Saturday, December 5, 2009
Friday, November 27, 2009
Wednesday, November 25, 2009
Science Fact or Cinematic Fiction?
If Sir Isaac Newton watched today's action packed movies he would certainly be convinced that his teachings went to the grave with him. His laws of motions are most often ignored in most action movies, let alone movies at large. Making things realistic looking does not matter as much as telling the story, no matter what the cost. Whether things hover inexplicably, or midgets beat up giants, directors strive for entertainment rather than credibility. Unless, that is, the credibility makes for good entertainment. Newton's third law of motion states that when an object exerts a force on another object, that other object will exert an equal amount of force in the opposite direction, on the original force. The movies 300, First Strike, and Cast Away are prime examples of a violation of Newton's third law of motion.
In the movie 300 the Spartans display a great amount of strength, so much so that at times they defy the laws of physics. Specifically, Newton's third law of motion. In their first clash with the Persian warriors they annihilate each one of them with their diligent fighting. During this first battle scene, King Leonidas is shown slashing his sword and stabbing individuals with his spear. His tremendous amount of strength can not go unsurpassed because of the damage he inflicts on each Persian running towards him. The extent of damage he causes is exagerated if you look at it up closely. When he throws his spear at an enemy it throws him backwards as it impales his chest. This would be highly unlikely considering the amount of inertia each object has. The Persian running towards the spear would weigh significantly more than the spear and therefore would keep travelling in his own path of action. Instead, upon impact the spear sends the warrior slightly backwards. To understand this we must look at the force exerted by each object. Force is determined by multiplying the mass of an object by its acceleration. Although the spear was undergoing a greater acceleration, its mass is only a small fraction of the mass of the warrior. The greater mass of the warrior far outweighs the acceleration factor. Therefore, for it to seem more realistic the warrior should have kept travelling forward a little bit.
In the crash scene of Cast Away, the way that the aircraft and the things inside of it behave upon impact is improperly presented. The airborne objects, that comprise the airplane and everything inside, would have suffered a worse demise than what is shown. The water does not seem to exert an equal force on the plane. There are a series of clues that reveal what would have truly been the fate of the plane and its contents. For starters, the speed of which the water flows into the aircraft we can deduce that it was travelling at high velocities and at a sharp angle to the water's surface. With these factors in mind it is hard to imagine that anything other than the pulverization of the plane would have resulted upon impact. The very slowest a 737 aircraft can fly at is around 150 miles per hours, otherwise it will stall. In this scenario we see the nose of the aircraft pointed downwards at an angle that indicates that the plane would have to be travelling faster. Therefore we know that it had to be travelling towards the water at atleast 150 miles per hour. The terminal velocity of a falling human is approximately 120 miles per hour and it proves fatal. Although the plane's fuselage would provide as a buffer for the people inside of it the change in speed upon impact would likely greatly injure, if not kill the passengers. We must not fail to remember that hitting water at high speeds is like hitting a concrete wall because the water has not a sufficient amount of time to move around the object and allow for a smooth impact. In this scenario this factor is especially the case considering the speed at which the plane hits the ocean water.
The closing action scene of the movie First Strike exemplifies a violation of physical laws perfectly. Jackie Chan, intent to rescue a hostage being taken away by a boat, pursues it by car and hits a ramp perfectly placed to project the car onto the boat. Upon the car's impact with the boat it merely crashes through the boat's top deck, not causing half the amount of damage it normally should have. Considering that an average car weighs about a ton and that it was travelling at high speeds to reach a height of over twenty feet, the force exerted by the car onto the boat would have been much greater. It would make more sense if the boat was completely totalled, if not damaged significantly more. The main forces we are looking at are that of the car on the boat, and that of the boat on the car, which should be equal. Although it has been pointed out the damage altogether should be much greater, the car should be especially more crushed up to show that the boat exerted an equal force upon it. Never the less, when determining what two objects are to be exerting equal forces on one another we may get confused as to what other contributing factors may have an influence. For instance the water below the boat's hull is receiving a force from the car because the car hits the boat which hits the water. In turn, the water exerts a force back. Therefore it might be safer to say that the force of the car is equal to the force exerted by the boat and water.
