Slashdot Mirror


Comic Book Physics

An anonymous reader writes "Seems many of the feats of SpiderMan, Superman and other superheroes obey the basic requirements of physics. So says a University of Minnesota physicist who uses nothing but comics to teach the subject. 'Comic books get their science right more often than one would expect ... I was able to find examples in superhero comic books of the correct descriptions of basic physical principles for a wide range of topics, including classical mechanics, electricity and magnetism, and even quantum physics.' Especially cool: Why Krypton *had* to explode."

579 comments

  1. A Big Mystery by cyranoVR · · Score: 5, Funny

    How do the breasts of all those super-heroines manage to defy gravity so well?

    1. Re:A Big Mystery by mlibby · · Score: 5, Funny

      ah, yes, well that is where super-powers come into play.

      and, to paraphrase Calvin, "apparently her superpower is being able to fit into that skin-tight suit".

    2. Re:A Big Mystery by LauraScudder · · Score: 5, Funny

      Man! The best female superpower my friend and I could come up with was the ability to cloud men's minds. I guess those two are related though...

    3. Re:A Big Mystery by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am not at all surprised at this finding; most cartoons do the same thing. Just watch the cartoon network.

    4. Re:A Big Mystery by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Many years ago, Mad Magazine addressed this issue when the Bionic Woman stopped a truck by using her breasts. The conclusion then was that it was the construction of the bra. Next question is do super-heroines wear bras?

    5. Re:A Big Mystery by cujo_1111 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Nothing a large quantity of duct tape can't get under control.

      They got Pamela Anderson's mammaries under control in Barb Wire, gotta take your hat off to the undergarment engineer right there.

      --
      If I point out that you are incorrect, making me a foe does not make you any more correct.
    6. Re:A Big Mystery by DebianRcksLindowsLie · · Score: 1

      The best female superpower is keeping their foes' eyes riveted on said breasts. Apparently that's what the above poster meant? Nothing beats Rebecca Romijn-Stamos, fully naked, but painted in X-Men.

    7. Re:A Big Mystery by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Women seem to have the ability to make men's pants smaller, particularly in the crotch'tal area... Maybe it's just me?

    8. Re:A Big Mystery by G-funk · · Score: 4, Funny

      That's superhero physiques, which is down the hall to your left.

      --
      Send lawyers, guns, and money!
    9. Re:A Big Mystery by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      and, to paraphrase Calvin, "apparently her superpower is being able to fit into that skin-tight suit".

      That was Hobbes. To which Calvin replied, "Nah, they can all do that."

    10. Re:A Big Mystery by mlibby · · Score: 1

      You're right... that's obviously a much more Hobbesian sort of comment.

    11. Re:A Big Mystery by Ryosen · · Score: 1

      You're clearly too young to remember Linda Carter as Wonder Woman. *grrrrrrrr*

      --

      Ryosen
      One man's "Troll, +1" is another man's "Insightful, +1".
    12. Re:A Big Mystery by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yeah but she had hips that could pass a krypton-sized planet... sorry, not my kind of girl.

    13. Re:A Big Mystery by skilzrulz · · Score: 1

      I hear ya;)

      --
      Maddox the only thing that matters.
  2. Worst. Slashdot Article. Ever. by Zalgon+26+McGee · · Score: 3, Funny

    http://jpaudio.com/bullshitgas/comic_book_guy.jpg

    --

    ---

    Book(n): Utensil used to pass time while waiting for the TV repairman

  3. Plot device by ObviousGuy · · Score: 5, Funny

    Krypton had to explode. If it did not, there would have been no incentive for Kal'el to send his son to Earth. Without Clark landing on Earth, the whole Superman series wouldn't have made much sense.

    That said, has anyone noticed that the names of the Krypton citizens were all slightly Jewish? Jor'el, Kal'el, and the others all sound like townships in Israel.

    Maybe it's just me.

