Sorta-OT: Movies and Electronic Design

moments,

That's because they have learned how crappy digital video is when trying to target the enemy. The extra processing time is enough to make you miss the target.

years on it it seems...

starwars had too much of.

Because they are too cheap to pay the port fees to land.

You didn't (can't?) answer the question, so you provide an example where it works in one application as a diversion. You must be a Democrat. Art

moments,

years on it it seems...

starwars had too much of.

Funny, most of the things that bother us are in production, not the writing. Maybe they'd best retain a good consultant through the process.

Best regards, Spehro Pefhany

That was one of my pet peeves back when I was working in video. I actually had a manager tell me that I should be able to just enhance that picture of a group or cars, and read all their license plates individually. He said he had seen it demonstrated by some defense company. I actually assumed they had edited it together in a demonstration video. His eyes glazed over as I tried to explain why that was actually impossible.

No, you can't take a picture and enhance it much beyond the original resolution, unless you have several serial shots to work with, and very sophisticated models of the optics of the individual cameras being used...

On a sunny day (Tue, 26 Feb 2013 21:45:22 -0500) it happened Spehro Pefhany wrote in :

moments,

years on it it seems...

starwars had too much of.

PS I recently invented the tractor beam: you shoot electrons with a big electron gun to the other object, and then it charges up, and gets attracted to you. The idea was to charge the moon, but that takes too long. (It would crash into the earth, my version of 'death star'). But it should work on small objects like floating away astronuts and spacecraft.. The math is up to you. :-)

"The Journey is the reward"

eff.com

The invisible airplane on Wonder Woman...had my eyes rolling...ok...actually had my eyeballs popped out of my sockets and glued to the TV

HAL = Half Assed Logic and a lot of things are already being built with it. ;-)

I modified a TV to run on 12 volts so I could watch Wonder Woman while I ran the sound system for some football games. Linda Carter looked a whole lot better than a bunch of muddy Football players any day. :)

spacecraft..

That takes too much hardware and energy. It's cheaper and easier to shoot magnetic monopoles.

An under water dive light is sometimes referred to as a "photon torpedo".

I'm always amazed at how movie astronauts get in and out of space suits in mere seconds. I vaguely recall the typical NASA time is over an hour. I guess the movie version doesn't have to worry about the inside plumbing and tight fits.

Reality imitates fiction:

Another irritation is when the movies show electronics, there is never any wires or cables attached. The reality of spaghetti wiring is sanitized for the movies (and also for display advertising). Often, the equipment doesn't even seem to have a power cord connected. Wireless I/O and powered test equipment must be in our future. However, there is one exception. When the evil genius's diabolical scheme is foiled with the pyrotechnic disassembly of his command console, there are invariably garden hose size umbilical cords projecting from the smoking wreckage. I guess fiber optic LAN cables just don't have the visual impact.

Digression: On a minor note, my parents involvement in the women's wear industry somewhat sensitized me to fashion trends. For many years, I had Women's Wear Daily delivered to my place of employment (with predictable comments). Movies are a great way to change and sell fashion trends. If a leading actor wears something deemed "cool", it will usually sell. Oddly, what the villains are wearing tends to sell better than the hero's. However, this doesn't seem to work for the science fiction fashions of the future, which emphasis just about everything except comfort and practicality. Some of the clothes and hardware worn in science fiction movies seriously fail the basic requirements for clothes and are often as dangerous to the wearer as to any assailant. For example, attending to basic bodily functions in the attire worn in the original Star Trek movies was impossible.

That doesn't work. I've built passive and active GPS repeaters for indoor use. What it delivers is the positon of the outside antenna, and not the position of the receiver. Same with speed and direction indication. Since the antenna is not moving, a GPS speed indicator will show zero speed at all times. In order to make GPS work with no view of the sky, at least 3 underground pseudolites are required, which is unlikely to work in a tunnel:

However, underground cell phone repeaters and distributed cellular antenna systems are common for indoor and underground structures.

On a sunny day (Wed, 27 Feb 2013 08:40:28 -0800) it happened Jeff Liebermann wrote in :

spacecraft..

Interesting, I was thinking maybe on mars no spacesuits are needed, stay inside a small car like rover with robotic arms that can grab things and bring those in via an air lock for inspection.

I had a look at the wiring between one of my PCs and the server here... oops :-) A whole bucnch of cabes, ethernet, audio, HDMI, VGA, USB, RS232, power, many small boxes each with their own walwart, antennas, settop boxes...

That wireless power thing from MIT does not seem to make it to market, as expected, Tesla already found out before them.

Have you seen the custumes in 'The fifth element'?

Very good movie indeed, from many aspects, except that garbage scene. :-)

It was already answered, moron. Do you need it repeated many times before it sinks in? Figures.

Idiot, one application is all that's needed. The one it's used for. You really are stupid.

That's you, in spades.

Yes. Fashion inspired by a roll of white duct tape or maybe some box packing tape. Soon, everyone will be wearing white duct tape. The costumes the movie were really weird, but not particularly dangerous. I was thinking more like the modified shoulder pads with spikes and hardware hanging from rather inconvenient places, that can be found in some space operas.

Watching the above trailer, there was yet another physics problem. A large spacecraft was destroyed, accompanied by the requisite pyrotechnic display, which then preceded to "fall" downward, as if gravity would have an effect in deep space. More likely, it would form a ball of random debris going in the direction prescribed by inertia, but that wouldn't look very spectacular in the movie.

I also like the concept of creating a new moon. However, the fine adjustments to speed and direction to place such a large object in a stable orbit around the earth would take many years. Having an alien invading machine get it right on the first try is rather improbable. The new moon is also substantially smaller than our real moon, which implies that to orbit so close to the earth, it would be moving at a really spectacular speed.

On a sunny day (Wed, 27 Feb 2013 10:44:45 -0800) it happened Jeff Liebermann wrote in :

That is a bit like the ISS. Such a con, 'training for living in zero gravity'. Anybody with a functioning brain or part there of would rotate that spacecraft to get rid of that annoying zero gravity at least in some places of the spacecraft. NASA does acrobatics as media show and cashes in in that via taxes.

It's a bit more complicated. Especially with the small size the rotational speed would have to be fairly high to get much force. You end up living in an archade ride. I had a prof with vestibular system expertise (he had worked with the space program) claim that this cure was worse than the disease. {turn off the waltz} Plus, of course, it would probably make docking and observations more challenging.

The simplest case would be to use two ships with equal mass connected to each other with a wire as in one of the Gemini flights.

Regarding docking problems, the classical 1950's von Braun space stations with a large torus and an docking adapter in the middle should solve the problem. Put the approaching supply module into the same rotational speed and there is no docking problems.

You could dock at the center of rotation. Anywhere else would require a steady thrust to counteract the centrifugal force of trying to follow a spot rotating about the center.

As for thevestibular system, for any fairly small structure, like the ISS, you'd be fine as long as you never moved your head. Turn your head 90 degrees and everything would start spinning. Some people could actually learn to live with it, but many would get motion sickness a hundred times a day.

Jon

Into the bozo bin with you. You'll be in good company.

Gigapixels.

It's clear you don't like the truth. So be it.