Futurama   Planet Express Employee Lounge
The Futurama Message Board

Design and Support by Can't get enough Futurama
Help Search Futurama chat Login Register

PEEL - The Futurama Message Board    Re-Check/Weird Scenes    Bender's rolex... « previous next »
Author Topic: Bender's rolex...  (Read 667 times)
Pages: [1] Print
mpbx3003

Crustacean
*
« on: 08-23-2004 11:48 »
« Last Edit on: 08-23-2004 11:48 »

In Godfellas, Bender puts on a Rolex watch from his swag, but it subsiquently disappears with no explaination...
Also, the piano is great...
comments?

The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men. Blessed is he, who in the name of charity and good will, shepherds the weak through the valley of darkness, for he is truly his brother's keeper and the finder of lost children. And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who would attempt to poison and destroy my brothers. And you will know my name is the Lord when I lay my vengeance upon thee.
Gratuitous Pulp Fiction...Yay!!!
Also, D&D is great...
Speli

Urban Legend
***
« Reply #1 on: 08-23-2004 11:55 »

It's hard to catch things when they accidentally fall off and fly away in the vacuum of space...
Teral

Helpy McHelphelp
DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #2 on: 08-23-2004 12:36 »

He put it inside his chest cabinet again. Sometimes the simplest explanation is the right one.
Xerxes

Bending Unit
***
« Reply #3 on: 08-23-2004 12:59 »

I know this is a bit off-topic, but it reminded me the scene earlier when Leela says: "We were going full speed when we fired him, so he is going even faster than that!". Physics is my very favourite thing and the fact that they spat at Newton's law face made me really angry. Ship's don't have maximum speed, only maximum acceleration! And a scene later, Benter is trying to lose momentum by throwing things in front of him. Other Newton's law, this time correct. But this law isn't being presented very often - I noticed it only in sophisticated sci-fi books like Arthur C. Clarke's (more sci than fi). This contradiction made me really mad.
Gwan101

Bending Unit
***
« Reply #4 on: 08-23-2004 13:10 »
« Last Edit on: 08-23-2004 13:10 »

Well, ships are like cars in Futurama, and they do have spedometers, so they must have a max speed. Ships arn't what they are now.

I just realized how little sense that last sentance made...
Teral

Helpy McHelphelp
DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #5 on: 08-23-2004 13:17 »
« Last Edit on: 08-23-2004 13:17 »

The difference is cars have to cope with something spaceships don't: drag (wind resistance, etc). All these forces eventually negates the accelaration of the car, and thus it have a max speed limit. Spaceships don't have any negative forces working on them (okay, they do, but nothing significant compared to the engine) and should be able to continue accelerating until they either run out of fuel or relativistic effects become a concern.

Meaning they should've been able to catch up with Bender, but then it would've been a short episode.  wink
Shadowstar

Liquid Emperor
**
« Reply #6 on: 08-23-2004 21:28 »

Not to mention the hole in Bender's head and the carving on his chest cavity also disappear. What about those, huh? HUH?! [snorts] I sure hope somebody got fired for that blunder.
Prof. Wernstrum

Starship Captain
****
« Reply #7 on: 08-24-2004 08:15 »

 
Quote
Originally posted by Xerxes:Ship's don't have maximum speed, only maximum acceleration!

But the PE ship doesn't propel itself in the normal way, i.e. with the engines providing a force to push it forward, instead the universe is moved around the ship. Since there is no explanation as to how this is achieved it is possible that there is a maximum speed at which the ship can move the universe (99% of whatever the new speed of light is).


F is the 6th letter of the alphabet.
O is the 15th letter (1+5=6)
X is the 24th letter (2+4=6)

Hence, FOX = 666
Hedonism Bot

Bending Unit
***
« Reply #8 on: 08-24-2004 12:03 »

If the ship can go at 99% light speed, then I imagine that relativity does come into play. I haven't read Einstein's therories recently, but I seem to remember that the faster you go, the less energy is being converted to speed and more to making the object heavier, therefore there's a point where practically none of the energy from the engines is being used to make the ship go forwards.