    --
    I have been pwned because my /. password was too easy to guess.
    1. Re:Plot device by BitterOak · · Score: 5, Informative
      Krypton had to explode. If it did not, there would have been no incentive for Kal'el to send his son to Earth.

      I thought it was Jorel who sent his son to Earth. Wasn't Kalel the son's (i.e. Superman's) name?

      --
      If I can be modded down for being a troll, can I be modded up for being an orc, or a balrog?
    2. Re:Plot device by robindmorris · · Score: 5, Informative

      The "el" ending means "god" (essentially), so it's not surprising that these names end up sounding slightly Jewish.

    3. Re:Plot device by sofakingl · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The creators of Superman were Jewish. They needed names that sounded alien for the characters, so they just used Hebrew sounding names, which at the time wouldn't be that well recognized by the general public.

    4. Re:Plot device by cujo_1111 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Go and read this article about one of the creators of Superman.

      --
      If I point out that you are incorrect, making me a foe does not make you any more correct.
    5. Re:Plot device by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      You guys call yourselves Nerds? Get with the program, it's Kal-El and Jor-El. The hyphen and capital "E" are important.

      Rookies.

      PS: Did you know that the "El" family lived next door to the "Em"?

    6. Re:Plot device by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I've always thought that the houses (family names) of Krypton were based off of the letters in the Americal alphabet. So we have the house of El (Kal-El, Jor-El, Zor-El), their neighbours, the house of Em (Dev-Em) and the final house, the house of Zee (Van-Zee)

    7. Re:Plot device by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      those wacky jews...

    8. Re:Plot device by dasheiff · · Score: 1

      That said, has anyone noticed that the names of the Krypton citizens were all slightly Jewish? Jor'el, Kal'el, and the others all sound like townships in Israel.

      More like Klingon.

    9. Re:Plot device by unitron · · Score: 2, Funny
      In the comic books of the late 50s, early 60s, they used hyphens, i.e, Jor-El, Kal-El, etc.

      Only vaguely related, last read Spiderman comics in the 60s, but only realised recently in retrospect that Stan was probably writing Peter Parker as Jewish.

      --

      I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.

    10. Re:Plot device by noewun · · Score: 1

      El was the high god of Canaan, as opposed to Yahweh, who became the Israelite god.

      --
      I am a believer of momentum and curves.
    11. Re:Plot device by Lord+Kano · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The "el" ending means "god" (essentially), so it's not surprising that these names end up sounding slightly Jewish.

      In Hebrew "el" as a suffix could mean "God" or "Of God", for example if we were to look at the names of angels Michael means "who is as God", Gabriel translates to "God is my strength" or possibly "my strength is God", Israel means "Striver with God", Usiel means "Strength of God", Raziel means "the secret of God".

      At one time Christians were so fond of tacking on el to the end of a word to create an angel that in 745 the church forbade the faithful to call on any angel other than Raphael, Gabriel and Michael. (the three mentioned by name in their canonical teachings)

      LK

      --
      "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
    12. Re:Plot device by asdf+101 · · Score: 1

      I agree with your inference on the Jewish tinge.

      A brief bit of history: "El" was the pagan high-god of Canaan and the areas surrounding it till the time when Yahweh captured the faith of the "believers". It was quite common the Axial age to append the suffix "El" to any notion or object with a transcendent perception e.g. Jacob renamed Luz to Beth-El (the house of El) after his epiphany at that location.

      I don't know about the religious inclination of the original team that created Superman, but it wouldn't be too far-fetched to assume that they were implying Kryton as habitated by beings superior to us (if not supreme-beings) and so they derived from symbolisms of the past in their naming conventions to make that ascendent connection.

    13. Re:Plot device by dameon · · Score: 2, Funny

      Actually, acording to the translations the Israelite god's name is mereley YHWH. That is as close to English as I can get you.

