consulting physicist who worked on the script and special effects, TJournal) has a book about what is real in the film and what is speculation, simply because most of it, of course , speculation. [...] There were a bunch of mindless tweets from people who had only seen the movie once but still didn't understand the science behind it. You'll need to stay with him a little longer and probably read Kip's book. I know where we cheated the way we cheat in movies, and I told him [Kip] about it. Christopher Nolan, director

#Article #Nolan #black_holes #Interstellar #interstellar_mistakes