Newton's law would also state that firing Bender out of the torpedo tube would slow the ship down, so maybe that is why they can't catch Bender; they won't be able to accelerate fast enough to offset the negative velocity given by Bender's ejection.
David A

Urban Legend
***
« Reply #9 on: 08-24-2004 12:56 »

 
Quote
Originally posted by Prof. Wernstrum:
But the PE ship doesn't propel itself in the normal way, i.e. with the engines providing a force to push it forward, instead the universe is moved around the ship. Since there is no explanation as to how this is achieved it is possible that there is a maximum speed at which the ship can move the universe (99% of whatever the new speed of light is).

If the universe is moved around the ship, the speed of light would not be a limit to this.  Also, relativistic effects would not apply, because the ship itself is not moving at relativistic speeds.  This is how warp drive would work.  It's all explained in The Physics of Star Trek by Lawrence M. Krauss.
Prof. Wernstrum

Starship Captain
****
« Reply #10 on: 08-25-2004 07:47 »

Well the professor seemed to believe that the speed of light was a limit in AComO since he says that exceeding this would be impossible (Admittedly he could be wrong about this since he had forgotten how the engines work in a dream). Also, in TMLH, Leela says that the ship can do up to 99% light speed so we have a limit right there. The restriction could come into play due to the fact that while the ship itself isn't moving, everything else is (I have no idea how you arrange for the entire universe to move around you, but I suspect that wizards may be involved) and relativity still applies to those things.
David A

Urban Legend
***
« Reply #11 on: 08-25-2004 14:30 »

 
Quote
Originally posted by Prof. Wernstrum:
I have no idea how you arrange for the entire universe to move around you

You cause spacetime to contract in front of the ship, and expand behind the ship.  This would require control over gravity.  I have no idea how you would control gravity, but if you're walking on the floor inside your spaceship (as opposed to floating around) then you've obviously figured that part out already.
Xerxes

Bending Unit
***
« Reply #12 on: 08-25-2004 16:05 »

 
Quote
Originally posted by David A:
but if you're walking on the floor inside your spaceship (as opposed to floating around) then you've obviously figured that part out already
Heh, I was thinking about it some time ago and came with an imaginary solution  smile (caution/disclaimer: this has nothing to do with an actual physics! And I never read anything like The Physics of Star Trek.)

The idea is that the ship creates some thing called for example "inertial shield". The area inside the ship then acts as some sort of independent inertial environment, that is, the ship can accelerate as fast as it needs with no negative effect on the crew inside (simply it won't squish the crew against the wall  smile) Independency of this protected environment could be controlled somehow in order to achieve the feel of movement while landing for example. Also, the generator can use some energy to achieve an artifical behaviour inside the environment, such as gravity.

In "Branigan Begins Again" episode there's an actual clue that the ship has something of this natrue; Leela calls it "antigravity pump".

But then, on the other hand, in episodes like "Roswell That Ends Well" and "Teenage Mutant Leela's Hurdles" they need seatbelts to protect themselves. I imagine the system would act like an airbag when the acceleration exceeds safe limit to reduce the effect.

I can't believe I just wrote this big piece of crap.
David A

Urban Legend
***
« Reply #13 on: 08-25-2004 16:24 »

 
Quote
Originally posted by Xerxes:
The idea is that the ship creates some thing called for example "inertial shield". The area inside the ship then acts as some sort of independent inertial environment, that is, the ship can accelerate as fast as it needs with no negative effect on the crew inside (simply it won't squish the crew against the wall   smile)

Star Trek uses something exactly like this, called an "inertial damper".  The plausibility of such a device (which, like warp drive, would require control over gravity) is discussed in The Physics of Star Trek.
Xerxes

Bending Unit
***
« Reply #14 on: 08-25-2004 16:32 »

Ok, well what's this The Physics of Star Trek I keep hearing so much about? A book, an article? It seems like something I could be interesed in (just to avoid thinking about something that other nerds already thought about and came with a satisfactory imaginary solution  smile).
David A

Urban Legend
***
« Reply #15 on: 08-25-2004 16:56 »

The Physics of Star Trek is a book by a physicist named Lawrence M. Krauss.  In the book, Krauss discusses various aspects of Star Trek and tries to apply real world physics to explain how they would be possible (or, how they wouldn't be, as the case may be).