      Imagine, all those Jew's saying Yahweh all the time. Sort of like mispronouncing God's name? I'd be pissed

      --
      Remember, a truly wise man never plays leapfrom with a unicorn
    14. Re:Plot device by dpilot · · Score: 1

      You mean Sieg-El and Schuster? (Guess the second time means you can't get it right, every time.

      --
      The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
    15. Re:Plot device by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      It's written "YHWH" simply because hebraic written language doesn't include the vowels. They're supposed to be self-explanatory. AFAIK, Arabic doesn't include vowels either, for that matter.

    16. Re:Plot device by MadChicken · · Score: 5, Informative

      Not really, the name was SPELLED YHWH, since they didn't need to write the vowels (they were understood). That is definitely not how it was PRONOUNCED.

      Some have said the vowels came from the Greek "Adonai" to give you, roughly, Yahowah. That is convenient but not 100% accurate. Other names like Joshua (Yehoshua) and many others contain the divine name have and preserved the proper vowels through common use. The pronunciation was almost certainly Yehowah in Hebrew -- and in English it *is* "Jehovah" (no need to mix languages in a sentence).

      How's THAT for offtopic? I never expected to discuss Hebrew phonetics in an article about comic book physics!

      --
      SYS 64738 NO CARRIER
    17. Re:Plot device by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Actually, in the first sentence of the bible ("In the beginning god...") uses the plural form of the word, "elohim", so it actually says "In the beginning the gods...". Elohim is used more than 2000 times throughout the old testament.

      Might be because lots of the storys are older myths from other religions (for instance the flood story which is found in Gilgamesh and lots of other places)

    18. Re:Plot device by payne · · Score: 3, Funny

      So does that mean that Superman and Emenem are neighbors? :)

      --
      Build an idiot-proof system and the world will build a better idiot. --unknown
    19. Re:Plot device by Lexic0n · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The creators of Superman were Jewish. "Kal-El" means something like "All that is God" in Hebrew. (Not sure on Jor-El.) Superman was created around the time of World War II, a time when the Jewish people of Europe were especially beset upon. His homeland is destroyed and his people eliminated -- sound like anything familiar? He is placed in something like a basket and floated out into space, a parallel to Moses. He is raised by a people not his own and rises to prominence in that society, also similar to Moses.

      Superman is actually a Jewish icon! He was created to give hope and encouragement to Jewish people the world over during a particularly bleak period in their history.

    20. Re:Plot device by SlamMan · · Score: 1

      Except which one came first? Bloody star trek nuts.

      --
      Mod point free since 2001
    21. Re:Plot device by Paradise+Pete · · Score: 3, Funny
      the name was SPELLED YHWH...That is definitely not how it was PRONOUNCED.

      It's spelled YHWH, but it's pronounced Throat-Wobbler Mangrove.

    22. Re:Plot device by Scrameustache · · Score: 4, Funny

      The creators of Superman were Jewish. They needed names that sounded alien for the characters, so they just used Hebrew sounding names, which at the time wouldn't be that well recognized by the general public.

      Had they been your run-of-the-mill regular good ol' Canadians, we would have had slightly different alien names.

      Kal'Eh, Jor'Eh...

      --

      You can't take the sky from me...

    23. Re:Plot device by ichimunki · · Score: 1

      Typical. There is a perfectly good Anglo-Saxon word, "God", available and we have to argue about some Greek-derived thing that no one even knows how to spell or pronounce? ;)

      Kidding aside (and nitpicky hat on), it was not spelled "YHWH", it was spelled Yod, He, Waw (aka Vav), He (forgive me for not typing in the actual Hebrew letters, don't know how)... and according to some sources those letters, or at least some of them, can be either consonants or vowels? I think this tendency to transliterate words is creates more confusion than necessary in many cases.

      --
      I do not have a signature
    24. Re:Plot device by Gilmoure · · Score: 1

      In Sindarin (or is it Quenya), El means star. Aragorn's Elvish name is Elessor or star of hope. There's also Elrond, but I forgot what the rest of his name means.