Movie directors are all about doing everything it takes to make a movie as entertaining as possible, even if it means making sacrifices. In the previously mentioned movies, the sacrifices made were in respect to Isaac Newton's third law of motion. The two objects that come into contact in each scenario should exert equal forces on one another. However they were off in each case, and for different reasons. For 300, the Spartans exerted greater forces on others to enhance the feeling that they are mighty and strong. In the case of Cast Away, the movie would not have had much content if Tom Hanks' character had died so early on in the movie as he should have, considering the laws of physics. Finally, we have First Strike, in which the movie would have had no conclusion if the boat and car had suffered total destruction as they should have. These intentional imperfections are noticeable in countless movies, all it takes is too lend a careful eye.
In the movie 300 the Spartans display a great amount of strength, so much so that at times they defy the laws of physics. Specifically, Newton's third law of motion. In their first clash with the Persian warriors they annihilate each one of them with their diligent fighting. During this first battle scene, King Leonidas is shown slashing his sword and stabbing individuals with his spear. His tremendous amount of strength can not go unsurpassed because of the damage he inflicts on each Persian running towards him. The extent of damage he causes is exagerated if you look at it up closely. When he throws his spear at an enemy it throws him backwards as it impales his chest. This would be highly unlikely considering the amount of inertia each object has. The Persian running towards the spear would weigh significantly more than the spear and therefore would keep travelling in his own path of action. Instead, upon impact the spear sends the warrior slightly backwards. To understand this we must look at the force exerted by each object. Force is determined by multiplying the mass of an object by its acceleration. Although the spear was undergoing a greater acceleration, its mass is only a small fraction of the mass of the warrior. The greater mass of the warrior far outweighs the acceleration factor. Therefore, for it to seem more realistic the warrior should have kept travelling forward a little bit.
In the crash scene of Cast Away, the way that the aircraft and the things inside of it behave upon impact is improperly presented. The airborne objects, that comprise the airplane and everything inside, would have suffered a worse demise than what is shown. The water does not seem to exert an equal force on the plane. There are a series of clues that reveal what would have truly been the fate of the plane and its contents. For starters, the speed of which the water flows into the aircraft we can deduce that it was travelling at high velocities and at a sharp angle to the water's surface. With these factors in mind it is hard to imagine that anything other than the pulverization of the plane would have resulted upon impact. The very slowest a 737 aircraft can fly at is around 150 miles per hours, otherwise it will stall. In this scenario we see the nose of the aircraft pointed downwards at an angle that indicates that the plane would have to be travelling faster. Therefore we know that it had to be travelling towards the water at atleast 150 miles per hour. The terminal velocity of a falling human is approximately 120 miles per hour and it proves fatal. Although the plane's fuselage would provide as a buffer for the people inside of it the change in speed upon impact would likely greatly injure, if not kill the passengers. We must not fail to remember that hitting water at high speeds is like hitting a concrete wall because the water has not a sufficient amount of time to move around the object and allow for a smooth impact. In this scenario this factor is especially the case considering the speed at which the plane hits the ocean water.
The closing action scene of the movie First Strike exemplifies a violation of physical laws perfectly. Jackie Chan, intent to rescue a hostage being taken away by a boat, pursues it by car and hits a ramp perfectly placed to project the car onto the boat. Upon the car's impact with the boat it merely crashes through the boat's top deck, not causing half the amount of damage it normally should have. Considering that an average car weighs about a ton and that it was travelling at high speeds to reach a height of over twenty feet, the force exerted by the car onto the boat would have been much greater. It would make more sense if the boat was completely totalled, if not damaged significantly more. The main forces we are looking at are that of the car on the boat, and that of the boat on the car, which should be equal. Although it has been pointed out the damage altogether should be much greater, the car should be especially more crushed up to show that the boat exerted an equal force upon it. Never the less, when determining what two objects are to be exerting equal forces on one another we may get confused as to what other contributing factors may have an influence. For instance the water below the boat's hull is receiving a force from the car because the car hits the boat which hits the water. In turn, the water exerts a force back. Therefore it might be safer to say that the force of the car is equal to the force exerted by the boat and water.