It's an entertaining book, for those who like science in their science fiction.  You probably don't even need to be a Star Trek fan to enjoy it.
Astral Runner

Crustacean
*
« Reply #16 on: 08-27-2004 19:19 »

I wouldn't really put too much credit in Farnsworth's clone's explanation of the dark matter engine, seeing as to how he just banged his head on a metal door at what looked like 80 mph.

But in any case, ships of the time must not travel though space in the sense that we think of it now, because if a crew traveled between galaxies in a matter of hours, the time dilation would put them several thoughsand years into the future relative to Earth, yet the time it takes to travel seems to be the same to the ships crew and those on earth.

Look, one of the best things about Futurama's explanations of it's technology is that it doesn't TRY to explain it's technology in scientific terms. This way, we can just assume that it all has a scientificly apprehended rational behind it. That is all.

Maybe ships traveling faster then light DO experience some sort of "drag". But lets not bother with that.
David A

Urban Legend
***
« Reply #17 on: 08-27-2004 20:42 »

 
Quote
Originally posted by Astral Runner:
But in any case, ships of the time must not travel though space in the sense that we think of it now, because if a crew traveled between galaxies in a matter of hours, the time dilation would put them several thoughsand years into the future relative to Earth, yet the time it takes to travel seems to be the same to the ships crew and those on earth.

One of the convenient things about warp drive, as described in The Physics of Star Trek, is that, although spacetime is warped in front of and behind the ship, local space around the ship is not warped, and remains "flat".  Since the ship itself is not moving at relativistic speeds, time dilation is not a concern.  When the ship reaches its destination, the same amount of time has passed on the ship as has passed on the planet that you left from, and on the planet you've arrived at.
Astral Runner

Crustacean
*
« Reply #18 on: 08-27-2004 21:06 »

Except that, for all we know, Futurama doesn't use warp drive in the Star Trek sense. Or amybe they do. I don't know, and I sincerly belive that one's enjoyment of the show is greatly enhanced by the relevent technology NOT being explained by science humanity has yet to understand to the slightest degree.

In fact, we don't even know if gravity accualy warps space. It's just an unproven model. Some author/physist can calculate and postulate all he wants, but without some hard results, it's all for naught. The physical evidence we have now is quite capable of supporting a great many models of the universe. The only recourse, then, is to get more physical evidence. Incidently, that's exactly what will happen very soon in regards to the warping of space-time, if this experiment goes well:  http://einstein.stanford.edu

Theorizing about possible faster-than-light drive systems is, admittedly, a very entertaining pass-time. However, as it applies to Futurama, I think it's best that we viewers look at it as Fry looks at it:

"Magic. Got it."

"But most importantly, I beat up someone who hurt my feelings in highschool. hehehehe." ~Leela
David A

Urban Legend
***
« Reply #19 on: 08-27-2004 22:29 »

 
Quote
Originally posted by Astral Runner:
Except that, for all we know, Futurama doesn't use warp drive in the Star Trek sense. Or amybe they do. I don't know, and I sincerly belive that one's enjoyment of the show is greatly enhanced by the relevent technology NOT being explained by science humanity has yet to understand to the slightest degree.

I'm not arguing that Futurama does use warp drive in the Star Trek sense.  I'm merely suggesting it as one possible explanation.

Cubert's line in "A Clone of My Own" about the universe moving around the ship has always made me think of Krauss' explanation of how warp drive would work.  In fact, considering the knowledge of science possesed by the nerdlingers who made the show, I wouldn't be surprised if that was exactly what that line meant.

 
Quote
Theorizing about possible faster-than-light drive systems is, admittedly, a very entertaining pass-time. However, as it applies to Futurama, I think it's best that we viewers look at it as Fry looks at it:

"Magic. Got it."