      --
      I drank what? -- Socrates
    25. Re:Plot device by kisrael · · Score: 1

      There was a funny line in the Adventures of Kavalier and Klay along the lines of "Clark Kent? So obviously the name a jewish guy would pick if he was trying to hide and sound strong and American"

      great book.

      --
      SO YOU'RE GOING TO DIE: The Comic for Dealing with Death
    26. Re:Plot device by Hadean · · Score: 2, Informative
      For anyone who's interested, a good (but possibly biased) source for the history of the word can be found here.


      Elohim is the common name for God. It is a plural form, but "The usage of the language gives no support to the supposition that we have in the plural form Elohim, applied to the God of Israel, the remains of an early polytheism, or at least a combination with the higher spiritual beings" (Kautzsch). Grammarians call it a plural of majesty or rank, or of abstraction, or of magnitude (Gesenius, Grammatik, 27th ed., nn. 124 g, 132 h). The Ethiopic plural amlak has become a proper name of God. Hoffmann has pointed out an analogous plural elim in the Phoenician inscriptions (Ueber einige phon. Inschr., 1889, p. 17 sqq.), and Barton has shown that in the tablets from El-Amarna the plural form ilani replaces the singular more than forty times (Proceedings of the American Oriental Society, 21-23 April, 1892, pp. cxcvi-cxcix).
    27. Re:Plot device by TheLink · · Score: 1

      "Actually, acording to the translations the Israelite god's name is mereley YHWH. That is as close to English as I can get you. Imagine, all those Jew's saying Yahweh all the time. Sort of like mispronouncing God's name? I'd be pissed"

      Ironically a probable contributing factor to the debate on the pronounciation is because the Jews weren't saying it all the time, because it was a very serious matter to misuse God's name:

      The 3rd Commandment- You shall not misuse the name of the LORD your God, for the LORD will not hold anyone guiltless who misuses his name.

      I suspect it was preferable to use other terms like Adonai, El (e.g. El-Shaddai, El-Sabaoth), and so on to refer to God, arguably not being the Name of God (see Exodus 3:13-14).

      Apparently the Hebrew scribes in ancient times would take special measures when encountering the Name of God whilst making copies of scriptures. They would stop their copying for the day. The next day they would ceremonially wash and then just write Name of God. The following day they would continue with the rest of copying till they encounter Name of God again.

      In contrast nowadays many people seem to be purposely disrespectful. Those that don't believe there's a God still use the term like an expletive. Lack of imagination or some other underlying reason - just want to be Bad?

      --
    28. Re:Plot device by Spunk · · Score: 1

      My name (Joel) means "The Lord is God". is Jo- related to Jehovah, then?

    29. Re:Plot device by weierstrass · · Score: 2

      Written arabic does have vowels. In fact, the first letter of the Arabic alphabet is alif (= a). There are two types of vowels though - stressed ones, which are always written, and unstressed ones, which are written a bit like accents above and below the words, and which are usually left out.

      OT i know, but people get this wrong ALL the time, and i have no idea why.

      --
      my password really is 'stinkypants'
    30. Re:Plot device by Ryosen · · Score: 2, Informative

      Bullocks. It's written as YHWH simply because, in the Jesish faith, you are forbidden to write out or pronounce the full name of G-d. <-- hence this spelling...

      --

      Ryosen
      One man's "Troll, +1" is another man's "Insightful, +1".
    31. Re:Plot device by Ryosen · · Score: 1

      Sorry about the spelling mistake. My "W" and "S" keys were sitting a little too close to each other.

      --

      Ryosen
      One man's "Troll, +1" is another man's "Insightful, +1".
    32. Re:Plot device by BenjiTheGreat98 · · Score: 1

      Wasn't the creator of Superman character Jewish?

