I think the most unrealistic thing in Don't Look Up, is that apparently there was enough force to eject parts of cities into space, but somehow leave the buildings on chunks of land intact.
That was just for the credits scene, meant to be for artistic gags, like Kate's phone going "Your diet is over!" That phone not only would never have flown into space, it wouldn't even be functional.
8:45 I am actually from Chelyabinsk, the city the meteor hit, and it was in 2013, not 2015 The fireball emerged in the morning sky around 9 am and we could see it before we could hear it, because it glowed brighter than the morning sky. After some time around 30 seconds to a minute, can’t remember exactly it blew up. That’s when we heard it, the explosion and the shockwave was so strong it shattered windows all over my region, and around 1000 people got injured in the aftermath, mostly from glass. It was pretty scary, at first we thought it was a nuclear missile, then we realized it was a meteor. Funny thing is, there was another asteroid that was supposed to fly by the earth later that day, NASA was actually tracking that one, and everyone in my town thought it was gonna hit too, so we pretty much expected the apocalypse that day😬
Yeah, I am not really sure what she was going on about there. If you hear it without seeing it first you are so far away you would never have seen it at all. Light is faster than sound after all, so if you can see see it, you will hear it with some delay.
I wonder if that event happening in Russia caused Vladimir Putin to think it was a "sign from God" for him to hurry up and "make Russia great again," thus triggering his annexation of Crimea, and then his invasion of Ukraine eight years later.
Kinetic energy is friggin terrifying dude. We can achieve the same kind of damage of a nuclear weapon with zero fissile material. Just drop a tungsten rod from orbit and you've got a relatively low tech weapon of severe mass destruction.
Armageddon 0:00 The Good Dinosaur 3:21 The Expanse S5E3 5:05 Greenland 6:52 Bruce Almighty 8:34 Ice Age: CC 9:54 Color Out of Space 11:25 Deep Impact 13:45 Don't Look Up 15:10
@@arik_dev What I was meaning was that it sounded almost like she said that some may not be just random space junk, not that some aren't made of rock.
That's the scientific way, you have to always assume in an universe as big as ours, that there is always a possibility of an outlier outside yer sample ye studied. Never make a blanket statement. Saying that all asteroids is made of just rock because ye looked at 100 asteroids and they all were just rocks. What if the 101th asteroid ye did NOT look at was made of metals? And someone else found it and said "HAH, all rocks my arse!" You just made a fool of yerself. Not to mention making such blanket statements blinds ye to other possibilities in the quest for the most complete understanding of the universe we can create. Ignore the possibilities and your science will forevermore be incomplete.
Funny thing is that was pretty much the entire point in that movie it is based on a HP Lovecraft story after all. So I think we can safely assume that it is most definitely no mere rock since that wouldn't make for much of a horror story now would it? Presumably it is some kind of incomprehensible powerful sentient entity since that is usually their choice of style.
I appreciate her honesty. She did not throw out high scores just because. Would love know what her opinion is on Moldavite. The coolest stone on earth.
Fun fact about the Colour Out Of Space: the fact that the meteor is unusually hot is actually commented on in the book it's based on. It's one of the first things that clues the science team from Miskatonic University investigating it that there's something not quite right about it.
I'm not sure why it's on the list. The meteor was just a McGuffin for the rest of the story. It could have just as easily been something washed up on a shore (which Lovecraft did more than a few other times as well).
Exactly, I don't know why it was even included but they should have at least given her some context for the scene. The fact that it's not normal is the whole point.
I think they're just talking about the impact of it. In the story it's like a portion of an elder god's consciousness or whatever so obviously its physical makeup isn't going to be necessarily scientifically accurate, but she can judge the realism of its impact upon the planet's surface.
The motto of the expanse is: "As realistic as possible while still having scifi action fun" The list of glaringly obvious science errors is countable on 1 hand (space goo and all its related stuff, engines, wormhole) even the travel times aren't that unreasonable, and are possibly too slow.
@@jasonreed7522 The main liberty the author took in the Expanse was the Epstein drive, which he acknowledge wasn't based on real science but was necessary for the book to work. He establishes what it is capable of and realistically integrates it into the world (universe) building. Love the books and the show is really good too.
I appreciate her trying to calm everyone's fears about the risks being low. The assumption being that we know where the big asteroids are and it's hard for us to get surprised. Trouble is, long period comets are 1) far away and not detectable until they're on their way in; 2) really big; 3) falling in toward the sun (and, potentially, us) from great distances and therefore really moving by the time they're here. The risks of long period comets are small but very real.
If they knew it was coming, why did they not warn people in Chelabinsk to stay away from the windows? I'd say they know a lot less then they pretend to, for various reasons.
@@edgarskalnins5390 Because the one in Chelabinsk was 1) really small, and 2) it came from the sun's direction, so the only way to know it was coming was the very slight chance to see it's shadow against sunlight, as it's reflected light wouldn't be pointed towards us. We know stuff, quit with that conspiracy mindset.
Some might call her honesty brutal. I say calling out Hollywood for its overhyped, unrealistic, overdramatized, crap is spot on. One thing I liked about the Martian is that the filmmakers took great care to stick to a science-based story that was practical. The fact that actual scientists gave its believability a thumbs up was good enough for me.
The only Issue I had was with Color Out Of Space. It's literally fiction and it's pretty much a vessel for an alien. I feel like she had no context but still. You take something like that and try to put science into it, of course it wont be 100% accurate!
The Martian is proof that audiences actually do want hard sci-fi, and will pay truckloads of money for it. It's also proof that people have forgotten what hard sci-fi means, because they think The Expanse is hard sci-fi and The Martian isn't sci-fi at all.
The Martian is great, at least until the end. The Iron Man sequence just felt like pure Hollywood. And, of course, as the source material points out, that having a bunch of people there to greet the survivor would be an unrealistic thing Hollywood would do, as they'd all be busy with tasks during the rescue.
I'm actually really happy to see Greenland on here because I think it's a really underrated film that not enough people saw or talk about. In my very humble layman opinion, I think it's one of the more realistic takes we've had on film of what could happen with an impending impact incident on earth. I know that the expert disagrees with me, and she may be right. But she also freely admitted that we've never seen firsthand a disaster of this size.........so who really knows? (I do agree however that the total global devastation of every city isn't very likely, but it makes for good cinema.)
I think she may have forgotten about the globe-wide fires that would've occurred as the fragments of our own crust that were kicked up into the atmosphere came back down. That would certainly mess up a lot of places far from the impact zone. But maybe her point is that it should've looked somewhat different.
@@nerysghemor5781 Well there are large craters in Paris, for example, that wouldn't necessarily exist. And a global burn doesn't destroy structures made of concrete and metal; though I could see the ensuing earthquakes potentially doing so.
@@majnuker The comet strikes Western Europe though (they even say so, multiple times, in the movie), so Paris having a lot of craters is actually on-point for that film. In fact, I'm kind of astounded Paris isn't just one gigantic hole in the ground, considering a comet of that size landed in the virtual neighborhood.
Would've really loved to have seen her analysis on the asteroid in Disney's Dinosaur (2000), such a shame. I remember it being a very intense scene that stuck with me.
@@timjaeger6589never even heard of it. not sure how i missed it. im assuming it wasn't something major at the time. I watched everything disney back then and somehow missed that one.
The thing about the impact damage in Greenland is that immediately after it shows the entire globe, and there were impact marks all over it caused from pieces of the comet that had broken off. Not all the damage was from the main body of the comet.
Deep Impact was based on a lot of studies at the time. That got reported on a lot at the time, and the team that ran the simulations for the movie had predicted a 28km tsunami hitting the east coast of the USA in the right conditions which they thought would inundate half the continent. As far as I'm aware, that's still supposed to be the most realistic movie on an impact, if only because they engaged the scientific community to get it looking right with then-current understanding.
I think you might have forgotten a decimal point. The Atlantic is only an average of 4000 meters deep, and its deepest points are only 8000 meters deep. There is, however, a strong possibility that a strong enough wave could run up to 28 kilometers inland. We know a 100-ft wave (about 30m) tall can get up to 10 miles (16 kilometers) inland.
@@mspicer3262 if it's 4km deep but for hundreds of km wide, that's largely enough water to make a wave higher than 4km if it's only a couple hundred meters (or even a couple kilometers) wide. For example, if you're pushing around with your hand water that is 1cm deep, it's easy to make a wave bigger than 1cm high.
@@erendorn that's not how waves work... try it in your bathtub, you'll get a bigger wave from a shove (like a landslide) than an impact. but a 28km high wave in the Atlantic would empty the ocean. there is insufficient water volume to create a wave that high.
In Armageddon, they were surprised by an asteroid, "The size of Texas", which is really a dwarf planet like Pluto. In Deep Impact, they tracked the comet for a couple of years and the government made plans for an "ELA" or extinction-level event. They also showed the comet having very low gravity and the icy surface sublimating as it got hit by the solar wind. I would give Armageddon a zero and Deep Impact a 6.
I haven't seen the movie adaptation, but the meteorite in the original Colour Out Of Space is supposed to be alien/supernatural/mysterious. I'm not sure why they included that - asking a scientist about the 'realism' of this scene is like taking an out-of-context clip from Harry Potter and asking an illusionist to comment on it without telling them that in the movie it's not an illusion but actual magic.
Agreed. The whole point of most of H. P. Lovecraft's stories was that the humans within them were dealing with things far FAR beyond their realm of knowledge. This was no more a common meteorite than a T. Rex was a common Gecko.
Lovecraft actually wrote alot of things with science in mind and I think getting a highly knowledgeable scientists opinions on those stories would actually be really fascinating, however the problem in this case is that she dismisses or is unaware of the "Lovecraftian" elements of the story. The lights she dismisses as unrealistic are actual aliens that exist outside our understanding of our own universe. They aren't "supernatural" but are far beyond our ablity comprend and therefore deal with.
I found it humorous she rates 'Deep Impact as a 1/10 for realism because about a month ago I read an article that 'Deep Impact' rated highest amongst astrophysicists for realism in disaster movies. Speaking of astrophysicists, Neil Degrasse Tyson (love him or hate him) even listed it on his Top 10 Sci-Fi movies saying, "'There have been many asteroid/comet disaster films. But this one took the time to get most of the physics right,..."I found humorous
One thing to keep in mind is how much of the movie the experts in these videos watch and thus, how much they actually grade. If all she saw were the main clips of the films (which may make sense, how much time does she have to watch the what...10 movies or more featured?) then all she would be going off of is the clips. Tyson and other astrophysicists may be going off of the full film(s), thus Deep Impact is rated not just for the impact scene (which may have Hollywood flourishes) but also the lead-up to the impact and attempts to knock it off course. I do find it hilarious that they have serious experts like these actually rate the 'science' of cartoons like Ice Age - like what do you expect, they are janky kids movies with some subtle adult humor, not documentaries. I mean in one of them, the squirrel thing actually forces continents to drift by rapidly rotating the Earth's core - do we need to get a PhD geologist on to get their reaction and see how 'real' that is? lol
In some cases she doesn't seem to have really understood or watched the scenes at all. Like at the end on Don't Look Up her comment is just stupid, the movie does _not_ show the Earth broken up by the impact, not even close. All we see is a chunk of city that has been ejected into space, presumably right from the impact point. Now is that realistic? No, the chunk wouldn't be intact, it would just be rocks. But rocks can be ejected into space, even by less violent events, and the Earth was 100% still in one piece. It was explicitly an event on the scale of the dinosaur extinction one.