Movie directors are all about doing everything it takes to make a movie as entertaining as possible, even if it means making sacrifices. In the previously mentioned movies, the sacrifices made were in respect to Isaac Newton's third law of motion. The two objects that come into contact in each scenario should exert equal forces on one another. However they were off in each case, and for different reasons. For 300, the Spartans exerted greater forces on others to enhance the feeling that they are mighty and strong. In the case of Cast Away, the movie would not have had much content if Tom Hanks' character had died so early on in the movie as he should have, considering the laws of physics. Finally, we have First Strike, in which the movie would have had no conclusion if the boat and car had suffered total destruction as they should have. These intentional imperfections are noticeable in countless movies, all it takes is too lend a careful eye.
Tuesday, November 3, 2009
Outline for Second Term Paper
Misrepresentation of Newton's 3rd Law of Motion in action scenes from movies 300, First Strike, and Cast Away.
I. Introduction
What Newton's 3rd law of motion entails.
It is easy for the eye to catch on when the law is not considered for action scenes.
My Thesis
II. Supporting Topic 1- 300
Law is ignored to give hierarachy to forces (ie- one is much stronger than the other, therefore even the law physics will not get in its way)
First attack scene against the persians- spear is thrown in such a way that the force exerted is not sufficient to do as much damage as it appears.
Man impaled comes to a stop. His inertia and Newton's 3rd law would support that he would continue travelling in same direction despite being stabbed by spear from opposite direction.
III. Supporting Topic 2- First Strike
Car hits ramp at high speed and lands on slower boat.
If Newton's 3rd law was considered in this scene the damage would have been much worse and car would have continued further in its action path.
Law of motion is ignored because otherwise the boat would have certainly been completely destroyed and so would have happened to the car and Jackie Chan.
Supporting Topic 3- Cast Away
Upon impact, when the cargo aircraft hits the water, Tom hanks would travel forward- opposite the direction of the in-flowing ocean water.
737 flies at minimal speed of 150 miles per hour and it was certainly going much faster and at such an angle to the water that it would have meant complete destruction.
The change in motion would have pulverised Tom Hanks' character.
V. Conclusion
Law of motion is not considered to enhance dramatic feel or to keep story on track.
If everything were so realistic movies would not be as enjoyable.
I. Introduction
What Newton's 3rd law of motion entails.
It is easy for the eye to catch on when the law is not considered for action scenes.
My Thesis
II. Supporting Topic 1- 300
Law is ignored to give hierarachy to forces (ie- one is much stronger than the other, therefore even the law physics will not get in its way)
First attack scene against the persians- spear is thrown in such a way that the force exerted is not sufficient to do as much damage as it appears.
Man impaled comes to a stop. His inertia and Newton's 3rd law would support that he would continue travelling in same direction despite being stabbed by spear from opposite direction.
III. Supporting Topic 2- First Strike
Car hits ramp at high speed and lands on slower boat.
If Newton's 3rd law was considered in this scene the damage would have been much worse and car would have continued further in its action path.
Law of motion is ignored because otherwise the boat would have certainly been completely destroyed and so would have happened to the car and Jackie Chan.
Supporting Topic 3- Cast Away
Upon impact, when the cargo aircraft hits the water, Tom hanks would travel forward- opposite the direction of the in-flowing ocean water.
737 flies at minimal speed of 150 miles per hour and it was certainly going much faster and at such an angle to the water that it would have meant complete destruction.
The change in motion would have pulverised Tom Hanks' character.
V. Conclusion
Law of motion is not considered to enhance dramatic feel or to keep story on track.
If everything were so realistic movies would not be as enjoyable.