      --
      :wq
    33. Re:Plot device by DavidTC · · Score: 1

      Except that God isn't the name of God, so 'G-d' is completely nonsensical.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    34. Re:Plot device by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Not Schuster

      Shuster.

      (I'm not being a spelling Nazi... same last name and people do that constantly...)

    35. Re:Plot device by Art+Tatum · · Score: 2, Funny

      Actually, they're one and the same person. Mild-mannered superhero who fights for justice by day, stupid white pseudo-rapper by night. But no one in the hood can put 2 and 2 together. Not surprising, since none of them made it successfully through 2nd grade.

    36. Re:Plot device by Lord+Kano · · Score: 1

      My name (Joel) means "The Lord is God". is Jo- related to Jehovah, then?

      I'm glad you brought that up. Let me preface my following comments like this...I believe 100% in freedom of religion, so please don't let history and my opinion dissuade you from believing something that you find to be true...

      The origin of the word "Jehova" and the subsequent extablishment of the so called "Jehova's Witnesses" is very comedic to me.

      In Hebrew, vowels are not written so their name for God was "YHWH", it was spoken as Yahweh. When German religious scholars were translating from Hebrew into German they wrote out the entire name. But they used the rules for pronounciation that was native to their language. Yahweh became Jehova because the letters y-a-w-e-h (in english) are pronounced like j-e-h-o-v-a (in german), so those people who call God Jevova or call themselves Jehova's witnesses are mispronouncind the name of their God and their religion.

      LK

      --
      "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
    37. Re:Plot device by noewun · · Score: 1

      You can see El's name used in early Biblical names - Beth-El (house of El), etc.

      --
      I am a believer of momentum and curves.
    38. Re:Plot device by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Em...is that Eminem's father?

    39. Re:Plot device by Spunk · · Score: 1

      Yep, I know about that. But don't you think they are simply alternates rather than one being right and the other wrong? J and Y (and I*) only became different letters more recently in history, as did U/V/W. So YHWH and JHVH are equally valid, as I see it. Add vowels to taste :)

      Besides, we got plenty of this going on already in the subthread here.

      Now to get back on subject, do you know if the Jo- in my name has any meaning as a word-particle? Or should I just keep telling people I'm Superman's dad? Using letter substitution, I'd expect Yoel to be an equivalent name, and it appears to be the case. Ironic that my name is a proclamation of faith when I no longer believe. Sorry mom and dad!

      * remember Indiana Jones - "Iehovah" to get around the trap.

    40. Re:Plot device by Reziac · · Score: 1

      It's perfectly on topic -- you need to invoke Cartoon Physics to pronounce it. ;)

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    41. Re:Plot device by omichron · · Score: 1

      It's probably because both Seigal and Shuster were of the Jewish faith. Funny how they "Wasp-ized" Superman to kinda look like more of a big Anglo-Saxon/Germanic American guy but Seigal's surname is probably of German origin anyway. They probably lifted the "El" word from Jewish tradition because, basically, it looks and sounds really cool! I wonder what those two guys would have had to say?

  4. Wouldn't suprise me by shadowkoder · · Score: 0

    This really doesn't suprise me. With the time and dedication comic book artists and manga creators put into their books (at least the better ones) is something to be proud of.

  5. Bullet Physics by superpulpsicle · · Score: 5, Interesting

    A man shoots a bullet toward superman's chest, the bullet bounces off. No problem... I can buy that.

    What I can't accept is, why is there no bullet holes in the shirt? Do superheroes wear some special brand? Study that...

    1. Re:Bullet Physics by RedFive · · Score: 5, Funny

      His custume is made from the material he was wrapped in on his journey from Krypton. Sheesh, even I know that :-)

      --
      RedFive jedi_knight111@hotmail.com
    2. Re:Bullet Physics by platipusrc · · Score: 5, Informative

      In a Lois and Clark episode, Superman said that he had a small field of invincibility around him that protected his clothing or anything else within its range. I believe that was in response to Lois asking why his suit could be damaged in the closet, but it was never damaged when he was wearing it.