@@HaganeNoGijutsushi That confirmed to me that she was only being shown short clips and that's it. That's not her fault in that case, but the fault of the people running this channel.
in fairness, they did actually point out the explosives issue in Armageddon. which was why they decided to put a single bomb on a fault line that ran the length of the object to break it in half instead of destroying it. I also think it actually was supposed to be a comet, not an asteroid, but just said asteroid because of deep impact coming out.
13:17 The flower itself isn't an alien life form, it's just been affected by the sentient alien color that came from the meteorite and is mutating everything it touches (and also caused the purple glow seen earlier, or rather, it _is_ the glow). I like how this particular story depicts alien life as so, well, _alien_ that we humans wouldn't even recognize it as being alive at first. Also, in the original story, it's not made clear whether the Color is actively antagonistic, or if it's just trying to make sense of our world in its own terms, which of course are incomprehensible and terrifying to us.
Yup, I'm disappointed that she either didn't know or dismissed the "Lovecraftian" aspects of the story in her analysis as doing so kinda makes the show/story's inclusion pointless.
@@RogueDragon05 i think you may have forgotten this series is quite literally called "How Real Is It?", she's not here to talk about the in universe fictitious aspects, she's here to take a look at popular movies and just comment on what parts of the celestial impacts are realistic and what parts arent, regardless of the in universe story
@@JubioHDX As I have pointed out elsewhere while yes your correct, your missing the point. Any virologist can watch clips from Resident Evil and say ok no virus can do that ever, end of video. That's boring, however they can talk about real life alternatives and what they might realistically look like. Also by knowing the actual lore of the story she can talk about how life like that could function and potentially exist. Imagine if an expert on radiation sickness watched Godzilla and said thats not what radiation does and that was the end of the clip. She wouldn't be wrong, but it would still be a boring and wasteful clip.
Makes me happy when smart people like her enjoy and/or compliment The Expanse. IMO, it’s the best show ever made and it’s also surprisingly scientifically accurate…well, at least compared to other sci-fi shows set in space 😄
@@JustHirt Yeah, pretty much. I finished the first season and half of second one so far, gotta get back to it someday, but the show really gets going upwards from like episode 2-3.
Smart people? She is not lol. Thermal radiation 500km away would take a minute to reach him? Are you fk kidding me? What is thermal radiation? Light for the love of God... LIGHT. Near instant!!!! She said a minute, while it would take...1/600s Also... You she would be surprised if he did not hear it before seeing the light? What is faster... Sound... or a god damn light... Light... a million times. Asteroid expert is she ? OMFG..
"If you see a fireball and it looks like its heading for you, just stand there. If it's small you MIGHT be able to get out of the way, but probably not, and if it's big *it won't matter* ." Ever notice how every Scientist has accepted their fate no matter how astronomically small the chance that fate actually happening is.
@@zydration3538 I'm guessing they assume that, if none of the prevention measures put in place work, there's no point in panicking since we're all dead anyway.
Instant like for The Expanse reference! Also an asteroid fragment would be cold after impacting the earth? I'm surprised. Learn something new every day!
I never thought about it, but it makes sense as long as the mass is sufficient. The travel time through the atmosphere where it gets heated up from incredibly cold to incredibly hot, is not long enough to cook it "well-done". The composition of the thing obviously also matters and whether or not it fell apart during re-entry and at what point.
@@Ganiscol It's even more than that, actually. Everyone instinctively thinks that the meteoroid heats up due to friction in the atmosphere. And while it's technically correct, it's not even a quarter of the whole thing, if it was exclusively friction, the rock would heat up to 300-400 degrees Celsius at most. The material wouldn't even glow. What actually causes the "fireball" is adiabatic heating. Basically: 1) the rock falls into the atmosphere very, very fast -blasting "if you smell what the rock is cooking" at full volume- 2) the air on its way gets compressed very, very rapidly (it's squashed before it has time to spread to the sides) 3) temperature of the compressed gas increases greatly because thermodynamics says so, manshaming the puny friction heating 4) the air gets so hot it ionizes creating the fireball What it means is that the rock itself gets even less heated up. There's barely enough heating to shave off tiny portions of the outermost layer of the rock, which then burn up and give different colors depending on its composition.
@@ahriman935 Problem is, every time an asteroid hits the earth, they're hitting while the average temperature of the asteroid is around 2000C. It's certainly cold compared to some things, like the average temperature of the earth's core or the corona of the sun... but it's quite a lot hotter than anything you could touch.
I feel like putting the Color Out of Space in here wasn’t really fair since it was literally a magic rock. None of these are particularly scientific movies but in that one the rock was just kinda there, what was in it was really the issue.
"The Color Out Of Space" is a short story written by H. P. Lovecraft. This story is WAY out of her comfort zone and if she knew anything about Lovecraft's mythos, she wouldn't have even dared to bother critiquing the movie. Lovecraft wrote stories about things that were supposed to be completely unknown to us. As you have said, this could literally just be summed up as a "magical rock". A very DANGEROUS "magical rock".
A key point to bring up is that the rock is NOT "magic" the "Colours" or lights are/is actual aliens. I know it's a hard concept to grasp, thats one of the fascinating aspects of the story, for those that have not read the story please do you can read it for free online or find audio readings on YT both in any number of versions and places. While there have been a couple of good movies based off the story (namely the Cage 2019 movie) made they ultimately can't do it complete justice.
@@BoMwarriorVlog She also doesn't know the difference between a comet (Deep Impact, Armageddon), an asteroid (Expanse), or magic rocks (Color out of Space, Expanse's big blue asteroids).
@@RogueDragon05 If you do read the story, you should realize that the rock is a fragment of the physical being of an elder god. That's why people call it a magic rock.
This was a lot of fun, although I did think she was a bit tough on DEEP IMPACT, which actually incorporated a lot of decent hard science, both in the spacecraft and in the landing sequence on the comet's surface. I'd definitely put it above a 1.
Hardly. She's not the only scientist in this field to take a steaming dump on the made up bullshit in that movie. Neil DeGrasse Tyson famously ripped into it as well. They didn't base it on "decent hard science." They asked an astrophysicist, got an answer they thought was too boring, incorporated what they thought would be film interesting, then just made it up from there. There is a saying in SciFi films that you must first learn and understand the science, then you can start to play with it. Here though, they learned and understood the science, then decided to throw it out with the bathwater because it was too boring.
I can tell you the tsunami scene was a complete false. I got one in 2011. Also you can see plenty of videos of tsunami on youtube. The scene shows that the film maker did not even try to learn about tsunami.
@@DalionHeartTTV If she's a "scientist" she's an astonishingly incompetent one. She doesn't seem to know anything about physics or asteroids. She thinks that an asteroid sublimating a bit of water vapor would allow for sound. This is complete nonsense. Some water vapor emitted by an asteroid in space would not have even _close_ to enough atmospheric pressure to allow for anything even resembling sound. 1 atm on Earth is an astonishing amount of pressure. She thinks that you would hear a meteor before you would see its light. How can anybody in their right mind think this? It's complete nonsense. She gets her terminology completely wrong. She says: _"The size of that thing is not a meteor. Those are big rocks, and we now know that meteors are really tiny small specks of dust. So meteors are different from asteroids and comets and meteorites."_ This is utter nonsense. A "meteor" is any piece of natural debris that's falling through the atmosphere. Of any size. A meteoroid is a small rocky or metallic body in outer space. (They become meteors if they fall into a planet's atmosphere.) A meteorite is a piece of meteor that has fallen to the ground, surviving its atmospheric entry and ground impact. A bolide is not a "super-scientific" term. It's an informal term used to describe extremely bright meteors. There's no exact definition.
@@ChadSimpson-ft7yz I think she forgot that cellphones weren’t a thing in the 90’s and that the only way those people running away would have known there was a tsunami was if they had one their car radios on.
@backseatpolitician7060 She didn't even list any particular reason why it was unrealistic. Other than the shockwave hitting the beach first and the comet blinding everyone I think it's realistic enough.
@@backseatpolitician not trying to be that guy but cellphones definitely existed in the 90s, they even had car phones in BMW's, Mercedes, etc. but they were mainly used by wealthy people so it wasn't super common.
What she did forget to add is that the same day the Chelyabinsk event happened, they had already predicted another chunk of rock the same size but passing at double or triple the distance of the Chelyabinsk one, they didn’t know it was going to happen because it was on the wrong side for us to see it, it was coming at us from the sun!
I get the feeling that this expert hasn't seen Color out of Space. The entire movie is about how everything around the meteor is wrong because it's some Lovecraftian relic that exists outside the realm of human comprehension--so yeah, a space ship designed to change wildlife. It's based off of the same short story as the also-criminally-underrated Annihilation.
The context literally doesn't matter. They had her rating meteors from cartoons too. The question was were they realistic or not, that one wasn't. But as you say, that wasn't the point of the movie so it literally doesn't matter. In fact, take it as a badge of honor. It's exactly what it's supposed to be
@@jacobsampsonis7782 Cartoons are more then capable of depicting realistic events, so thats a false equivalency. While I understand your point that she's simply grading the realism of these representations the context in this case DOES matter because if she dosen't know anything about the story then she really can't say much about shows depiction. All other people are saying is that it's a wasted opportunity for her to add something to the thoughts on the show if she dosen't know anything about those elements.
"Annihilation" wasn't based on "Color Out of Space", it's a loose adaptation of the 2014 novel "Annihilation" by Jeff VanderMeer. Sure, both clearly draw inspiration from Lovecraft, but that's it. But yeah, great movie and one of my favorite sci-fi films.
Its definitely one of the most scientifically accurate scifi space dramas/action shows of this era. Minor spoiler warning for stuff from way before the "throwing asteroids at earth arc" Most of the breaks from our physics are either handwaves to have a show (like the drive technology) or pass the burden of knowledge onto magical alien space goo beyond anyones understanding, so why should the audience understand how alien technology works if nobody in the show does either. (Its not an unreasonable assumption that aliens capable of making wormholes and pocket dimensions and burning entire solar systems can make magic space goo capable of everything it does in the show)
I think I tried watching it years ago but couldn't make it through the first episode. Can't remember if it was because the show was boring or poor quality. Maybe I'll try it again.
In the eyes of a self-proclaimed asteroid expert, it's a very realistic show. It definitely doesn't have a sentient blue asteroid in it, which isn't even slightly realistic.
0:12 - Intro to Gretchen Benedix 0:26 - Armageddon (1998) 3:21 - The Good Dinosaur (2015) 5:05 - The Expanse, S5E3 (2020) 6:52 - Greenland (2020) 8:35 - Bruce Almighty (2003) 9:55 - Ice Age: Collision Course (2016) 11:24 - Color out of Space (2019) 13:44 - Deep Impact (1998) 15:10 - Don't Look Up (2021) 17:01 - Outro
I learn so much information from these videos that I otherwise would never research on my own. Thank you for the series. It is truly once of the ones I enjoy the most on RUclips.
Designer at Pixar: The beautiful ring I made out of these asteroids is going to look cool in the shot the board artists composed. Gretchen Benedix: WRONG
Really though, I remember there was a dude talking about fight scenes from viking or celtic movies (I think, can't remember) and the entire time he was considering it's fantasy and commenting based on that. We need more of those.
Definitely take things in context, analysis of fights in a D&D type world: better acount for magic, healing, proof gods are real and active interventionists, racial varients, and whatever else. Analysis of a show like the Expanse, understand that Eros was taken over by alien goo and decided to violate all known laws of physics and "go home" to earth at the will of a girls mind the goo incorporated. The show straight up blames alien tech so we can't explain the physics of this thing's propulsion. Now the flight times are perfectly explained as accelerating to provide ship gravity and at the designated "half way point" start breaking to have your desired arrival velocity. This is math we can do to determine the travel time from say earth to Mars and that we can compare to stated times in the show. (We even know where the planets will be on the stated dates when given for more accurate conparisons, you just may need a degree in astrophysics to do the math yourself)
Really appreciated her in-depth approach that is coming from her years of experience. It is actually a privilege to be able to watch this kind of programmes that also for free.