Sunday, October 25, 2009
Mid Semester Survey
"This is to certify that I completed the anonymous mid-semester survey for Art/Physics 123 and am requesting the five points of extra credit.As a student at San Jose State, I understand the university's Academic Integrity Policy (http://info.sjsu.edu/web-dbgen/narr/catalog/rec-2083.html)."
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
Toy Story Analysis
When Pixar's Toy Story came out in 1995, everyone could relate to Andy and the Toys that played a major role in his life. The liveness of each toy was a great reflection of how real a toy is to a child, no matter how inanimate it can be. All this, thanks to the power of the human imagination. Furthermore, the animators of Pixar used their own imagination to bring toys to life in a movie, not letting the laws of physics entirely get in their way. The bending of the laws of physics is a commonality in animated movies because it makes scenes more visually appealing and helps better convey messages to the viewers. Pixar mastered this technique in the newly developing 3d entertainment medium, with their movie Toy Story. While trying to convey the emotions of warmth, laughter, and terror, the distortion of reality lent more appeal to the movie; specifically in regards to time, energy output, and malleability of shapes and characters.
Time is distorted to evoke certain emotions throughout the movie. In the opening scene of the movie the main character, a toy named Woody, is flung around by his owner Andy who's exalted with joy to have Woody as his toy. As Andy tosses his cowboy doll into the air, sending him doing flips, the trajectory lasts four seconds when in real life Woody would have been in the air at the very most for only two seconds. The toss is made to seem to happen in real time because as Woody is flying you hear Andy's voice speaking at normal speed. In other other words, it was not meant to seem to be in slow motion because otherwise Andy's voice would have been slower too, and therefore much deeper sounding. The slowing gives a happier feel to the scene. If it had been animated at the speed that corresponds with reality it would have been too fast for the viewer to enjoy and would have evoked less happy of a feel. Interestingly, the same effect is applied later on in the movie but to give a feeling entirely opposite to that previously mentioned. When Buzz is perched atop the guard rail he makes the leap to find out whether he really can fly or not. He stalls mid air for three seconds when in reality he would go straight down. It is as though the gravitational pull of the Earth periodically shuts off just at the right moment. The movie concludes with Woody and Buzz Lightyear making a successful escape from the antagonist and all thanks to the sudden functionality of Buzz's wings. As they reach for the skies they break off from a rocket and start free falling. At that point Buzz deploys his wings and they end up gliding to safety. Although the higher the speed the higher chance you have of obtaining lift with a smaller wing area, this scenario is pushing it a little. The combined weight of Woody and Buzz relative to the amount of lift provided by the wings is much too great. Realistically they would have plundered to their deaths.
The force required for certain actions were not consistent and for the most part were fake. When Buzz is determined to prove to his new friends that he can fly he instead relies on a sequence of accidental propulsions from the objects in the room. One of them included a ramp that sent him flying to the ceiling which made for a ridiculous path of action. The height of where he starts along the ramp is less than half the height of the ceiling which makes his propulsion upwards to an impossible height. Not enough energy was stored to send him downward with enough force to bounce up to the ceiling. Without the laws of physics he would shoot upwards and continue forever. Newton clearly stated that this would happen only if no force was acting on it. With just gravity he would simply attain the height to which he started and then go back down. However, both gravity and air resistance are present in this case so in reality he would have only gone up to the height of which he started at. For this scene to have been made possible he would have had to have kinetic energy built up from a height higher than the ceiling. Further on in the movie you have a great exaggeration of force to make the scene more dramatic. Woody, jealous of Buzz Lightyear, causes a pin up board to topple over sending thumb tacks flying in Buzz's direction. The tacks dart into the wooden desk on which they both are standing. This action is unlikely because the tacks are not traveling fast enough to have enough force to penetrate the surface. It would also be unlikely that the thumbtack's pin would be pointing down as it falls towards the ground. Due to air resistance the top heavy part would be falling faster than the pin and therefore would hit the desk first. Second the force exerted by the thumbtacks' own momentum would not suffice to dig into the desk's surface. Even at their terminal velocity they would not be able to force themselves into a desk.