      --
      And the muscular cyborg German dudes dance with sexy French Canadians
    3. Re:Bullet Physics by Fuzzle · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Actually, this is explained in John Byrne's mini-series/relaunch The Man Of Steel, in which Ma Kent sews Clark his first costume, and they talk about how the material close to his body seems to become impervious to damage, while something like his cape, which isn't skin-tight gets shredded all the time, because it isn't as close.

    4. Re:Bullet Physics by Reorax · · Score: 1

      Superman's suit was made from the blankets in the ship he arrived in. But why does that help They...umm...are just woven better.

      --
      This sig is only here so people stop skipping the last lines of my posts.
    5. Re:Bullet Physics by BobWeiner · · Score: 1

      Dunno about Superman -- but I do know that other bullet-proof characters, like Luke Cage (aka PowerMan) would always get his shirts shredded when fired upon.

      Forget the whales, and bring back Power Man and Iron Fist!

      --
      The PC Weenies: 11 Years of Online Tech 'Too
    6. Re:Bullet Physics by NewbieProgrammerMan · · Score: 5, Funny

      Apparently the shirt is made from the same stuff as the Hulk's pants. It cuts down on the special-effects budget for Superman movies, and eliminates the fuzzy blue dot and R-rating budgets for Hulk movies.

      In the older Superman TV shows, it was funny that he could stand there and deflect bullets, and yet he ducked when the shooter ran out of bullets and threw the gun at him.

      --
      [b.belong('us') for b in bases if b.owner() == 'you']
    7. Re:Bullet Physics by pranay · · Score: 5, Interesting

      If the tension in a cloth is too great, and it is backed by a hard srface like superman muscles, it can deflect bullets without absorbing too much impact energy itself. Most bullet proof jackets are made of layers that deaccelerate the bullets by absorbing the energy, and so they get holes. Try shooting at a piece of cloth tightly wrapped around a solid titanium block, the bullet will deflect, and the cloth will remain intact.

    8. Re:Bullet Physics by cowscows · · Score: 5, Interesting
      I'm no expert on these sorts of things, but here's how I see it. Imagine I'm wearing a shirt that you really don't like. So you hit me in the chest with a hammer. The hammer crushes through my ribcage and creates a nice hole. My shirt gets stretched down into this new hole by the hammer, and eventually tears from the tension of it stretching. As I slowly bleed to death and whine, you notice another shirt, exactly like the one I was wearing, sitting in the street behind me. (Maybe I'm selling them and I dropped one when you hit me). So it a fit of rage, you try to destroy the shirt laying in the road. The hammer smashes the cloth against the ground before bouncing back up, but probably doesn't do any real damage to the cloth.


      Now, a bullet probably has a bit more energy in it than a hammer swung by most people, but I imagine it'd work in a similar fashion. And Superman's body seems to be made of something even stronger than asphalt.


      But I could be very wrong. and the article could explain it infact. It's too busy for me to read at the moment.

      --

      One time I threw a brick at a duck.

    9. Re:Bullet Physics by hubie · · Score: 3, Funny

      What I liked better is in the TV series, (the old one with George Reeves, not that sappy Lois and Clark), the bad guy shoots at Superman and he stands there with his chest out smiling as the bullets bounce off. The bad guy empties his gun, and with no other options in front of him he throws the gun at Superman, who then ducks so he doesn't get hit.

    10. Re:Bullet Physics by StenD · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Chalk it up to poor scripting. The bullets were FX, but the thrown gun was real. :)

    11. Re:Bullet Physics by Catnapster · · Score: 5, Funny

      That has to be the most violent analogy I've ever seen used.

      --
      The world can be wrong today for once.
    12. Re:Bullet Physics by Lehk228 · · Score: 1

      actually i think a well swung hammer has more power behind it than a normal sized bullet, it's just the way the power is applied.