I'd say -from what i've seen- the expanse is the ONLY realistic one out there or at least the only one that makes an effort to try and be closer to reality. Then again i don't watch many movies but i noticed how brainwashed we are from the space stereoticial films like star wars. Even though i study physics and am really into space stuff -also gonna specialise in astrophysics- again and again there were times were i saw a scene and was puzzled like 'why are they doing this' or 'thats weird' 'thats bullshit' before thinking about it more deeply and realising no that was exacly how things would happen. Not only obvious things like changes of velocity delays etc but almost every detail is wrong in other films. A perfect example is scenes of depressurisation where the air takes minutes to leave the ship, i found that weird until i did the math and they were spot on.
@@alexisjuillard4816 im an electrical engineer (with interest in most fields) so i usually pick up on things being wrong and get excited when things are correct, but you are definitely right in how we get so used to the "Style over realism" of Hollywood, especially with classics like Star Wars and Star Trek that we don't always recognize deviations from real world physics (which can be counter intuitive or much less dramatic or far weirder) Death by falling into lava is sooo much worse than in the movies, IRL you don't sink and its more like being in a frying pan than boiling water. But the Expanse is definitely one of the most accurate shows in a while, with the known physics breaks of the alien goo (protomolecule is a plot device and handwaves everything because its crazy advanced alien tech so why should we be able to understand it), the Epstein Drive (hand wave to let us accelerate all the time for "gravity"), and Flight times (the moon gravity assist scene in the Ganemede arc was beautiful but way too fast, as for the rest of the travel times its hard to be certain what the actual time of flight should be but its clearly just whatever is good for the plot, but they are typically slower than they should be) I'm sure plenty of the combat scenes are unrealistic but the show is fantastic as a hard scifi action masterpiece.
@@jasonreed7522 well let's not get into the physics of the protomolecule lol and you're right and they do play with physics as they have to, but what i love about it is the raw feeling of being in space, introducing very relevant scientific notions in space eploration like gravitational slings, grusome realities of things like etreme decceleration and what they will do to our soft bodies... death by lava is still a mystery to me to be honest. i've though and read a bit about the physics of the stuff and i'd bet we could get a wide range of cool macabre stuff depending on the situation^^ i mean context is everything here, is the lava at 700C or 1200C, whats the fluid dynamics down there are you stepping or falling what sort of viscosity we dealing with etc... all these factors and may more imo would change drastically the outcome, a guy stepping on a stagnant pool of 700C lava would maybe fry on some harder outer crust or sink in a bit, but a guy falling from high will for sure go under the surface. but my intuition tells me it would be quicker then you'd think and maybe even a good death. A guy jumping 50 meters in a bubbling pool of 1200C lava would literally explode i think. As soon as his body hit the surface that big sac of water will turn to steam and fast, rapid gaas expansion, explosion. You see videos of guys throwing organic matter in volcanoes that just create this instant eplosion of vapor
The Expanse gets even better because the multiple strikes later lead to a global cooling effect. Even the asteroids that don't make impact still have a detrimental effect, since multiple vaporized asteroids still add to the particulates in the sky blocking out the sun.
Given what we know now with data from the horrible Australian wildfires and the Hunga Tonga Hunga-Haapai volcano, which kicked up dust clouds visible from space but barely moved the needle on global temperature, I'm pretty sure that isn't accurate. Such heavy particulates (relative to air) couldn't possibly stay around long enough to cool the planet like shown in the show.
Lol. Comparing a few wildfires and one volcano to dozens of asteroid impacts all over the planet over the span of months. But okay, bud. You are "pretty sure" so you must be correct.
I will never understand why producers and directors never collaborate with this kind of people. They can make spectacular movies based on their knowledge.
Because reality is generally rather dull, particularly space travel. Space travel is slow, tedious, and cumbersome - nothing zips, zooms, and swerves like a jet fighter on Earth.
In Deep Impact, the tsunami somehow hit Paris. In Greenland, it shows cities across the world to be decimated when in reality the Shockwave would only reach (maximum) the nearest continent.
This one was fun. What got to me though is how I haven't even heard about half of the media analyzed. I've no idea how some sort of pop culture with references that people can understand would develop and endure between younger people anymore when there's so much out there and with it all passing by so fast and most not even leaving a smidge.
I'm no expert by any means but I'm pretty sure we can still see these things from the other side of the sun. From what I do know, if it's close enough to the sun that we can't see it, it's likely pretty small and will probably be sucked in by the sun's gravity and destroyed anyways.
We can log the vast majority of them while we and the various objects orbit the sun, thankfully. And if it's a hazardous-sized one we'd keep an extra close eye on it by any means possible.
this is one of the most clear and concise expert I've seen in this things. That is sign of her level of understanding she has on her field. I would love to have her as a teacher
With everything thats happening in the world i asked myself "do i really wanna watch this, and lose another nights sleep"...well i did and now that i heard her say "dont be afraid" i actually have one less thing to worry about 😆
I've been terrified since I learned about asteroid impacts as a little kid. I remember when I was 8 wondering what I would do, and thinking I could jump in the bubblers at school (even then I knew it wouldn't help at all). I wish I had seen such a video then. It would have made me much less terrified. A great example of how a little knowledge can be harmful, but a good amount is reassuring and helpful
I was the same way as a kid, always viewing it as the pinnacle unavoidable natural/cosmic disaster that could kill us all at any moment with no chance for survival. It's nice to know, and really inspiring even, knowing that we not only have a high likelihood to detect them long in advance--but also redirect/destroy them, as seen with the precedent set in the D.A.R.T. mission.
Right! Films and TV programs are meant to be entertaining, not a documentary! Haha I like the ones where the expert acknowledges the fun factor along with the scientific view
@@thestraydog I'd be fine with this video (because it's specifically asking "how real is it?") if she at least diversified her rankings... pretty sure she only gave 1/10 or 8/10. Like, Ma'am, I know you're far more intelligent than me, but are you really saying Ice Age is just as realistic as Deep Impact???
I was honestly scared to watch this video because I have a fear of these types of events actually happening. But I'm glad I did watch because this woman put my mind at ease. Bless her for the work she does and for her pleasant disposition. She is a 10/10. ❤🎉😊
@@erakfishfishfish Heh, yeah I remember thinking something like "Wait, so, Greenland's a frozen sheet of ice and Iceland isn't frozen? Who named these places?" back when I was a kid.
@@Bubbajones213 The funny thing about that is that Erik the Red just wanted to attract people to a colony he was starting there because he was exiled from Iceland. It was literally a marketing scam.
I disagree with her that the guy in the Expanse clip would hear it before seeing the light. Light travels more or less instantly on that scale, where as sound travels a comparatively slow 343m/s. When the Chelyabinsk impactor hit Russia, the shockwave hit whiteness anywhere from tens of seconds, to several minutes after the impact.
You are right but u r also wrong. Listen to her whole sentence. And I can relate to hearing sounds before we see the object or light. Um... Suppose aeroplanes, if they are at very high altitude you hear them coming first before you see them and that is when they are actually above you. The sound keeps travelling in all directions while light may or may not appear to you at the same time depending upon the position of the viewer and the source. Generally, we compare lightning and thunder to explain why light travels faster then sound but the deal is that lightning are pretty straightforward and they are happening inside our atmosphere most probably in front of us. There are also instances where we do hear the sound of thunder and don't see the lightning. So, I am not calling you wrong you are right but I am also telling that she is also right. Just listen to her complete explanation.
@@s.s.8673 I've watched what she said again, and I understand where your coming from, but still disagree. The light from a super bolide, large enough to reach the ground with a significant fraction of it's cosmic velocity, is going to be ridiculously bright. It's just not something you wouldn't immediately notice. Even with your eyes closed and your hands covering your face.The one featured in this clip looks to be at least as large, if not larger that the 1908 Tunguska event. When that entered the atmosphere, it appeared as bright as the sun to whiteness 65km/40mi away. Even more intense than the visible light, was the infra-red radiation. Those same whitenesses described it as feeling like their skin was on fire. The blast/sound from that impact took another three minutes to travel the 65km to those whitenesses. Not only would an individual see the light instantaneously, but they would feel it instantaneously too. In your airplane analogy, an aircraft is visually insignificant. A small dot in the sky, so it's very easy not to notice it before the sound alerts you to it's presence. Same with lightning. If it's some distance away, or during daylight, it's easy to not notice it before thunder. A super bolide, like the one in Expanse, is on a whole other magnitude. If your out in the open, like this guy is, and close enough to be killed by it, then the light is going to be similar to that produced by an atomic blast. There's just no scenario where someone killed by the blast outdoors, wouldn't immediately notice the light, with the sound/blast/death coming tens of seconds, to minutes later.
@zzziie That's just not going to happen with a super bolide of this size. If it's entering the atmosphere directly above you, then it's within 100km/60 miles of you. At that distance, it's as bright as the sun, if not brighter. It doesn't matter what direction your looking, your going to notice. While it could be more than a minute before the sound arrives
@@s.s.8673 Her sentence is about thermal radiation and him being 500km from it. He feels the heat before he hears the explosion. This is absolutely how physics works. You don't hear the explosion, traveling at around 340m/s, before you feel the heat, traveling at around 300,000,000m/s.
i believe the sounds isnt just from the object itself but more the breaking of atmosphere and the amount of atmosphere it moves. thats the rumble that will get to you first as it will simply push away the entire atmosphere around you. imagine pushing a ball into water, the water getting pushed away would be the atmosphere
Was a bit surprised she said we'd see it before it got to that point with Armageddon because in the movie they did identify it a few weeks before it got that close. Guessing she didn't watch the movie, lol. Also the scientists have said if one comes from the direction of the sun we'll be completely blind to it until it's too late given that most of the ways of seeing it would be blinded, so it's not entirely farfetched. There have been several "close calls" where NASA didn't even see the asteroids until it was too late or they were already passing because they came out of the blind spot. She mentions the same thing when talking about Deep Impact about how we wouldn't know only if we didn't track it, just odd she ignores that there can be rogue asteroids we don't see. I won't even get into the part where she says you'll hear it before you see it, lol.
I love these videos for the insights in all kinds of topics, but I hate how quiet they are in comparison to practically everything else I watch on youtube.
Very interesting! I have always wanted to see a meteor and I finally did! It was about a year ago now, high in the air, green turning to orange. I reported it on a website that tracks such sightings and with 500 or so reports, they estimated it at about 450 miles south of where I saw it at high altitude (don't remember exactly, maybe 40,000ft?) Anyway cool video - thanks!
Hey Insider - could you please start adding the titles of the movies at the "rating card" screens? (or if you don't want it on the same frame, have the title just before (maybe morph to the ratings text?)) It is a bit annoying having to scroll back and find the brief title inset if there is a movie that seems interesting.
Armageddon always gets my vote for worst blockbuster of the 90s: bad writing, bad direction, bad acting, even the editing is bad. I saw it at a free preview screening and I was very happy I didn’t pay for the tix!
Omg I loved this lady!! Are there more space movies and shoes cuz y’all need to bring her back! She did so well and was super honest and INFORMATIVE! I think that was the best science lesson I’ve ever gotten that I actually understood!
You loved this lady?? Did you go to public school? Must have. She claims the guy in Greenland should hear the Shockwave before he sees the fireball, and that you could dodge a fireball if you watched it long enough and then just jumped out of the way. She is a moron.
