io9 
Enter your username and password.
San Francisco, 4:12 AM
Sat Nov 21
26 posts in the last 24 hours
Tip your editors: tips@io9.com
Editor-in-Chief:
Annalee Newitz | Email
News Editor:
Charlie Jane Anders | Email
Associate Editor:
Meredith Woerner | Email
Assistant Editor:
Lauren Davis | Email
Weekend Editor:
Graeme McMillan | Email
Contributors:
Joshua Glenn
Stephen Goldmeier | Email
Ed Grabianowski | Email
Austin Grossman
Paul Hogan | Email
Lauren Davis | Email
Chris Hsiang | Email
Lynn Peril | Email
Ann VanderMeer
Alasdair Wilkins | Email
Graphic Designer:
Stephanie Fox | Email
Interns:
Tim Barribeau | Email
Julia Carusillo | Email
Alex Eichler | Email
Cyriaque Lamar | Email
Caitlin Petrakovitz | Email
Mary Ratliff | Email
Josh Snyder | Email
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
11/20/09
11/20/09
11/20/09
11/20/09
Oh who am I kidding? These are stupid cool and probably more entertaining than sitting through that movie.
11/20/09
These pictures are amazingly cool. They are my kind of end of civilization.
11/15/09
11/13/09
11/15/09
Also - if you've seen the LA destruction/plane scene online - its the only thing worth watching. Though some of the dialogue in the film is so laughably bad it borders on entertainment (but this will one day be online as well in an edited 2-3 min clip) #2012
11/13/09
But a fun game might be to try to figure out how one would survive all the cataclysmic stuff that happens in it. I'm thinking along the lines of being in a nuclear sub over deep ocean -- would the earthquakes and subsequent tidal waves still get you? In the international space station -- would ejecta from volcanoes reach high enough to get you? Are you pretty much screwed anywhere but in deep space?
11/13/09
Europe exists and it's not for a happy couple visiting Paris or the Nazis invading us? That's not very Hollywood, in Hollywood the Aliens tend to destroy Washington, New York, Los Angeles, or the whole world, from NY to LA. #2012
11/13/09
Meh, all uh them're yankees. so ain't no great loss. #2012
11/13/09
11/13/09
11/13/09
11/13/09
I'm currently minus one laptop.... #2012
11/13/09
11/13/09
11/13/09
11/13/09
11/13/09
11/13/09
11/14/09
11/13/09
11/13/09
Someone please pass me the vomit bucket, FAST!
(Not a criticism of Lauren's review nor, obviously, of her as a person)
Is it really that hard for moviemakers to have a tiny bit of scientific validity in their movies? Am I asking too much? Don't answer - these are rhetoric questions. #2012
11/13/09
11/13/09
11/13/09
I laughed when I saw Contact, for instance, because there are several mistakes, though only one that's obvious (in the scene where Ellie tells the priest about how many galaxies and planets and so on there are, if you pay attention to her math, you'll see that her conclusion should have been: no planets should ever exist harboring life).
But in movies such as Frequency (where the abnormal aurora borealis is explained as being caused by string theory) and 2012, the science is sooooooooo butchered that I can't help but pull my hair out.
I spent half my life teaching physics, and it's all wasted effort because Hollywood makes people believe the stupidest things. #2012
11/13/09
I'm fine with pew pew lasers with no explanations (eg, I love(d) Star Wars light sabers), but trying to add an air of scientific respectability by using completely butchered science is an insult to us all, in my opinion. #2012
11/13/09
Hoffman was a chemist for one of the coffee companies before becoming an actor. #2012
11/13/09
11/13/09
I'd like to see a good movie based on the hollow-earth theory.
Or how about a movie where our solar system is really a binary star system? #2012
11/13/09
"Or how about a movie where our solar system is really a binary star system?"
A binary star system with several planets would have these planets in orbits that are quite extreme and possibly unstable, with multiple collisions (hence, a lot of debris floating by to collide with any "surviving" planet).
For instance, assuming a stable orbit, it very likely would be the case that part of the year the planet would be very close to one of the stars while during another part of the year it would be very far away from both.
That means the temperature changes would be so extreme that life would most likely not survive if it started there at all. #2012
11/13/09
There seems to be a dwarf planet, Sedna that has an irregular orbit (when compared to our solar system). Some of the proposed explanations include: Sedna was orbiting another star and it was captured by our sun's gravity, it's orbit was altered by the proximity of another star shortly after its formation, and some others.
Here's an article on it from science daily. NASA also mentions that there might have been another star in close proximity to our system early in its formation.
I know, I know - "close proximity to our system during its formation" doesn't necessitate a binary star system; in fact, one of the articles states that it is probable that the nearness of the stars was due to them forming in the same nebula. #2012
11/14/09
11/14/09
It's easier for me to stop breathing than to stop thinking. I can go without breathing for 3 minutes, but I can't go without thinking for more than a second. Sorry. It's how I'm built. #2012
11/14/09
11/14/09
11/17/09
11/13/09
Lauren, you have confirmed what I have thought of this movie: my friends will go see it thinking it will be great, come back disappointed, but still talk up the few gags to try to convince themselves it was worth $10.50... #2012