Sure, you can do that, and Futurama won't be any less entertaining if you do; but the whole purpose of the Re-Check/Weird Scenes board is to discuss this sort of thing.  Some of us like coming up with explanations for why things on Futurama are the way they are, even if it is just speculation.
Astral Runner

Crustacean
*
« Reply #20 on: 08-29-2004 00:15 »

You're full of crap David. Now let me plug in this... <zap>

You make a compeling argument David. Not to mention that the physics of how ship's drives works could at some point be relevent to a Futurama related project I'm working on...

I don't remember any exact instances, but if the PE's power is suddenly shut off while it's traveling at >light speeds, does it come to a complete halt immidiatly, or does it maintain some momentum?
LAN.gnome

Urban Legend
***
« Reply #21 on: 08-29-2004 04:43 »

 
Quote
Originally posted by David A:
 One of the convenient things about warp drive, as described in The Physics of Star Trek, is that, although spacetime is warped in front of and behind the ship, local space around the ship is not warped, and remains "flat".  Since the ship itself is not moving at relativistic speeds, time dilation is not a concern.  When the ship reaches its destination, the same amount of time has passed on the ship as has passed on the planet that you left from, and on the planet you've arrived at.

I thought all the space/time stuff relevant to our universe was moot, since the primary purpose warp drive is to allow a ship to move into subspace, where the laws of physics are different. Ergo, time dilation et. al. wouldn't be a factor.

Or is that basically what you were saying and I just couldn't translate all the nerd-ese?  wink
Xerxes

Bending Unit
***
« Reply #22 on: 08-29-2004 05:09 »

Quote
Originally posted by Astral Runner:
I wouldn't really put too much credit in Farnsworth's clone's explanation of the dark matter engine, seeing as to how he just banged his head on a metal door at what looked like 80 mph.
[/small]Yeah, that bang should have killed the little skunk.

Quote
Originally posted by Astral Runner:
But in any case, ships of the time must not travel though space in the sense that we think of it now, because if a crew traveled between galaxies in a matter of hours, the time dilation would put them several thoughsand years into the future relative to Earth, yet the time it takes to travel seems to be the same to the ships crew and those on earth.
[/small]Either Einstein is wrong, or the scientists canceled his theory at the same time they incerased the speed of light  tongue. Or that thing David said.

I even heard the rumour that scientists managed to stop light as well as boost its speed. It may be just a fake, this is not the area I'm interested in, but it sounds cool. Any opinions?

Quote
Originally posted by Astral Runner:I don't remember any exact instances, but if the PE's power is suddenly shut off while it's traveling at >light speeds, does it come to a complete halt immidiatly, or does it maintain some momentum?
[/small]Commons sence says that if it used the warp thingy, the ship would halt immidiately, and if it used common movement [dark voice] as God intended [/dark voice], the ship would continue at the speed the engines stopped at.

In Love and Rocket, at the time Bender breaks up with the ship, it halts (making the car braking sound  smile). But we don't know wether it just turned off the engines or braked as well  confused.

Quote
Originally posted by LAN.gnome:
I thought all the space/time stuff relevant to our universe was moot, since the primary purpose warp drive is to allow a ship to move into subspace, where the laws of physics are different. Ergo, time dilation et. al. wouldn't be a factor.
[/small]It may work like this in Star Trek, but there's no clue about this in Futurama.

Quote
Originally posted by David A:
Sure, you can do that, and Futurama won't be any less entertaining if you do; but the whole purpose of the Re-Check/Weird Scenes board is to discuss this sort of thing. Some of us like coming up with explanations for why things on Futurama are the way they are, even if it is just speculation.
[/small]Amen.
David A

Urban Legend
***
« Reply #23 on: 08-29-2004 11:39 »

 
Quote
Originally posted by LAN.gnome:
 I thought all the space/time stuff relevant to our universe was moot, since the primary purpose warp drive is to allow a ship to move into subspace, where the laws of physics are different. Ergo, time dilation et. al. wouldn't be a factor.

It's probably worth pointing out that the Lawrence M. Krauss explanation of Warp Drive is not the explanation that's actually used on the show.  It's just one physicist's explanation of how it could work, theoretically.