She is not an expert... Thermal radiation 500km away would take a minute to reach him? Are you fk kidding me? What is thermal radiation? Light for the love of God... LIGHT. Near instant!!!! She said a minute, while it would take...1/600s Also... You she would be surprised if he did not hear it before seeing the light? What is faster... Sound... or a god damn light... Light... a million times. Asteroid expert is she ? OMFG..
But they weren't trying to blow Dotty up, they were trying to blow it apart... They rather said what she said about the quantity of nukes needed: "Given her size, composition, her sheer velocity, (slight laugh) you could fire every nuke you've got, and she'd just smile at you and keep on coming."
Real hard to make a realistic meteor / asteroid / comet impact for a movie. The real thing is far more stunning. I still remember reading that 65 mya when the 10km meteor wiped out most life on Earth, if you were close enough to 'see' it, you were already dead from the thermal flash alone. When Russia dropped their 55 megaton Tsar Bomba, you were seriously burned 100 km or 62 miles from ground zero. The dino killer was fatal from flash burns thousands of miles away. If that didn't kill you, the blast wave would. If that didn't kill you, 500 mph winds would. If that didn't kill you, magnitude 15 earthquake would. If that didn't kill you, Tsunamis over 1 km high would. If that didn't kill you, when atmosphere temp rose to over 2,000 degrees would. If that didn't kill you, global fire storms would. If that didn't kill you, 1 year of darkness, choking dust, marauding starving people would... see why it is so hard to make a realistic impact?
I grew up in Arizona and have been to the Meteor Crater there several times. I find it pretty fasinating. I especially like the museum that details how the meteor, in the final moments, traveled from the east coast to the west before impacting. I just imagine what it must've looked like streaking through the sky, just before impacting.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but in Armageddon weren't they SPLITTING the asteroid, not blowing it to pieces? Seems to me that would take much less force if you knew what you were doing...
Amazing how one can become an astro-geologist without understanding even basic physics, isn't it? Even before she made that statement I disliked a lot of her over-simplifications, but when I got to that part, I had to turn off the video in disgust. Quite an "expert" ...
The Great Daylight Fireball of 1972 skipped off the atmosphere, entering over Utah and leaving over Alberta. The thing was, it came low enough to create a fireball, but high enough not to lose too much kinetic energy, about 57 km. I would expect a mile-wide asteroid passing at that altitude would likewqise escape.
You've got to love scientists when they say don't be worried we're looking out for anything... If they do find something big enough... They can't do anything 🤦♂️🙃
we could still determine the damage level, what areas will be impacted, literally and elsewise, and where the safest places would be. All this could save just enough of us, even if we can't stop it in the first place.
This is the LAST person we want looking at the skies. She claims a person shod be able to hear a fireball before seeing it and that you could jump out of the way if you saw a meteor fireball coming towards you. She is an idiot.
She is not an expert... Thermal radiation 500km away would take a minute to reach him? Are you fk kidding me? What is thermal radiation? Light for the love of God... LIGHT. Near instant!!!! She said a minute, while it would take...1/600s Also... You she would be surprised if he did not hear it before seeing the light? What is faster... Sound... or a god damn light... Light... a million times. Asteroid expert is she ? OMFG..
For an 'expert' this woman doesn't seem to know much about what she's talking about. There's a few good points in there, but it's mostly just "I think this, I think that" without any basis in reality. I give her 1/10.
Come on, guys?.. A beautifully filmed and edited "Armageddon" deserves much more higher mark! Of course it has several inaccuraces and blunders (asteroid's gravity strength, shuttle's external fuel tank, "Mir" axial rotation, nuke yield is too low, etc.) but after all the concept itself behind the movie and physics are very realistic for the theatrical purposes solely. Rate it higher, please 💖
The thing with the meteorite in Color Out of Space is that it's supposed to have a color we have no name for and that the light itself coming out of it is a living entity. Welcome to cosmic horror.
@@marcussinclaire4890 Read the story, it makes more sense. The movie's terrible, but not because it's not realistic... but because the production budget was 3 paperclips and a rubber band.
13:08-13:12 "unless the meteorite is... a spaceship... which GENERALLY they're just rocks". Definition of generally: in MOST cases. Most, meaning NOT all cases. Ladies and gentlemen, we got them. Now we know
Due to the last comment (about size and Earth's destruction), I would have liked to hear her view about Melancholia's ending since it is the largest object hitting Earth I've seen in a movie.
I was watching a meteor shower with my son and we happened to be looking at a spot where a point began glowing brighter and brighter white, then it faded. It was a meteor that was pointed directly at us. I'd never seen that before and I've seen some amazing meteor showers. That was super cool! We joked that it would've been funny if the glow subsided and a few seconds later we went a "doink" on our head 😂
I like these for the most part, but sometimes it's just so obvious that the expert has only been shown a clip, and has not seen the movie or TV show in its entirety. The analyses given are often (and especially in this instance) slightly inaccurate because the expert was shown a clip of a movie they'd never seen out of context.
I know, it's very noticeable. I understand that showing numerous multiple hours long films isn't possible but I wish they'd at least give them a breakdown and correct them on certain aspects
@@Mila-Rosa Or maybe, just maybe, when an asteroid expert looks at a rock with a big ball of ice and chemicals around it, they don't call it an asteroid... can't take her seriously when she can't tell a comet from an asteroid.
@@FroggerbobT if you mean armageddon its because people in the movie call it that. its supposed to be a comet (two comets, technically, that had been fused together), but they call it an asteroid, i suspect because of deep impact which was coming out a few months later.
05:48 I'm surprised she thinks someone would hear it before seeing it in the sky. Light travels WAY faster than sound. I remember the meteor flying over Russia. Lots of people saw that light way before the sound/shockwave came into play. Expert, you say?
You would see it, then you'd notice yourself turned to ash, and then several minutes later, you'd hear it with your ash ears. Obviously, the residents of Nagasaki didn't go deaf before they were melted.
I think the most unrealistic thing in Don't Look Up, is that apparently there was enough force to eject parts of cities into space, but somehow leave the buildings on chunks of land intact.
You mean parts of Mogadishu and Port-au-Prince are in space in that movie?
The movie was entertaining but it was completely unrealistic imo.
Funny, because the asteroid hit the ocean, maybe it ejected Atlantis out 😂
That was just for the credits scene, meant to be for artistic gags, like Kate's phone going "Your diet is over!" That phone not only would never have flown into space, it wouldn't even be functional.
You think that's the most unrealistic thing in that film. You must think Santa is real then 🤣
8:45 I am actually from Chelyabinsk, the city the meteor hit, and it was in 2013, not 2015
The fireball emerged in the morning sky around 9 am and we could see it before we could hear it, because it glowed brighter than the morning sky. After some time around 30 seconds to a minute, can’t remember exactly it blew up. That’s when we heard it, the explosion and the shockwave was so strong it shattered windows all over my region, and around 1000 people got injured in the aftermath, mostly from glass. It was pretty scary, at first we thought it was a nuclear missile, then we realized it was a meteor. Funny thing is, there was another asteroid that was supposed to fly by the earth later that day, NASA was actually tracking that one, and everyone in my town thought it was gonna hit too, so we pretty much expected the apocalypse that day😬
crazy stuff 😅
In Russia space explores you.
Yeah, I am not really sure what she was going on about there. If you hear it without seeing it first you are so far away you would never have seen it at all. Light is faster than sound after all, so if you can see see it, you will hear it with some delay.
I wonder if that event happening in Russia caused Vladimir Putin to think it was a "sign from God" for him to hurry up and "make Russia great again," thus triggering his annexation of Crimea, and then his invasion of Ukraine eight years later.
Glad you weren't hurt. Heard there were alot of injuries in your town.
Explosives experts: "Completely unrealistic, too much fireball!"
Asteroid expert: "Completely unrealistic, not nearly enough fireball!"
yes
One has more velocity and power than the other lol
Kinetic energy is friggin terrifying dude. We can achieve the same kind of damage of a nuclear weapon with zero fissile material. Just drop a tungsten rod from orbit and you've got a relatively low tech weapon of severe mass destruction.
@@kpopscenario1406 what are you talking about? What?
Michael Bay: *furiously taking notes* more... explosions...
Armageddon 0:00
The Good Dinosaur 3:21
The Expanse S5E3 5:05
Greenland 6:52
Bruce Almighty 8:34
Ice Age: CC 9:54
Color Out of Space 11:25
Deep Impact 13:45
Don't Look Up 15:10
Imagine Your Name (2016) was in this list
It’s just a comet strike but I count as a meteor strike because it broke apart from the comet
13:11, I love that she said "generally, they're just rocks," implying that some may not be rocks.
They can also be made up of ice or metals so she had to make that distinction
@@arik_dev What I was meaning was that it sounded almost like she said that some may not be just random space junk, not that some aren't made of rock.
That's the scientific way, you have to always assume in an universe as big as ours, that there is always a possibility of an outlier outside yer sample ye studied. Never make a blanket statement. Saying that all asteroids is made of just rock because ye looked at 100 asteroids and they all were just rocks. What if the 101th asteroid ye did NOT look at was made of metals? And someone else found it and said "HAH, all rocks my arse!" You just made a fool of yerself. Not to mention making such blanket statements blinds ye to other possibilities in the quest for the most complete understanding of the universe we can create. Ignore the possibilities and your science will forevermore be incomplete.
@@arik_dev Yeah they can be many things but broadly yeah, rock, rocky metal or ice or some combination. Big comets often have a rocky core.
Funny thing is that was pretty much the entire point in that movie it is based on a HP Lovecraft story after all. So I think we can safely assume that it is most definitely no mere rock since that wouldn't make for much of a horror story now would it? Presumably it is some kind of incomprehensible powerful sentient entity since that is usually their choice of style.
I appreciate her honesty. She did not throw out high scores just because. Would love know what her opinion is on Moldavite. The coolest stone on earth.
If you're talking about the "healing" properties, she'd probably think it was BS
I love that stone! I have a few pieces. Bought my wife some earrings too.
@@chrisf6612 well rocks don’t have healing and soothing and so on effects to them so of course it’s bs
@@chrisf6612 rocks dont have any type of healing things
@@Wolf35063 soothing is incorrect in terms of textile feel, some people like the feel soap stone for example.
Fun fact about the Colour Out Of Space: the fact that the meteor is unusually hot is actually commented on in the book it's based on. It's one of the first things that clues the science team from Miskatonic University investigating it that there's something not quite right about it.
Phenomenal story/movie
I'm not sure why it's on the list. The meteor was just a McGuffin for the rest of the story. It could have just as easily been something washed up on a shore (which Lovecraft did more than a few other times as well).
Exactly, I don't know why it was even included but they should have at least given her some context for the scene. The fact that it's not normal is the whole point.
I think they're just talking about the impact of it. In the story it's like a portion of an elder god's consciousness or whatever so obviously its physical makeup isn't going to be necessarily scientifically accurate, but she can judge the realism of its impact upon the planet's surface.
@@michaelniemeyer2706 but it's the colour from out of space!? I know lol at least they didnt have her cover the thing on the doorstep.
This Lady is harsh but fair.
Fair, because she gave The Expanse "at least an 8". 😌
The motto of the expanse is: "As realistic as possible while still having scifi action fun"
The list of glaringly obvious science errors is countable on 1 hand (space goo and all its related stuff, engines, wormhole) even the travel times aren't that unreasonable, and are possibly too slow.
Shes got Chelyabinsk meteor date wrong, it was 2013, I remember. I even googled it to make sure before commenting.