      --
      Snowden and Manning are heroes.
    13. Re:Bullet Physics by Blimbo · · Score: 1

      No, as i recall in the comic or was it the cartoon?? .. anyway the suit was created from material that was in his ship when he landed on earth, giving it these super properties.

    14. Re:Bullet Physics by Dylan+Zimmerman · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Actually, they changed that. Now, he radiates a small field that protects anything within about two millimeters of his skin. I forget when they changed it, but I do remember reading that his costume was made from the cloth from Krypton. However, this raises the question, how could it be cut and tailored? If it's immune to bullets, then one would expect it to resist being cut quite well.

    15. Re:Bullet Physics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...one would expect it to resist being cut quite well.

      why? kevlar's great for stopping a bullet, yet if someone tries to stab you, you might as well be wearing denim.

    16. Re:Bullet Physics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic


      But I could be very wrong. and the article could explain it infact. It's too busy for me to read at the moment.


      AND YET YOU HAVE THE TIME TO WRITE A RELATIVELY LONG RESPONSE TO A COMMENT? ARE YOU CRAZY OR SOMETHING?

    17. Re:Bullet Physics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Oops, misread your orignal post to be "I'm too busy to read it at the moment."

      My appologies.

    18. Re:Bullet Physics by Kjuib · · Score: 0, Redundant

      When bullets fly at Superman, He sticks out his chest and takes it like a man... But, when the henchman is out of bullets, what is he to do? well... Throw the gun at Superman what else... Now what I don't get is why Superman Ducks from this?! wouldn't want to get hit by an unloaded gun now would we?!

      --
      - Your stupidity got you into this mess, why can't it get you out? -Will Rogers
    19. Re:Bullet Physics by paulgrant · · Score: 5, Informative

      actually no. nice try though.

      #1 - any deflection in the bullet path ("ricochet") would have to at some point, engage the material as its path curved..

      #2 - the material itself would be mashed (and probably torn) just by the sheer collision of a fast bullet and the wall.

    20. Re:Bullet Physics by endofoctober · · Score: 5, Interesting

      In the original Superman, didn't Ma Kent make Kal-El's first clothes out of cloth from the interior of the ship that brought the baby to Earth? I always thought the cloth itself, coming from Krypton's red sun atmosphere, would be less impervious to damage in Earth's yellow sun environment.

      The Byrne explanation was a little too "plucked out of thin air". Sometimes the best explanations are the simple ones.

      --
      - Jack
    21. Re:Bullet Physics by paulgrant · · Score: 2, Interesting

      #3 - the heat of the bullet
      #4 - the flattening of the bullet against the chest

    22. Re:Bullet Physics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      And of course the show was made before the discovery of balsa wood and the ability to paint things to look realistic.

    23. Re:Bullet Physics by Dachannien · · Score: 5, Funny

      "In the older Superman TV shows, it was funny that he could stand there and deflect bullets, and yet he ducked when the shooter ran out of bullets and threw the gun at him."

      That's because getting hit in the face with a gun hurts!

    24. Re:Bullet Physics by forgotmypassword · · Score: 5, Funny

      However, this raises the question, how could it be cut and tailored? If it's immune to bullets, then one would expect it to resist being cut quite well.

      Why the same way he cuts his hair!

      With his laser vision and an ideal vanity mirror that he apparently got from physics class along side the massless rope and frictionless pully.

      (I am not making this up ... well I made up where he got the mirror)

    25. Re:Bullet Physics by t0ny · · Score: 1

      Thank you, Robert Wuhl.

      --

      Manipulate the moderator system! Mod someone as "overrated" today.

    26. Re:Bullet Physics by Graff · · Score: 2, Interesting
      In the original Superman, didn't Ma Kent make Kal-El's first clothes out of cloth from the interior of the ship that brought the baby to Earth? I always thought the cloth itself, coming from Krypton's red sun atmosphere, would be less impervious to damage in Earth's yellow sun environment.

