|
Please login to reply
| 1 of 2 |
|
|||||
|
[#212026]
Written by: Ferozban [20/03/2014, 15:30] |
|||||
| it's like 400, just with 4000 and named 100 | |||||
|
[#212028]
Written by: Volvi [20/03/2014, 15:44] |
|||||
|
[#212029]
Written by: BoonesFerry [20/03/2014, 16:02] |
|||||
|
show information page: http://eztv.it/shows/1000/the-100/  show description, air dates, show resources, and torrent links. page created: march 15, 2014 |
|||||
|
[#212034]
Written by: Magicman2051 [20/03/2014, 17:24] |
|||||
|
am i the only one who already can't watch it? i mean the muscle atrophy from being in space alone would mean they'd be doa upon returning to normal g, this is before you consider the damage/changes to their skeletal structure... i just can't even conceive how bad this is going to be because of how blissfully ignorant the pitch seems to be about the simple practicalities of life in space. so i'll watch it and report back. edit short version: a crushing lack of imagination/ignorance of the possibilities or realities leaves the show shallow and condescending. long version: poorly thought out from start to finish, it wouldn't have been too difficult for them to actually work in some semblance of research to the plot/setting. the funny thing is it isn't as though they avoided the research because it would have made for a less coherent show/episode or somehow altered the stakes dramatically, adding in the effects of first time exposure to the toxic soup of bacteria on the surface would have been interesting. what killed it for me was the "re-entry" sequence which made all of no physical sense. i mean there is a very fucking good reason that you splashdown on water. completely aside from the scientific ignorance of the plot the ultimate death of the show will likely be the writing/acting which seems hit and miss at best. it might be that i watch a lot of television and have standards for what to expect but this show is bad, even by cw standards. |
|||||
|
[#212038]
Written by: zoran_b [20/03/2014, 18:22] |
|||||
| yep, that's a big load of crap ! | |||||
|
[#212041]
Written by: solitaire [20/03/2014, 19:20] |
|||||
ermmm.... you do realise that the russian soyuz craft (you know the ones in use currently on the iss to get astronauts back home!) actually land on the ground every time? no water landing for them! it's actually safer for the crews on-board. less likely of "death due to drowning" as they are usually to weak to swim or even stand after being in space for so long in virtually zero-g. as for the show, well you can see sections rotating on the ark (that's probably where most of the people are!) so problems due to muscle weakness & bone density are minimised. |
|||||
|
[#212044]
Written by: RodPowermaster [20/03/2014, 21:34] |
|||||
|
i dislike this show like i disliked the first season of revolution but looks like they hired almost every character actor who appeared on tv in the past decade and put them on this show. if they keep this up we'll probably see kristin kreuk, dean kane and lou diamond phillips as a regular cast members. its nothing but familiar faces. |
|||||
|
[#212051]
Written by: Magicman2051 [21/03/2014, 03:16] |
|||||
i agree, the soyuz reentry however is just around 2 meters wide and 2 meters tall with very strict weight profiles. by comparison the apollo reentry was closer to 4 meters on both counts and absolutely required a water landing. rotating sections does not completely eliminate the effects, there would be an active gravity differential between the centre of your mass and the floor that'd cause even more issues long term. |
|||||
|
[#212054]
Written by: ockraz [21/03/2014, 05:16] |
|||||
i did notice that they used retrorockets at the end to cushion the landing like soyuz
why does the size determine that a water landing is necessary? |
|||||
|
[#212055]
Written by: ockraz [21/03/2014, 05:36] |
|||||
|
it's not as good as i'd hoped or as bad as i'd feared. frankly, i'm less concerned about the science than the acting, but my biggest complaint about the science isn't about living in space or reentry. how is it that they're fitted with bracelets that measure and transmit data about heart rate, blood pressure, respiratory rate, body temperature, glucose levels, plasma osmolarity, pulse oximetry and (because the bracelet is magical) capnography, but they didn't think to strap a geiger counter to anyone? this is a major plot point. arguably the entire reason for sending down 'the 100' is to see if they survive radiation exposure but they forgot any kind of dosimeter? wtf?! |
|||||
|
[#212056]
Written by: YezzMann [21/03/2014, 06:34] |
|||||
|
see all these nerds above using their science... it's a tv-show people, they tend to be somewhat flawed in the science department. live with it. watch it or don't, but don't be a "i'm so much smarter" a-hole on the web. it makes you look sad. |
|||||
|
[#212061]
Written by: Nerdfury [21/03/2014, 08:31] |
|||||
|
christ, all this succeeded in doing was making me angry. not for the science or the acting or the plot, but at teenagers. it's a string of belligerent teenagers making bad decisions over and over again, without foresight, just to spite the rest of the community. the concept of people making bad decisions to get back at people makes me irrationally angry. |
|||||
|
[#212063]
Written by: Magicman2051 [21/03/2014, 09:56] |
|||||
i'm going to simplify this, for myself tbh, so bear with me. a capsule measuring 2x2 weighs 4 units, a successful parachute deployment creates drag to slow the capsules descent enough for a ground landing to be feasible (i personally wouldn't want to be in it). a capsule measuring 4x4 weighs 8 units, a successful parachute deployment creates drag to slow the capsules decent but not enough for a ground landing. it is worth noting that the parachute alone doesn't make a capsule capable of ground landing, the construction used as well as any possible countermeasures (you mentioned retro rockets earlier) would have to be taken into account. the soyuz is rated for 3 people and has little or capacity for carrying any more. there are a few new capsules in development, one from roskosmos can _supposedly_ seat 6 but would likely return to water landings. furthermore the suggestion is that the parachute element would only be a back-up and the primary deceleration would be handled by thrusters. the physics to allow 100 people to reenter the atmosphere safely in a single capsule escapes me. as does the amount of fuel you'd need to expend to stop a landing from being immediately fatal. it isn't impossible it is just highly improbable. i watch plenty of shows that take massive liberties with simple physics but there is a difference between that liberty being handwaved or being taken because hitting the hard science wall would have taken away from the plot and that liberty being taken simply because it didn't occur to anyone to do a google search. i'm likely to not watch the show either way, i think someone mentioned it just being stupid people doing stupid things and i agree with that sentiment. the fact that this is targeted at kids, being watched likely by kids, and just decides to avoid even trying for a bit of realism is just infuriating. |
|||||
|
[#212064]
Written by: Magicman2051 [21/03/2014, 09:57] |
|||||
| if i could upvote. | |||||
|
[#212065]
Written by: Chouette [21/03/2014, 10:37] |
|||||
agree! lol |
|||||
|
| 1 of 2 |
|
|||||