@@fynkozari9271 Also the asteroid impact happened 66 million years ago, not 65
@@jasonreed7522 The main liberty the author took in the Expanse was the Epstein drive, which he acknowledge wasn't based on real science but was necessary for the book to work. He establishes what it is capable of and realistically integrates it into the world (universe) building. Love the books and the show is really good too.
The thing she got way wrong is that you'd hear an asteroid before you saw it. Light is WAY faster than sound so ....
Really appreciate the fact she tries to explain it without over complicating it, good job 👍
You can see her face freezing while she's thinking up a layman-friendly sentence that can be understood by anybody.
I appreciate her trying to calm everyone's fears about the risks being low. The assumption being that we know where the big asteroids are and it's hard for us to get surprised. Trouble is, long period comets are 1) far away and not detectable until they're on their way in; 2) really big; 3) falling in toward the sun (and, potentially, us) from great distances and therefore really moving by the time they're here. The risks of long period comets are small but very real.
If they knew it was coming, why did they not warn people in Chelabinsk to stay away from the windows? I'd say they know a lot less then they pretend to, for various reasons.
@@edgarskalnins5390 Because the one in Chelabinsk was 1) really small, and 2) it came from the sun's direction, so the only way to know it was coming was the very slight chance to see it's shadow against sunlight, as it's reflected light wouldn't be pointed towards us. We know stuff, quit with that conspiracy mindset.
@@kartoffel4050 if being small and coming from Suns side leaves out ability to detect, there is a lot you don't know. No need for conspiracies.
it being small cuts down it's destructive power AND detectability exponentially. We. Do. Know. Stuff.
@@kartoffel4050 that is what every ignorant person thinks.
The Expanse was a great series, they did a lot of fact checking on the actual realism of space & how things would actually act in it.
the politics in it is dumb tho.
@@doejan8549 politics in real world are way dumber
@@benasbuivydas4074 The problem with fiction is that it has to be believable. Real life has no such restriction xD
@@Sky_Guy Yep, I think the phrase is "Sometimes reality is unrealistic.".
Oye , beltalawda
Some might call her honesty brutal. I say calling out Hollywood for its overhyped, unrealistic, overdramatized, crap is spot on. One thing I liked about the Martian is that the filmmakers took great care to stick to a science-based story that was practical. The fact that actual scientists gave its believability a thumbs up was good enough for me.
The only Issue I had was with Color Out Of Space. It's literally fiction and it's pretty much a vessel for an alien. I feel like she had no context but still. You take something like that and try to put science into it, of course it wont be 100% accurate!
The Martian is proof that audiences actually do want hard sci-fi, and will pay truckloads of money for it. It's also proof that people have forgotten what hard sci-fi means, because they think The Expanse is hard sci-fi and The Martian isn't sci-fi at all.
Funny thing is, that realism gave The Martian much more tension and stakes. I was on edge till the end.
The Martian is great, at least until the end. The Iron Man sequence just felt like pure Hollywood. And, of course, as the source material points out, that having a bunch of people there to greet the survivor would be an unrealistic thing Hollywood would do, as they'd all be busy with tasks during the rescue.
@@Axterix13 Minor flaws. It is an entertainment focused film after all. Loved it.
I'm actually really happy to see Greenland on here because I think it's a really underrated film that not enough people saw or talk about. In my very humble layman opinion, I think it's one of the more realistic takes we've had on film of what could happen with an impending impact incident on earth. I know that the expert disagrees with me, and she may be right. But she also freely admitted that we've never seen firsthand a disaster of this size.........so who really knows? (I do agree however that the total global devastation of every city isn't very likely, but it makes for good cinema.)
i love greenland because of how it's realistic in the human reaction. it's impressive.
@@iamsueshii8529 Exactly.
I think she may have forgotten about the globe-wide fires that would've occurred as the fragments of our own crust that were kicked up into the atmosphere came back down. That would certainly mess up a lot of places far from the impact zone. But maybe her point is that it should've looked somewhat different.
@@nerysghemor5781 Well there are large craters in Paris, for example, that wouldn't necessarily exist. And a global burn doesn't destroy structures made of concrete and metal; though I could see the ensuing earthquakes potentially doing so.
@@majnuker The comet strikes Western Europe though (they even say so, multiple times, in the movie), so Paris having a lot of craters is actually on-point for that film. In fact, I'm kind of astounded Paris isn't just one gigantic hole in the ground, considering a comet of that size landed in the virtual neighborhood.
Would've really loved to have seen her analysis on the asteroid in Disney's Dinosaur (2000), such a shame. I remember it being a very intense scene that stuck with me.
Same here! Really fantastic scene from a very underrated movie.
traumatized me as a kid 😬
@@timjaeger6589never even heard of it. not sure how i missed it. im assuming it wasn't something major at the time. I watched everything disney back then and somehow missed that one.
Core traumatic memory right there 😂
I saw that movie in the theater as a kid and it gave me some pretty bad dreams for a while! 😂
The thing about the impact damage in Greenland is that immediately after it shows the entire globe, and there were impact marks all over it caused from pieces of the comet that had broken off. Not all the damage was from the main body of the comet.
Deep Impact was based on a lot of studies at the time. That got reported on a lot at the time, and the team that ran the simulations for the movie had predicted a 28km tsunami hitting the east coast of the USA in the right conditions which they thought would inundate half the continent. As far as I'm aware, that's still supposed to be the most realistic movie on an impact, if only because they engaged the scientific community to get it looking right with then-current understanding.
I think you might have forgotten a decimal point. The Atlantic is only an average of 4000 meters deep, and its deepest points are only 8000 meters deep. There is, however, a strong possibility that a strong enough wave could run up to 28 kilometers inland. We know a 100-ft wave (about 30m) tall can get up to 10 miles (16 kilometers) inland.
@@mspicer3262 if it's 4km deep but for hundreds of km wide, that's largely enough water to make a wave higher than 4km if it's only a couple hundred meters (or even a couple kilometers) wide.
For example, if you're pushing around with your hand water that is 1cm deep, it's easy to make a wave bigger than 1cm high.
@@erendorn that's not how waves work... try it in your bathtub, you'll get a bigger wave from a shove (like a landslide) than an impact. but a 28km high wave in the Atlantic would empty the ocean. there is insufficient water volume to create a wave that high.
In Armageddon, they were surprised by an asteroid, "The size of Texas", which is really a dwarf planet like Pluto. In Deep Impact, they tracked the comet for a couple of years and the government made plans for an "ELA" or extinction-level event. They also showed the comet having very low gravity and the icy surface sublimating as it got hit by the solar wind. I would give Armageddon a zero and Deep Impact a 6.
@@mspicer3262 28 km high lmao, that's like over double the cruising altitude of a commercial jet.
I love these. I especially love the "this would never happen, 1/10." Preach it, Gretchen!
Gretchen doesn't care about your feelings. 0/10.
@@Jt-88_ that got me rolling for some reason
@@Jt-88_ Expert rates YT comments...
-10/10! 😆
she really was their to rate meteors lol
The Dinosaurs do not care about her opinion.
I haven't seen the movie adaptation, but the meteorite in the original Colour Out Of Space is supposed to be alien/supernatural/mysterious.
I'm not sure why they included that - asking a scientist about the 'realism' of this scene is like taking an out-of-context clip from Harry Potter and asking an illusionist to comment on it without telling them that in the movie it's not an illusion but actual magic.
Agreed. The whole point of most of H. P. Lovecraft's stories was that the humans within them were dealing with things far FAR beyond their realm of knowledge. This was no more a common meteorite than a T. Rex was a common Gecko.
Lovecraft actually wrote alot of things with science in mind and I think getting a highly knowledgeable scientists opinions on those stories would actually be really fascinating, however the problem in this case is that she dismisses or is unaware of the "Lovecraftian" elements of the story. The lights she dismisses as unrealistic are actual aliens that exist outside our understanding of our own universe. They aren't "supernatural" but are far beyond our ablity comprend and therefore deal with.
Not sure why they asked an asteroid expert what a comet was either, but she didn't know the answer to that.
I found it humorous she rates 'Deep Impact as a 1/10 for realism because about a month ago I read an article that 'Deep Impact' rated highest amongst astrophysicists for realism in disaster movies. Speaking of astrophysicists, Neil Degrasse Tyson (love him or hate him) even listed it on his Top 10 Sci-Fi movies saying, "'There have been many asteroid/comet disaster films. But this one took the time to get most of the physics right,..."I found humorous
One thing to keep in mind is how much of the movie the experts in these videos watch and thus, how much they actually grade. If all she saw were the main clips of the films (which may make sense, how much time does she have to watch the what...10 movies or more featured?) then all she would be going off of is the clips. Tyson and other astrophysicists may be going off of the full film(s), thus Deep Impact is rated not just for the impact scene (which may have Hollywood flourishes) but also the lead-up to the impact and attempts to knock it off course. I do find it hilarious that they have serious experts like these actually rate the 'science' of cartoons like Ice Age - like what do you expect, they are janky kids movies with some subtle adult humor, not documentaries. I mean in one of them, the squirrel thing actually forces continents to drift by rapidly rotating the Earth's core - do we need to get a PhD geologist on to get their reaction and see how 'real' that is? lol
@@jacobcoburn7634 yeah, it's ridiculous and that channel sucks
In some cases she doesn't seem to have really understood or watched the scenes at all. Like at the end on Don't Look Up her comment is just stupid, the movie does _not_ show the Earth broken up by the impact, not even close. All we see is a chunk of city that has been ejected into space, presumably right from the impact point. Now is that realistic? No, the chunk wouldn't be intact, it would just be rocks. But rocks can be ejected into space, even by less violent events, and the Earth was 100% still in one piece. It was explicitly an event on the scale of the dinosaur extinction one.
Deep Impact deserved way better than a 1/10. Seems realistic the water would be that high and rush inland that fast and far.
@@HaganeNoGijutsushi That confirmed to me that she was only being shown short clips and that's it. That's not her fault in that case, but the fault of the people running this channel.
"if you see a fireball coming at you. just stand there... if its big it doesn't matter" I lol'ed
Same! That was so savage haha
in fairness, they did actually point out the explosives issue in Armageddon. which was why they decided to put a single bomb on a fault line that ran the length of the object to break it in half instead of destroying it. I also think it actually was supposed to be a comet, not an asteroid, but just said asteroid because of deep impact coming out.
Well if the comet thing were true then it would lose points on that because they aren't rocky and metallic like asteroids
13:17 The flower itself isn't an alien life form, it's just been affected by the sentient alien color that came from the meteorite and is mutating everything it touches (and also caused the purple glow seen earlier, or rather, it _is_ the glow).
I like how this particular story depicts alien life as so, well, _alien_ that we humans wouldn't even recognize it as being alive at first. Also, in the original story, it's not made clear whether the Color is actively antagonistic, or if it's just trying to make sense of our world in its own terms, which of course are incomprehensible and terrifying to us.
Yup, I'm disappointed that she either didn't know or dismissed the "Lovecraftian" aspects of the story in her analysis as doing so kinda makes the show/story's inclusion pointless.
@@RogueDragon05 i think you may have forgotten this series is quite literally called "How Real Is It?", she's not here to talk about the in universe fictitious aspects, she's here to take a look at popular movies and just comment on what parts of the celestial impacts are realistic and what parts arent, regardless of the in universe story
@@JubioHDX As I have pointed out elsewhere while yes your correct, your missing the point. Any virologist can watch clips from Resident Evil and say ok no virus can do that ever, end of video. That's boring, however they can talk about real life alternatives and what they might realistically look like. Also by knowing the actual lore of the story she can talk about how life like that could function and potentially exist. Imagine if an expert on radiation sickness watched Godzilla and said thats not what radiation does and that was the end of the clip. She wouldn't be wrong, but it would still be a boring and wasteful clip.
