Star Wars Spoilers
In the real universe, which of the following could not happen:
- BB-8 , a smooth rolling metal spherical ball, rolls smoothly on sand.
- The Millennium Falcon completes the Kessel Run in under 12 parsecs.
- TIE fighters make the same sound in a vacuum as they do in a planet's atmosphere.
- All of the rest.
This section requires Javascript.
You are seeing this because something didn't load right. We suggest you, (a) try
refreshing the page, (b) enabling javascript if it is disabled on your browser and,
finally, (c)
loading the
non-javascript version of this page
. We're sorry about the hassle.
1 solution
yes lol a movie is a movie.
Lol like for the gif
Actually, the length of the Kessel Run is measured in parsecs
I'm not sure where the strong skepticism for BB8 comes from. The directors claim that BB8 was specifically made without computer graphics to capture the analog feel of the original movies, and there are several behind the scenes videos that show the BB8 puppet rolling on the sand between takes. Also, there is a fully functional BB8 toy which I have observed rolling on sand and dirt covered surfaces, only getting stuck when the variations in the landscape are on the order of the radius of the main sphere of BB8. I believe Neil deGrasse Tyson should do the honorable thing and issue a retraction on this one.
Log in to reply
I too think that this question and the excepted answers have some very deep flaws.
I have seen videos of an actual BB8 model built by a star wars fan. It appears to navigating quite well on sand.
I also believe that there is no question the Millennium Falcon would have completed the Kessel Run in under 12 parsecs. The question given kind of implies that a parsec is a unit of time, that is simply not the case. A parsecs is a unit of length, a very large unit of length.
The Kessel run, I assume, is a fictional trip of a distance that I don't know. It is not necessary to consider warp speeds in this fictional movie setting. We can simply assume the Kessel run is a distance that can be traveled in the time frame covered in the movie. How far is the Kessel Run in terms of length? The Kessel Run could be any distance. In the real universe, as we understand it today, we know that the Kessel run will certainly covers a distance much shorted than 12 parsecs, if the trip can be made in the time span covered in the movie. If the Kessel run was (for example) a trip to the kitchen and back, it is certain that the Mellennium fulcon or anything else completing the trip would have traveled far less then 12 parsecs. :)
Log in to reply
A BB8 can "appear to navigate quite well on" SOME sand. But there's a lot of different sand conditions for which it'll navigate very poorly. Do you think NASA engineers are envisioning this design for robotic travel on Mars, for instance?
Log in to reply
@Michael Mendrin – I am referring to the solution for the question posed in this problem "In the real universe, which of the following could not happen: " It is very clear that a BB8 type robot rolling on sand could happen, in fact has happened, in the real universe. That is completely different question then asking is it good design or is it likely to be used for any serious endeavor.
All I am doing is answering the question as put, I am a little confused what your point about NASA has to do with the question.
Log in to reply
@Darryl Dennis – "Could happen" is good enough, so that the "correct answer" is not in dispute.
Log in to reply
@Michael Mendrin – Well! not the answer that was accepted when I first saw, and failed to get the excepted answer to, this problem. At that time the all of the rest was considered correct. I think the only selection that is not possible in the real universe is hearing sound in space.
"The Millennium Falcon completes the Kessel Run in under 12 parsecs" could easily happen in the real universe. As you have pointed out, a parsec is a large unit of distance not a unit of time. The statement is comparable to saying an aircraft completes the New York run in under 10 million miles. The statement make no reference to how far away New York might be. For any location on earth the answer is always going to be certainly an aircraft can make that trip in under 10 million miles. I see no reason, given the wording of this question why we should assume that the Kesel run is a distance that is anything near 12 Parsecs. I totally agree that traveling 12 parsecs in the time frame covered by the movie is not possible in the real universe, but that is not what is said in the statement. We are asked if the Millennium Falcon COULD in the real universe make a fictional trip referred to as the Kesel Run in less then 12 parsecs. There is absolutely no indication in this question how great of a distance this fictional Kessel run might. be, perhaps it is just a few miles. It is very possible that the Millennium Falcon could complete the Kessel Run in UNDER 12 parsecs. It is not possible to complete a trip that is anywhere close to 12 parsecs in length in the time frame of the movie, But any distance less then 12 parsecs down to zero will stratify the conditions of the statement as it is given (under 12 parsecs).
Log in to reply
@Darryl Dennis – In law school, they teach you to practice making an argument on either side of any premise, i.e., e.g., "my client wishes to counter-sue the plaintiff for injury to his fist when the plaintiff's face was smashed into it." It's always a fun exercise to try to make an argument for any premise, so since we know that 1) BB8's can roll on sand, and 2) The Kessel run could be shorter than 12 parsecs, let me finish the job by arguing that 3) there IS sound in outer space, since there is not a complete absence of molecules which can "carry sound". Astronomers have in fact observed "shock waves" in extremely ratified interstellar gases. And by "same sound", we can argue that it refers to ordinary acoustic sound. So, we can pronounce Calvin Lin totally wrong on all three points.
Log in to reply
@Michael Mendrin – I think you have made a very valid point. I suppose we could agree that we do not agree with the answer that is excepted for this problem.
I had considered doing a series of problems related to some of the glaring problems that arise when thinking about physical reality vs the scenes that where depicted in the movie Gravity. I suppose that could be said about almost all Sci-fi, Horror, Fantasy and other movies. Normally I have no problem suspending reality in the movie setting. occasionally when it appears that the movie is attempting to depict a setting as truly possible or factual in nature I find things a bit difficult to reconcile.
Anyway; this problem did cover a few interesting principles in physics, even if the answer excepted is very questionable.
Log in to reply
@Darryl Dennis – It was Mark Twain that said, "Never let truth get in the way of a good story". Movies have never been a good way to get facts. Granted, even "Interstellar" retained Kip Thorne, a top theoretical physicist, as a paid consultant on black holes, time dilation, and general relativity, still it deliberately ignored a number of pretty glaring facts, otherwise the story would have gone flat. This is the reason why Neil deGrasse Tyson has the inauspicious reputation of being a movie bubble-popper, such as his tweeted comment, "BB-8, a smooth rolling metal spherical ball, would have skidded uncontrollably on sand," which happens to be true in the practical sense. But the BB-8 is so cute!
@Darryl Dennis – Hi Daryl, I've awarded you credit for this problem.
Log in to reply
@Brilliant Physics – Thanks! I am not really all that concerned about the points but I do appreciate getting the credit.
Brilliant Physics, I go off-road in the Mohave Desert in order to reach some of my favorite climbing places. Trust me, smooth steel wheels would never get me there. And neither would BB-8 get there.
But this problem asks if it could not [ever] happen that a BB-8 can roll "smoothly on sand". Well, it can, if the conditions are just right.
If we are going with the updated answer, shouldn't we update the last bullet point?
The idea of a movie is to forget about reality.
Edit: Dune buggy with smooth steel wheels travelling on sand is not an impossibility, just not feasible. I suppose this explains the change in the "correct answer".