To enhance the contrast between inanimate and living things, the animators played around with the malleability of the objects. One of the ongoing themes in the movie is that the toys only come to life in the absence of humans. To portray this, objects were made more stiff looking than usual. When Andy tosses Buzz Lightyear on a hard surface, the toy's limbs do not budge, but stay stiff. Typically upon impact an object with jointed parts will change shape more or less. The first impacting part will slow the fastest and the connecting limbs slow down before impact. Squash and stretch is the number one principle of the 11 principles of animation. Pixar however applied it very little in Toy Story. Most likely they had not used much squash and stretch to maintain the firm look on certain toys. The etch a sketch would not change shape at all whilst moving around. No deforming of any sort takes place when it moves its feet. The etch a sketch for instance waddles around because it has no feet. To swing each foot forward it would have to squash and stretch, but instead it stays stiff. The Russian dolls also bounced about without a squash and stretch. Their displacement was much like a bouncing ball and yet they kept their shape both on the bounce up and down without changing shape even the slightest.
In the world of animation there is a balance between making things look real and defying the laws of physics to communicate a message to the viewer. The Toy Story animators' focus however clearly was to tell a story rather than make it all look the way it should in reality. Defying the laws permitted the movie characters to achieve their short term goals. It would have been more work and less appealing if indeed everything was made to look the way it should. Perhaps the only downfall is the fact that there are a couple of inconsistencies. Such as Buzz Lightyear hanging in the air at one part of the movie, versus dropping like a brick in another part. The movie keeps you so entertained that you do not even have the time to pick up on such details.
Time is distorted to evoke certain emotions throughout the movie. In the opening scene of the movie the main character, a toy named Woody, is flung around by his owner Andy who's exalted with joy to have Woody as his toy. As Andy tosses his cowboy doll into the air, sending him doing flips, the trajectory lasts four seconds when in real life Woody would have been in the air at the very most for only two seconds. The toss is made to seem to happen in real time because as Woody is flying you hear Andy's voice speaking at normal speed. In other other words, it was not meant to seem to be in slow motion because otherwise Andy's voice would have been slower too, and therefore much deeper sounding. The slowing gives a happier feel to the scene. If it had been animated at the speed that corresponds with reality it would have been too fast for the viewer to enjoy and would have evoked less happy of a feel. Interestingly, the same effect is applied later on in the movie but to give a feeling entirely opposite to that previously mentioned. When Buzz is perched atop the guard rail he makes the leap to find out whether he really can fly or not. He stalls mid air for three seconds when in reality he would go straight down. It is as though the gravitational pull of the Earth periodically shuts off just at the right moment. The movie concludes with Woody and Buzz Lightyear making a successful escape from the antagonist and all thanks to the sudden functionality of Buzz's wings. As they reach for the skies they break off from a rocket and start free falling. At that point Buzz deploys his wings and they end up gliding to safety. Although the higher the speed the higher chance you have of obtaining lift with a smaller wing area, this scenario is pushing it a little. The combined weight of Woody and Buzz relative to the amount of lift provided by the wings is much too great. Realistically they would have plundered to their deaths.
The force required for certain actions were not consistent and for the most part were fake. When Buzz is determined to prove to his new friends that he can fly he instead relies on a sequence of accidental propulsions from the objects in the room. One of them included a ramp that sent him flying to the ceiling which made for a ridiculous path of action. The height of where he starts along the ramp is less than half the height of the ceiling which makes his propulsion upwards to an impossible height. Not enough energy was stored to send him downward with enough force to bounce up to the ceiling. Without the laws of physics he would shoot upwards and continue forever. Newton clearly stated that this would happen only if no force was acting on it. With just gravity he would simply attain the height to which he started and then go back down. However, both gravity and air resistance are present in this case so in reality he would have only gone up to the height of which he started at. For this scene to have been made possible he would have had to have kinetic energy built up from a height higher than the ceiling. Further on in the movie you have a great exaggeration of force to make the scene more dramatic. Woody, jealous of Buzz Lightyear, causes a pin up board to topple over sending thumb tacks flying in Buzz's direction. The tacks dart into the wooden desk on which they both are standing. This action is unlikely because the tacks are not traveling fast enough to have enough force to penetrate the surface. It would also be unlikely that the thumbtack's pin would be pointing down as it falls towards the ground. Due to air resistance the top heavy part would be falling faster than the pin and therefore would hit the desk first. Second the force exerted by the thumbtacks' own momentum would not suffice to dig into the desk's surface. Even at their terminal velocity they would not be able to force themselves into a desk.