Makes me happy when smart people like her enjoy and/or compliment The Expanse. IMO, it’s the best show ever made and it’s also surprisingly scientifically accurate…well, at least compared to other sci-fi shows set in space 😄
I keep hearing good things about The Expanse. I didn't make it through the first episode but I hear the first two are slow and then you are hooked.
@@JustHirt Yeah, pretty much. I finished the first season and half of second one so far, gotta get back to it someday, but the show really gets going upwards from like episode 2-3.
Smart people? She is not lol. Thermal radiation 500km away would take a minute to reach him? Are you fk kidding me? What is thermal radiation? Light for the love of God... LIGHT. Near instant!!!! She said a minute, while it would take...1/600s Also... You she would be surprised if he did not hear it before seeing the light? What is faster... Sound... or a god damn light... Light... a million times. Asteroid expert is she ? OMFG..
There's a channel called Sacred Cow Shipyards, he mostly roasts sci-fi ships but he had a LOT of good things about The Expanse...
The Expanse is consistently considered one of the most scientifically accurate Sci-Fi shows/movies ever. Just a a the authors of the books intended.
I was happy to hear her say that she loves _The Expanse._ Great show.
Same. One of my favourite shows ever
"If you see a fireball and it looks like its heading for you, just stand there. If it's small you MIGHT be able to get out of the way, but probably not, and if it's big *it won't matter* ."
Ever notice how every Scientist has accepted their fate no matter how astronomically small the chance that fate actually happening is.
EOD: either they diffuse the bomb or it’s not their problem anymore.
Aside from the constant work, research, and experimentation going into preventing and handling these potential issues?
@@zydration3538 I'm guessing they assume that, if none of the prevention measures put in place work, there's no point in panicking since we're all dead anyway.
I have had a couple dreams about cataclysmic impacts. Can confirm, I just stood there and came to terms 🤷♀️ woke up absolutely terrified though lol.
Instant like for The Expanse reference!
Also an asteroid fragment would be cold after impacting the earth? I'm surprised. Learn something new every day!
With her explanation it totally makes sense. Without that I probably wouldn't believe it even though I love everything about the universe.
I never thought about it, but it makes sense as long as the mass is sufficient. The travel time through the atmosphere where it gets heated up from incredibly cold to incredibly hot, is not long enough to cook it "well-done". The composition of the thing obviously also matters and whether or not it fell apart during re-entry and at what point.
@@Ganiscol It's even more than that, actually.
Everyone instinctively thinks that the meteoroid heats up due to friction in the atmosphere. And while it's technically correct, it's not even a quarter of the whole thing, if it was exclusively friction, the rock would heat up to 300-400 degrees Celsius at most. The material wouldn't even glow.
What actually causes the "fireball" is adiabatic heating. Basically:
1) the rock falls into the atmosphere very, very fast -blasting "if you smell what the rock is cooking" at full volume-
2) the air on its way gets compressed very, very rapidly (it's squashed before it has time to spread to the sides)
3) temperature of the compressed gas increases greatly because thermodynamics says so, manshaming the puny friction heating
4) the air gets so hot it ionizes creating the fireball
What it means is that the rock itself gets even less heated up. There's barely enough heating to shave off tiny portions of the outermost layer of the rock, which then burn up and give different colors depending on its composition.
@@ahriman935 Problem is, every time an asteroid hits the earth, they're hitting while the average temperature of the asteroid is around 2000C. It's certainly cold compared to some things, like the average temperature of the earth's core or the corona of the sun... but it's quite a lot hotter than anything you could touch.
Think of putting a freezed chicken in the oven for 2 seconds
I feel like putting the Color Out of Space in here wasn’t really fair since it was literally a magic rock. None of these are particularly scientific movies but in that one the rock was just kinda there, what was in it was really the issue.
Yeah, she gave 1's & 0's when she could've given a 2, 3, or 4. 😒 Way too harsh.
"The Color Out Of Space" is a short story written by H. P. Lovecraft. This story is WAY out of her comfort zone and if she knew anything about Lovecraft's mythos, she wouldn't have even dared to bother critiquing the movie. Lovecraft wrote stories about things that were supposed to be completely unknown to us. As you have said, this could literally just be summed up as a "magical rock". A very DANGEROUS "magical rock".
A key point to bring up is that the rock is NOT "magic" the "Colours" or lights are/is actual aliens. I know it's a hard concept to grasp, thats one of the fascinating aspects of the story, for those that have not read the story please do you can read it for free online or find audio readings on YT both in any number of versions and places. While there have been a couple of good movies based off the story (namely the Cage 2019 movie) made they ultimately can't do it complete justice.
@@BoMwarriorVlog She also doesn't know the difference between a comet (Deep Impact, Armageddon), an asteroid (Expanse), or magic rocks (Color out of Space, Expanse's big blue asteroids).
@@RogueDragon05 If you do read the story, you should realize that the rock is a fragment of the physical being of an elder god. That's why people call it a magic rock.
This was a lot of fun, although I did think she was a bit tough on DEEP IMPACT, which actually incorporated a lot of decent hard science, both in the spacecraft and in the landing sequence on the comet's surface. I'd definitely put it above a 1.
Hardly. She's not the only scientist in this field to take a steaming dump on the made up bullshit in that movie. Neil DeGrasse Tyson famously ripped into it as well.
They didn't base it on "decent hard science." They asked an astrophysicist, got an answer they thought was too boring, incorporated what they thought would be film interesting, then just made it up from there. There is a saying in SciFi films that you must first learn and understand the science, then you can start to play with it. Here though, they learned and understood the science, then decided to throw it out with the bathwater because it was too boring.
Yeah I thought she'd at least give it a 3-5
I can tell you the tsunami scene was a complete false. I got one in 2011. Also you can see plenty of videos of tsunami on youtube. The scene shows that the film maker did not even try to learn about tsunami.
What are your credentials?
@@DalionHeartTTV If she's a "scientist" she's an astonishingly incompetent one. She doesn't seem to know anything about physics or asteroids.
She thinks that an asteroid sublimating a bit of water vapor would allow for sound. This is complete nonsense. Some water vapor emitted by an asteroid in space would not have even _close_ to enough atmospheric pressure to allow for anything even resembling sound. 1 atm on Earth is an astonishing amount of pressure.
She thinks that you would hear a meteor before you would see its light. How can anybody in their right mind think this? It's complete nonsense.
She gets her terminology completely wrong. She says: _"The size of that thing is not a meteor. Those are big rocks, and we now know that meteors are really tiny small specks of dust. So meteors are different from asteroids and comets and meteorites."_ This is utter nonsense. A "meteor" is any piece of natural debris that's falling through the atmosphere. Of any size. A meteoroid is a small rocky or metallic body in outer space. (They become meteors if they fall into a planet's atmosphere.) A meteorite is a piece of meteor that has fallen to the ground, surviving its atmospheric entry and ground impact. A bolide is not a "super-scientific" term. It's an informal term used to describe extremely bright meteors. There's no exact definition.
Oddly enough, Deep Impact is generally regarded as one of the most realistic impact scenes. Well, opinions can vary even among experts, I guess.
Yea like how does she give that a 1/10 and don’t look up a 6/10 ffs
Yeah I know the shockwave would hit the beach first and the comet would be blinding everyone but other than that what's her criticism?
@@ChadSimpson-ft7yz I think she forgot that cellphones weren’t a thing in the 90’s and that the only way those people running away would have known there was a tsunami was if they had one their car radios on.
@backseatpolitician7060 She didn't even list any particular reason why it was unrealistic. Other than the shockwave hitting the beach first and the comet blinding everyone I think it's realistic enough.
@@backseatpolitician not trying to be that guy but cellphones definitely existed in the 90s, they even had car phones in BMW's, Mercedes, etc. but they were mainly used by wealthy people so it wasn't super common.
What she did forget to add is that the same day the Chelyabinsk event happened, they had already predicted another chunk of rock the same size but passing at double or triple the distance of the Chelyabinsk one, they didn’t know it was going to happen because it was on the wrong side for us to see it, it was coming at us from the sun!
I get the feeling that this expert hasn't seen Color out of Space. The entire movie is about how everything around the meteor is wrong because it's some Lovecraftian relic that exists outside the realm of human comprehension--so yeah, a space ship designed to change wildlife. It's based off of the same short story as the also-criminally-underrated Annihilation.
Not a relic, but rather the "lights" are actual living beings/being.
The context literally doesn't matter. They had her rating meteors from cartoons too. The question was were they realistic or not, that one wasn't. But as you say, that wasn't the point of the movie so it literally doesn't matter. In fact, take it as a badge of honor. It's exactly what it's supposed to be
@@jacobsampsonis7782 Cartoons are more then capable of depicting realistic events, so thats a false equivalency. While I understand your point that she's simply grading the realism of these representations the context in this case DOES matter because if she dosen't know anything about the story then she really can't say much about shows depiction. All other people are saying is that it's a wasted opportunity for her to add something to the thoughts on the show if she dosen't know anything about those elements.
Annihilation was a fantastic movie
"Annihilation" wasn't based on "Color Out of Space", it's a loose adaptation of the 2014 novel "Annihilation" by Jeff VanderMeer. Sure, both clearly draw inspiration from Lovecraft, but that's it. But yeah, great movie and one of my favorite sci-fi films.
Various scientists love for the Expanse makes me love it even more.
Need to binge the show, for research of course!
Its definitely one of the most scientifically accurate scifi space dramas/action shows of this era.
Minor spoiler warning for stuff from way before the "throwing asteroids at earth arc"
Most of the breaks from our physics are either handwaves to have a show (like the drive technology) or pass the burden of knowledge onto magical alien space goo beyond anyones understanding, so why should the audience understand how alien technology works if nobody in the show does either. (Its not an unreasonable assumption that aliens capable of making wormholes and pocket dimensions and burning entire solar systems can make magic space goo capable of everything it does in the show)
@@d1sturb3d119 same here!
I would give The Expanse characters a 1/10
@@andreabindolini7452 I would give your worthless rating a 1/10
If anyone is on the fence or has never heard of The Expanse, it's absolutely worth the watch
Agree. Best sci fi series ever!
I think I tried watching it years ago but couldn't make it through the first episode. Can't remember if it was because the show was boring or poor quality. Maybe I'll try it again.
@@MrRJPE The show starts out pretty good then kinda turns to crap in the last couple seasons. Which is pretty typical these days.
@@hansgruber9685 Not a majority opinion.
In the eyes of a self-proclaimed asteroid expert, it's a very realistic show. It definitely doesn't have a sentient blue asteroid in it, which isn't even slightly realistic.
I’m surprised they didn’t have her rate the impact scene from Disney’s Dinosaur film! That’s such a great and intense scene.
0:12 - Intro to Gretchen Benedix
0:26 - Armageddon (1998)
3:21 - The Good Dinosaur (2015)
5:05 - The Expanse, S5E3 (2020)
6:52 - Greenland (2020)
8:35 - Bruce Almighty (2003)
9:55 - Ice Age: Collision Course (2016)
11:24 - Color out of Space (2019)
13:44 - Deep Impact (1998)
15:10 - Don't Look Up (2021)
17:01 - Outro
thx
I learn so much information from these videos that I otherwise would never research on my own. Thank you for the series. It is truly once of the ones I enjoy the most on RUclips.
This doesn't mean you learned anything
@@iamkingnegan I learned that Frog Governor is a troll and well worth muting on YT.