I don't really know how warp drive is supposed to work in the context of the show.  I don't know if Star Trek ever does explain how warp drive works.  Most viewers probably look at the technology on Star Trek the same way that Astral Runner looks at the technology on Futurama: "Magic. Got it."  I know that I like to annoy other Star Trek fans by referring to the warp drive as "the magic engines".  Don't even get me started on the magic teleportation device.

Many science-fiction shows get around the whole faster-than-light travel problem by having the ship travel through some sort of hyperspace where the laws of physics can be whatever you want, and you don't have to worry about needing and infinite amount of energy to accelerate an object with a non-zero rest mass to the speed of light.  However, the type of warp drive that Krauss talks about in his book is different, and assumes that the ship remains in normal space where all of the normal rules of physics (as we currently understand them) still apply.
LAN.gnome

Urban Legend
***
« Reply #24 on: 08-30-2004 03:47 »

 
Quote
Originally posted by David A:
 It's probably worth pointing out that the Lawrence M. Krauss explanation of Warp Drive is not the explanation that's actually used on the show.  It's just one physicist's explanation of how it could work, theoretically.

Ah, alright then. The theory I mentioned is just the one the editor of the "Nitpicker's Guide to..." series ascribes to (which I have read many, many times), and subsequently the one I happen to like best.  tongue
Astral Runner

Crustacean
*
« Reply #25 on: 08-30-2004 21:42 »
« Last Edit on: 08-30-2004 21:42 »

Another thing worth noting: the Universe in Futurama has a center. Ours does not, because if things are relative, any point can be counted as the center of the universe and all your calculations will still come out right, relative to that point. Furutama, however, has the nibbler-planet as it's objective center.

This would support the existence of the Ether. But the ether theory was thoughly disporven by a certain experiment that showed that the speed of light is constant relative to the observer. For there to be an ether, it would be constant relative to the ether. It is not. Hence, no ether.

Somehow, both this is true and the universe having a center is true. This, of course, throws most of what modern physics relys on out the window, followed by a grenade.

Now, this is just my crack-pot theory, but perhaps there are 2 levels of space. A low-energy-state, relative one, and a high-energy-state, absolute one. Let's call the second Superspace. Somehow, ships are able to jump themselves and their contents from the low energy state of Space, to the high energy state of Superspace. In this state, movement is absolute, not relative, and most importantly, the energy required to accelerate to a given speed does NOT approch infinity as it approches c. Matter in Space and Superspace can interact freely, as is evident in the show, and there are many complicated equations that accuratly describes what happens when they do. It especialy gets hard when an object in Superspace traveling faster then c interacts with a Space object.

However, the reason all matter and energy exists naturaly in space and not superspace, is because nature tends towards the msot stable state. As soon as an object is not being activly projected into Superspace, it immediatly "drops" into the lower-energy Space, and immediatly loses any momentum it held in Superspace.

With this being true, intergalactic travel only needs 4 things: 1)A means of jumping matter into the higher-energy-state of Superspace and maintaining it, 2) an engine able to accelerate a ship to upwards of 500,000,000,000c in a short time, 3) a means of allowing that sort of acceleration without instantly killing the crew and smashing the ship from the insane g's that would cause, and 4) a portable powersouce that uses a compact fuel able to deliver the billions of billions of terrajoules required to run all that. Simple.

However, there is another factor. In Superspace, where movement is absolute, there is a sort of "ether" that resists motion. At low speeds, this is unimportant. As you approche c, however, the "drag" becomes noticable, and with a force working against a ship that is in direct relation to it's own speed, this results in the maximum speed of ships, that would otherwise not exist. But since the increase of drag relative to speed is "only" exponential and not infinity-approching, there is no hard-cap on how fast something can go if you put enough juice behind it.

The idea of relative and absolute space overlapping is hard to comprehend, but then again, so is the idea of 11 dimensional objects menifesting macroscopicly in 3 dimensions, or gravitons that are the only particle able to travel in a 4th dimension, yet these are current and as yet not-disproven theories.