To enhance the contrast between inanimate and living things, the animators played around with the malleability of the objects. One of the ongoing themes in the movie is that the toys only come to life in the absence of humans. To portray this, objects were made more stiff looking than usual. When Andy tosses Buzz Lightyear on a hard surface, the toy's limbs do not budge, but stay stiff. Typically upon impact an object with jointed parts will change shape more or less. The first impacting part will slow the fastest and the connecting limbs slow down before impact. Squash and stretch is the number one principle of the 11 principles of animation. Pixar however applied it very little in Toy Story. Most likely they had not used much squash and stretch to maintain the firm look on certain toys. The etch a sketch would not change shape at all whilst moving around. No deforming of any sort takes place when it moves its feet. The etch a sketch for instance waddles around because it has no feet. To swing each foot forward it would have to squash and stretch, but instead it stays stiff. The Russian dolls also bounced about without a squash and stretch. Their displacement was much like a bouncing ball and yet they kept their shape both on the bounce up and down without changing shape even the slightest.
In the world of animation there is a balance between making things look real and defying the laws of physics to communicate a message to the viewer. The Toy Story animators' focus however clearly was to tell a story rather than make it all look the way it should in reality. Defying the laws permitted the movie characters to achieve their short term goals. It would have been more work and less appealing if indeed everything was made to look the way it should. Perhaps the only downfall is the fact that there are a couple of inconsistencies. Such as Buzz Lightyear hanging in the air at one part of the movie, versus dropping like a brick in another part. The movie keeps you so entertained that you do not even have the time to pick up on such details.
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
Outline of First Term Paper
Physics applied in the Movie Toy Story
I. Introduction – Toys brought to Life
a. Toys are inanimate, aren't alive
b. Toys can talk/ interact
c. Toys defy laws of gravity in many aspects
d. Thesis statement
II. Laws of Physics are bent to allow toys to seem alive.
Hard plastic toys move about as though they were made of flexible flesh as humans are
Humans can relate to toys because toy behaviors outweigh physical improbabilities.
Toys move around with ease (ie: little plastic soldiers, etch a sketch dude)
III. Movie's defience of laws of gravity
Gravity's affect is lessened. (ie: Buzz Lightyear stalls mid air before falling)
Army descend rope to lower floor.
Flying on rocket at the end of the movie
IV. Exageration of Forces
characters fall from heights who's forces would kill them.
Woody's own wieght of upper body would force him to collapse on himself.
V. Conclusion
a. How different scenarios provide for good entertainment and yet bend the laws of physics
b. Repeat thesis
I. Introduction – Toys brought to Life
a. Toys are inanimate, aren't alive
b. Toys can talk/ interact
c. Toys defy laws of gravity in many aspects
d. Thesis statement
II. Laws of Physics are bent to allow toys to seem alive.
Hard plastic toys move about as though they were made of flexible flesh as humans are
Humans can relate to toys because toy behaviors outweigh physical improbabilities.
Toys move around with ease (ie: little plastic soldiers, etch a sketch dude)
III. Movie's defience of laws of gravity
Gravity's affect is lessened. (ie: Buzz Lightyear stalls mid air before falling)
Army descend rope to lower floor.
Flying on rocket at the end of the movie
IV. Exageration of Forces
characters fall from heights who's forces would kill them.
Woody's own wieght of upper body would force him to collapse on himself.
V. Conclusion
a. How different scenarios provide for good entertainment and yet bend the laws of physics
b. Repeat thesis
Thursday, September 24, 2009
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
Monday, September 7, 2009
Monday, August 31, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