This channel deserves an award for lowest audio on RUclips. Every video is incredibly quiet compared to literally every other video out there.
Designer at Pixar: The beautiful ring I made out of these asteroids is going to look cool in the shot the board artists composed.
Gretchen Benedix: WRONG
Really though, I remember there was a dude talking about fight scenes from viking or celtic movies (I think, can't remember) and the entire time he was considering it's fantasy and commenting based on that. We need more of those.
Definitely take things in context, analysis of fights in a D&D type world: better acount for magic, healing, proof gods are real and active interventionists, racial varients, and whatever else.
Analysis of a show like the Expanse, understand that Eros was taken over by alien goo and decided to violate all known laws of physics and "go home" to earth at the will of a girls mind the goo incorporated. The show straight up blames alien tech so we can't explain the physics of this thing's propulsion.
Now the flight times are perfectly explained as accelerating to provide ship gravity and at the designated "half way point" start breaking to have your desired arrival velocity. This is math we can do to determine the travel time from say earth to Mars and that we can compare to stated times in the show. (We even know where the planets will be on the stated dates when given for more accurate conparisons, you just may need a degree in astrophysics to do the math yourself)
Dude u spoke my mind!!
This woman is my new favorite person rn. She taught me a thing or two about space rocks and eased some existential dread, all in one video
Really appreciated her in-depth approach that is coming from her years of experience. It is actually a privilege to be able to watch this kind of programmes that also for free.
"The Expanse" hands down is the most realistic one.
I'd say -from what i've seen- the expanse is the ONLY realistic one out there or at least the only one that makes an effort to try and be closer to reality. Then again i don't watch many movies but i noticed how brainwashed we are from the space stereoticial films like star wars. Even though i study physics and am really into space stuff -also gonna specialise in astrophysics- again and again there were times were i saw a scene and was puzzled like 'why are they doing this' or 'thats weird' 'thats bullshit' before thinking about it more deeply and realising no that was exacly how things would happen. Not only obvious things like changes of velocity delays etc but almost every detail is wrong in other films.
A perfect example is scenes of depressurisation where the air takes minutes to leave the ship, i found that weird until i did the math and they were spot on.
@@alexisjuillard4816 im an electrical engineer (with interest in most fields) so i usually pick up on things being wrong and get excited when things are correct, but you are definitely right in how we get so used to the "Style over realism" of Hollywood, especially with classics like Star Wars and Star Trek that we don't always recognize deviations from real world physics (which can be counter intuitive or much less dramatic or far weirder)
Death by falling into lava is sooo much worse than in the movies, IRL you don't sink and its more like being in a frying pan than boiling water.
But the Expanse is definitely one of the most accurate shows in a while, with the known physics breaks of the alien goo (protomolecule is a plot device and handwaves everything because its crazy advanced alien tech so why should we be able to understand it), the Epstein Drive (hand wave to let us accelerate all the time for "gravity"), and Flight times (the moon gravity assist scene in the Ganemede arc was beautiful but way too fast, as for the rest of the travel times its hard to be certain what the actual time of flight should be but its clearly just whatever is good for the plot, but they are typically slower than they should be) I'm sure plenty of the combat scenes are unrealistic but the show is fantastic as a hard scifi action masterpiece.
@@jasonreed7522 well let's not get into the physics of the protomolecule lol and you're right and they do play with physics as they have to, but what i love about it is the raw feeling of being in space, introducing very relevant scientific notions in space eploration like gravitational slings, grusome realities of things like etreme decceleration and what they will do to our soft bodies...
death by lava is still a mystery to me to be honest. i've though and read a bit about the physics of the stuff and i'd bet we could get a wide range of cool macabre stuff depending on the situation^^
i mean context is everything here, is the lava at 700C or 1200C, whats the fluid dynamics down there are you stepping or falling what sort of viscosity we dealing with etc...
all these factors and may more imo would change drastically the outcome, a guy stepping on a stagnant pool of 700C lava would maybe fry on some harder outer crust or sink in a bit, but a guy falling from high will for sure go under the surface.
but my intuition tells me it would be quicker then you'd think and maybe even a good death.
A guy jumping 50 meters in a bubbling pool of 1200C lava would literally explode i think. As soon as his body hit the surface that big sac of water will turn to steam and fast, rapid gaas expansion, explosion. You see videos of guys throwing organic matter in volcanoes that just create this instant eplosion of vapor
The Expanse gets even better because the multiple strikes later lead to a global cooling effect. Even the asteroids that don't make impact still have a detrimental effect, since multiple vaporized asteroids still add to the particulates in the sky blocking out the sun.
Given what we know now with data from the horrible Australian wildfires and the Hunga Tonga Hunga-Haapai volcano, which kicked up dust clouds visible from space but barely moved the needle on global temperature, I'm pretty sure that isn't accurate. Such heavy particulates (relative to air) couldn't possibly stay around long enough to cool the planet like shown in the show.
Lol. Comparing a few wildfires and one volcano to dozens of asteroid impacts all over the planet over the span of months. But okay, bud. You are "pretty sure" so you must be correct.
Her: "you would hear the sound before you see the light"
Lightspeed: "Am I a joke to you?"
She's thinking of lightning, where you don't stop seeing the light until after you hear the sound, because it temporarily blinds you in that area.
Well the guy was looking away, so we hope he'd at least hear it (eventually).
I will never understand why producers and directors never collaborate with this kind of people. They can make spectacular movies based on their knowledge.
Because reality is generally rather dull, particularly space travel. Space travel is slow, tedious, and cumbersome - nothing zips, zooms, and swerves like a jet fighter on Earth.
I love that both Chris Hadfield and Gretchen Benedix here love the Expanse for its space realism!!
In Deep Impact, the tsunami somehow hit Paris. In Greenland, it shows cities across the world to be decimated when in reality the Shockwave would only reach (maximum) the nearest continent.
This one was fun. What got to me though is how I haven't even heard about half of the media analyzed. I've no idea how some sort of pop culture with references that people can understand would develop and endure between younger people anymore when there's so much out there and with it all passing by so fast and most not even leaving a smidge.
My understanding is that we do miss impacting objects sometimes. Especially when they come from the sun.
I'm no expert by any means but I'm pretty sure we can still see these things from the other side of the sun. From what I do know, if it's close enough to the sun that we can't see it, it's likely pretty small and will probably be sucked in by the sun's gravity and destroyed anyways.
A rock the size of a golf ball, sure. A rock the size of Rhode Island, no.
We can log the vast majority of them while we and the various objects orbit the sun, thankfully. And if it's a hazardous-sized one we'd keep an extra close eye on it by any means possible.
One of the best "expert rates" videos I've seen. Really well explained and great info.
this is one of the most clear and concise expert I've seen in this things. That is sign of her level of understanding she has on her field. I would love to have her as a teacher
With everything thats happening in the world i asked myself "do i really wanna watch this, and lose another nights sleep"...well i did and now that i heard her say "dont be afraid" i actually have one less thing to worry about 😆
I've been terrified since I learned about asteroid impacts as a little kid. I remember when I was 8 wondering what I would do, and thinking I could jump in the bubblers at school (even then I knew it wouldn't help at all). I wish I had seen such a video then. It would have made me much less terrified. A great example of how a little knowledge can be harmful, but a good amount is reassuring and helpful
What is a bubbler?
Haven't had a big one for 65 million years. Little ones, yes. We're pretty safe.
I was the same way as a kid, always viewing it as the pinnacle unavoidable natural/cosmic disaster that could kill us all at any moment with no chance for survival. It's nice to know, and really inspiring even, knowing that we not only have a high likelihood to detect them long in advance--but also redirect/destroy them, as seen with the precedent set in the D.A.R.T. mission.
I love these so much when they've either never seen the movie or they're taking everything dead seriously.
Right! Films and TV programs are meant to be entertaining, not a documentary! Haha I like the ones where the expert acknowledges the fun factor along with the scientific view
@@thestraydog I'd be fine with this video (because it's specifically asking "how real is it?") if she at least diversified her rankings... pretty sure she only gave 1/10 or 8/10. Like, Ma'am, I know you're far more intelligent than me, but are you really saying Ice Age is just as realistic as Deep Impact???
I was honestly scared to watch this video because I have a fear of these types of events actually happening. But I'm glad I did watch because this woman put my mind at ease. Bless her for the work she does and for her pleasant disposition. She is a 10/10. ❤🎉😊
13:45 my literally favorite part
Preview image for the video : "Greenland - How real is it?"
Me : "Uh, I'm fairly certain it's pretty real..."
This expert is very dumb!!
Except for the green part
@@erakfishfishfish Heh, yeah I remember thinking something like "Wait, so, Greenland's a frozen sheet of ice and Iceland isn't frozen? Who named these places?" back when I was a kid.
@@Bubbajones213 The funny thing about that is that Erik the Red just wanted to attract people to a colony he was starting there because he was exiled from Iceland. It was literally a marketing scam.
@@HermanVonPetri Erik : "Ok guys, here's your new home...umm...bye!" *sails away with the only ships*
16:43
Well yes... But I mean... It turned earth into a molten lump again so I guess from a human perspective it's kinda destroyed at that point?
I disagree with her that the guy in the Expanse clip would hear it before seeing the light. Light travels more or less instantly on that scale, where as sound travels a comparatively slow 343m/s. When the Chelyabinsk impactor hit Russia, the shockwave hit whiteness anywhere from tens of seconds, to several minutes after the impact.
You are right but u r also wrong. Listen to her whole sentence.
And I can relate to hearing sounds before we see the object or light. Um... Suppose aeroplanes, if they are at very high altitude you hear them coming first before you see them and that is when they are actually above you. The sound keeps travelling in all directions while light may or may not appear to you at the same time depending upon the position of the viewer and the source.
Generally, we compare lightning and thunder to explain why light travels faster then sound but the deal is that lightning are pretty straightforward and they are happening inside our atmosphere most probably in front of us. There are also instances where we do hear the sound of thunder and don't see the lightning.
So, I am not calling you wrong you are right but I am also telling that she is also right. Just listen to her complete explanation.
@@s.s.8673 I've watched what she said again, and I understand where your coming from, but still disagree. The light from a super bolide, large enough to reach the ground with a significant fraction of it's cosmic velocity, is going to be ridiculously bright. It's just not something you wouldn't immediately notice. Even with your eyes closed and your hands covering your face.The one featured in this clip looks to be at least as large, if not larger that the 1908 Tunguska event. When that entered the atmosphere, it appeared as bright as the sun to whiteness 65km/40mi away. Even more intense than the visible light, was the infra-red radiation. Those same whitenesses described it as feeling like their skin was on fire. The blast/sound from that impact took another three minutes to travel the 65km to those whitenesses. Not only would an individual see the light instantaneously, but they would feel it instantaneously too. In your airplane analogy, an aircraft is visually insignificant. A small dot in the sky, so it's very easy not to notice it before the sound alerts you to it's presence. Same with lightning. If it's some distance away, or during daylight, it's easy to not notice it before thunder. A super bolide, like the one in Expanse, is on a whole other magnitude. If your out in the open, like this guy is, and close enough to be killed by it, then the light is going to be similar to that produced by an atomic blast. There's just no scenario where someone killed by the blast outdoors, wouldn't immediately notice the light, with the sound/blast/death coming tens of seconds, to minutes later.