This theory is based on a modest understanding of astrophysics and quantum mechanics, and observatiosn made of the show. Is it at all realistic or possible? My final argument is this: It is if Superspace exists, and you can't prove that it doesn't!

Like I said, just a crack-pot theory I thought up over the weeks that seems to fit what Futurama presents.

"But most importantly, I beat up someone who hurt my feelings in highschool. hehehehe." ~Leela
Hedonism Bot

Bending Unit
***
« Reply #26 on: 08-31-2004 11:12 »

Wow. I think you'll fit in well here, Astral Runner[/i].
JBERGES

Urban Legend
***
« Reply #27 on: 08-31-2004 12:44 »
« Last Edit on: 08-31-2004 12:44 »

Interesting, very interesting Astral.   While I like the superspace idea for avoiding speed of light issues, I must comment on another claim you make.

 
Quote
Originally posted by Astral Runner:
Another thing worth noting: the Universe in Futurama has a center. Ours does not, because if things are relative, any point can be counted as the center of the universe and all your calculations will still come out right, relative to that point. Furutama, however, has the nibbler-planet as it's objective center.


While what you say about our universe is true, there is some ambiguity about what the word "center" means.  Our universe is clearly expanding, and when you extrapolate backwards from the directions the galaxies are moving, they tend to converge, hence the big bang theory.  Now, whether this area of conversion exists due to the actual creation of the universe, or as the crossing point during a previous “big crunch” effect remains to be determined. 

Recall a Nibblonian saying this: “When the universe was forged in the crucible of the Big Bang, our mighty race was already 17 years old”

First of all, this makes no sense whatsoever by our scientific conventions.  So, let’s say my later assumption is true, that the universe has been oscillating; expanding and contracting.  Further surmise that this “Big Bang” is not the ultimate conception, but simply the inevitable reversal of a “big crunch” (all the galaxies slingshotting past the gravitational center of the universe)..  Wait, did I just say, “center?”  Perhaps, one planet is not oscillating, but instead is at the direct gravitational center of said astronomical ballet.  One could now claim several things:

1:  This planet is the gravitational center of what we know to be the universe.
2:  Relatively, there is still no center, because you cannot claim that said planet isn’t moving.  Therefore, any point you pick may just as well be the center. 
3:  It is possible for the Nibblonian planet to have existed 17 years before the creation of our universe, if you take “the creation” to mean the time when contraction switched to expansion.

So there, it’s the center, but it’s not the center.  I make these claims based on limited knowledge from some books I read.
   big grin

PS:  How would the nibblonians stay alive on said planet?  I don't know, I'll say there's a small sun orbiting it or something..

EDIT:  Now, dealing with the fact that the Futuramaverse has an edge is a different story.  This babbling was just to state that I think our universe could be said to have a center.
VoVat

Bending Unit
***
« Reply #28 on: 09-02-2004 20:43 »

 
Quote
Except that, for all we know, Futurama doesn't use warp drive in the Star Trek sense.

No, they use convenience drive.
canned eggs

Space Pope
****
« Reply #29 on: 09-17-2004 01:33 »

The ship having a max speed makes sense.  The relativistic effect on the ship's mass would make the acceleration small enough that it wouldn't be able to overcome the drag associated with the small amount of matter in the vacuum of space.  Mass varies inversely with the square root of 1-(v/c)^2.  The energy needed to overcome drag varies with v^2, assuming front area and drag coefficient are constant.  These figures will meet up surprisingly quickly, even given a very small amount of drag.  Bender, being smaller than the Planet Express ship, encounters less drag.  But you would think that since he'll be decelerating and the ship won't, that they could eventually catch him.  Maybe it would take longer than their fuel load would allow...
Pages: [1] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF | SMF © 2006, Simple Machines | some icons from famfamfam
Legal Notice & Disclaimer: "Futurama" TM and copyright FOX, its related entities and the Curiosity Company. All rights reserved. Any reproduction, duplication or distribution of these materials in any form is expressly prohibited. As a fan site, this Futurama forum, its operators, and any content on the site relating to "Futurama" are not explicitely authorized by Fox or the Curiosity Company.
Page created in 0.183 seconds with 17 queries.