@zzziie That's just not going to happen with a super bolide of this size. If it's entering the atmosphere directly above you, then it's within 100km/60 miles of you. At that distance, it's as bright as the sun, if not brighter. It doesn't matter what direction your looking, your going to notice. While it could be more than a minute before the sound arrives
@@s.s.8673 Her sentence is about thermal radiation and him being 500km from it. He feels the heat before he hears the explosion. This is absolutely how physics works. You don't hear the explosion, traveling at around 340m/s, before you feel the heat, traveling at around 300,000,000m/s.
i believe the sounds isnt just from the object itself but more the breaking of atmosphere and the amount of atmosphere it moves. thats the rumble that will get to you first as it will simply push away the entire atmosphere around you. imagine pushing a ball into water, the water getting pushed away would be the atmosphere
Was a bit surprised she said we'd see it before it got to that point with Armageddon because in the movie they did identify it a few weeks before it got that close. Guessing she didn't watch the movie, lol. Also the scientists have said if one comes from the direction of the sun we'll be completely blind to it until it's too late given that most of the ways of seeing it would be blinded, so it's not entirely farfetched. There have been several "close calls" where NASA didn't even see the asteroids until it was too late or they were already passing because they came out of the blind spot. She mentions the same thing when talking about Deep Impact about how we wouldn't know only if we didn't track it, just odd she ignores that there can be rogue asteroids we don't see. I won't even get into the part where she says you'll hear it before you see it, lol.
I love these videos for the insights in all kinds of topics, but I hate how quiet they are in comparison to practically everything else I watch on youtube.
How exactly would you hear a meteor before you saw it? light travels faster than sound it’s like hearing a nuclear weapon before seeing it
Because she doesn't understand basic physics. 340m/s is faster than 300,000,000 m/s to her.
Very interesting! I have always wanted to see a meteor and I finally did! It was about a year ago now, high in the air, green turning to orange. I reported it on a website that tracks such sightings and with 500 or so reports, they estimated it at about 450 miles south of where I saw it at high altitude (don't remember exactly, maybe 40,000ft?) Anyway cool video - thanks!
Hey Insider - could you please start adding the titles of the movies at the "rating card" screens? (or if you don't want it on the same frame, have the title just before (maybe morph to the ratings text?))
It is a bit annoying having to scroll back and find the brief title inset if there is a movie that seems interesting.
I'm just happy to see Armageddon get the rating it deserves. Deep Impact should have gotten at least a +1 because they actually tried.
Armageddon always gets my vote for worst blockbuster of the 90s: bad writing, bad direction, bad acting, even the editing is bad. I saw it at a free preview screening and I was very happy I didn’t pay for the tix!
Don’t Look Up is a great film. Absolutely loved the premise and the consequences of the inaction taken.
Omg I loved this lady!! Are there more space movies and shoes cuz y’all need to bring her back! She did so well and was super honest and INFORMATIVE! I think that was the best science lesson I’ve ever gotten that I actually understood!
You loved this lady?? Did you go to public school? Must have. She claims the guy in Greenland should hear the Shockwave before he sees the fireball, and that you could dodge a fireball if you watched it long enough and then just jumped out of the way. She is a moron.
She is not an expert... Thermal radiation 500km away would take a minute to reach him? Are you fk kidding me? What is thermal radiation? Light for the love of God... LIGHT. Near instant!!!! She said a minute, while it would take...1/600s Also... You she would be surprised if he did not hear it before seeing the light? What is faster... Sound... or a god damn light... Light... a million times. Asteroid expert is she ? OMFG..
But they weren't trying to blow Dotty up, they were trying to blow it apart...
They rather said what she said about the quantity of nukes needed: "Given her size, composition, her sheer velocity, (slight laugh) you could fire every nuke you've got, and she'd just smile at you and keep on coming."
Yeah wasn't the premise to break the Asteroid into smaller pieces to minimize damage rather than completely prevent impact?
Real hard to make a realistic meteor / asteroid / comet impact for a movie. The real thing is far more stunning. I still remember reading that 65 mya when the 10km meteor wiped out most life on Earth, if you were close enough to 'see' it, you were already dead from the thermal flash alone.
When Russia dropped their 55 megaton Tsar Bomba, you were seriously burned 100 km or 62 miles from ground zero. The dino killer was fatal from flash burns thousands of miles away. If that didn't kill you, the blast wave would. If that didn't kill you, 500 mph winds would. If that didn't kill you, magnitude 15 earthquake would. If that didn't kill you, Tsunamis over 1 km high would. If that didn't kill you, when atmosphere temp rose to over 2,000 degrees would. If that didn't kill you, global fire storms would. If that didn't kill you, 1 year of darkness, choking dust, marauding starving people would... see why it is so hard to make a realistic impact?
Stop, we're dead already.
@@janflores398 Thanks... and I thought it was only a bad dream. But I woke up and all the Dinosaurs were dead.
Basically what was depicted in Last day of dinosaurs documentary. Especially scene with alamosaurus.
@@ExtremeMadnessX Thank you. Always liked good extinction level events. 65 million years ago would have been awesome to watch... from space that is.
I grew up in Arizona and have been to the Meteor Crater there several times. I find it pretty fasinating. I especially like the museum that details how the meteor, in the final moments, traveled from the east coast to the west before impacting. I just imagine what it must've looked like streaking through the sky, just before impacting.
Meteor Crater is among the places I most want to visit in North America! :D
Correct me if I'm wrong, but in Armageddon weren't they SPLITTING the asteroid, not blowing it to pieces? Seems to me that would take much less force if you knew what you were doing...
5:50 I don't see how you could possibly hear the rumbling before seeing the meteor.
Last time I checked, light was definitely faster than sound.
Amazing how one can become an astro-geologist without understanding even basic physics, isn't it? Even before she made that statement I disliked a lot of her over-simplifications, but when I got to that part, I had to turn off the video in disgust. Quite an "expert" ...
"Generally meteorits are not spaceships" lol. Love it!
I love listening to this woman talk. She has a great way of explaining things, and has the perfect perspective.
The Great Daylight Fireball of 1972 skipped off the atmosphere, entering over Utah and leaving over Alberta. The thing was, it came low enough to create a fireball, but high enough not to lose too much kinetic energy, about 57 km. I would expect a mile-wide asteroid passing at that altitude would likewqise escape.
A mile wide asteroid would probably have too much gravity and be pulled apart in the same situation
You've got to love scientists when they say don't be worried we're looking out for anything... If they do find something big enough... They can't do anything 🤦♂️🙃
we could still determine the damage level, what areas will be impacted, literally and elsewise, and where the safest places would be. All this could save just enough of us, even if we can't stop it in the first place.
Aren’t they getting ready to test the first technology to divert asteroids away from the earth?
This is the LAST person we want looking at the skies. She claims a person shod be able to hear a fireball before seeing it and that you could jump out of the way if you saw a meteor fireball coming towards you. She is an idiot.
@@nahadoth2087 It’s called DART. It’s really happening.
She is not an expert... Thermal radiation 500km away would take a minute to reach him? Are you fk kidding me? What is thermal radiation? Light for the love of God... LIGHT. Near instant!!!! She said a minute, while it would take...1/600s Also... You she would be surprised if he did not hear it before seeing the light? What is faster... Sound... or a god damn light... Light... a million times. Asteroid expert is she ? OMFG..
For an 'expert' this woman doesn't seem to know much about what she's talking about.
There's a few good points in there, but it's mostly just "I think this, I think that" without any basis in reality.
I give her 1/10.
Thankfully, movies follow their own rules. Can you imagine a battle in space with no sound? Thrilling.
Thank you to the expert for doing the job they do.
9:53 "That would be a 'Zero out of ten..."
But 9 out of 10 for Jim Carrey?
To be fair about the purple rock, in the context of the film nothing about that rocks existence was supposed to be “normal”
Jupiter does a good job of protecting us from interstellar objects I hear.
And Saturn
Jupiter throws as many asteroids at us as it protects as from.
@@RandomStuff-he7lu so tsundere
@@niallreid7664 i just imagined a massive ball of gas saying baka
Come on, guys?.. A beautifully filmed and edited "Armageddon" deserves much more higher mark! Of course it has several inaccuraces and blunders (asteroid's gravity strength, shuttle's external fuel tank, "Mir" axial rotation, nuke yield is too low, etc.) but after all the concept itself behind the movie and physics are very realistic for the theatrical purposes solely. Rate it higher, please 💖
FYI: average distance between asteroids in our asteroid belt is 1,000,000 km - or 2.5 times the distance from the earth to the moon.
Really was hoping that she would look at Dinosaur (2000). Based on her analysis, that might be the most accurate asteroid sequence of all of these.
Haha i was waiting for her to bring that up. I love that scene.
The thing with the meteorite in Color Out of Space is that it's supposed to have a color we have no name for and that the light itself coming out of it is a living entity. Welcome to cosmic horror.
I found that movie actually quite interesting. Had no idea what it was about going in but was pleasantly surprised by it.
@@marcussinclaire4890 Read the story, it makes more sense. The movie's terrible, but not because it's not realistic... but because the production budget was 3 paperclips and a rubber band.
13:08-13:12 "unless the meteorite is... a spaceship... which GENERALLY they're just rocks". Definition of generally: in MOST cases. Most, meaning NOT all cases. Ladies and gentlemen, we got them. Now we know
AHHAHAHAHA
Due to the last comment (about size and Earth's destruction), I would have liked to hear her view about Melancholia's ending since it is the largest object hitting Earth I've seen in a movie.
I loved her explanation and her Vibes... this was good.
I was watching a meteor shower with my son and we happened to be looking at a spot where a point began glowing brighter and brighter white, then it faded. It was a meteor that was pointed directly at us. I'd never seen that before and I've seen some amazing meteor showers. That was super cool! We joked that it would've been funny if the glow subsided and a few seconds later we went a "doink" on our head 😂
I think you mean an asteroid shower. She'd know. She's an expert in what an asteroid is, and there's no other sort of space rock but asteroid. :)
Basically she’s saying everything that’s been depicted is bogus
RUclips ads every few minutes absolutely ruins a great video - again. Thanks Google for utterly destroying the RUclips experience.
brave browser.....i never see youtube ads
ublock origin my dude
RUclips vanced on mobile
She helps lower my anxiety
I like her, this topic is really difficult to understand and she did an amazing job explaining it :)
I like these for the most part, but sometimes it's just so obvious that the expert has only been shown a clip, and has not seen the movie or TV show in its entirety. The analyses given are often (and especially in this instance) slightly inaccurate because the expert was shown a clip of a movie they'd never seen out of context.
I know, it's very noticeable. I understand that showing numerous multiple hours long films isn't possible but I wish they'd at least give them a breakdown and correct them on certain aspects
@@Mila-Rosa Or maybe, just maybe, when an asteroid expert looks at a rock with a big ball of ice and chemicals around it, they don't call it an asteroid... can't take her seriously when she can't tell a comet from an asteroid.
@@FroggerbobT if you mean armageddon its because people in the movie call it that. its supposed to be a comet (two comets, technically, that had been fused together), but they call it an asteroid, i suspect because of deep impact which was coming out a few months later.
05:48 I'm surprised she thinks someone would hear it before seeing it in the sky. Light travels WAY faster than sound. I remember the meteor flying over Russia. Lots of people saw that light way before the sound/shockwave came into play. Expert, you say?
5:51 you definitely would not hear it, the speed of sound is slower then light, so you see it first.
You would see it, then you'd notice yourself turned to ash, and then several minutes later, you'd hear it with your ash ears. Obviously, the residents of Nagasaki didn't go deaf before they were melted.
I love her commitment to judge extremely harshly
I think this video illustrates perfectly why we should trust experts on topics or at the very least value their opinion highly.
"It's glowing on the ground. Wrong. So that means there's something inside of it."
Well... yeah. That's the entire premise of the movie. :P
"Your skin might not burn off, but I imagine that it would."