      That explanation always sounded fishy to me. The material won't get ruined by extreme heat/bullets/corrosive chemicals but it can be cut with scissors and tailored with a needle? Hmm...

      At least the "impervious field" explanation is internally-consistant, no matter how contrived it sounds. Generally a contrived answer that is self-consistant is better than a simple answer that begs more questions.
    27. Re:Bullet Physics by prockcore · · Score: 2, Informative

      What I can't accept is, why is there no bullet holes in the shirt? Do superheroes wear some special brand? Study that...

      I'm a big fan of Smallville (surely the next show that WB will stupidly cancel), and whenever clark gets shot, there are bullet holes in his clothing.

    28. Re:Bullet Physics by Cruciform · · Score: 3, Informative

      Solid titanium?

      It would shatter wouldn't it? It's extremely brittle unless in an alloy.

      Any metallurgists out there? Edu-ma-cate us!

    29. Re:Bullet Physics by nametaken · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      You sir, are why I love slashdot. Someone actually took the time to answer what seemed like a silly question. Well done. :)

    30. Re:Bullet Physics by unitron · · Score: 5, Informative
      Martha Kent took the kid's baby blankets, un-wove them thread by thread (since trying to cut them was a good way to break scissors, although eventually they could trim the thread with his x-Ray heat vision), and then re-wove them into his outfit, re-un-weaving and re-re-weaving as he grew from boy to man.

      At least that was the way they told it back around 1960.

      --

      I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.

    31. Re:Bullet Physics by 0mni · · Score: 1

      If the hammer is swung enough to have more force than a "normal sized" bullet then the concrete below will be damaged somewhat, this was not supposed to be the case.

    32. Re:Bullet Physics by nametaken · · Score: 1

      This is similar to another poster's suggestion. My question is this: Wouldn't the mushrooming copper or lead snag/tear/shred the garment at the point of impact? In fact most bullets fragment, if only a little. I would expect this to cause tearing, particularly from "splash" or any impact that doesn't hit at a perfect 90 degree angle.

    33. Re:Bullet Physics by hubie · · Score: 1

      Where did Wuhl say it?

    34. Re:Bullet Physics by EvanED · · Score: 1

      Ah, but then the issue comes from his cape. I'm sure that'd get torn some time.

    35. Re:Bullet Physics by arazor · · Score: 1

      Its from Rober Wuhl's stand up routine. If you get HBO Comedy its worth checking out when they get around or to playing it or maybe you can search for it on your favorite p2p sources.

      --
      You can't fight crime with a macaroni duck - arthur in the animated series The Tick

    36. Re:Bullet Physics by GigsVT · · Score: 1

      I don't know about that. Power hammers use .22 sized charges to shoot nails into concrete walls. I'd like to see you hammer a nail into a concrete wall... with one stroke :)

      --
      I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
    37. Re:Bullet Physics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      What I want to know is how does Superman get a haircut?

    38. Re:Bullet Physics by t0ny · · Score: 1
      my apologies if you didnt actually see it. He refers to it in his standup act, and on one of his specials (I think it was from HBO).

      He had a really good line about Superman standing there with a big shit-eating grin on his face, saying "you cant hurt me, Im Superman!", but then ducking because the gun gets thrown at him.

      --

      Manipulate the moderator system! Mod someone as "overrated" today.

    39. Re:Bullet Physics by r_j_prahad · · Score: 1

      In Episode 1 of the TV series "The Adventures of Superman" ("Superman On Earth"), it's explained that the blanket that baby Kal'el (Joel Nestler) was wrapped in when he was found in the crashed spaceship is indestructible. Later in the show, Sarah 'Ma' Kent (Frances Morris) sews Clark's first uniform from this material.

      I know, I know... so how did she cut and stitch the material? I've always wondered that.

    40. Re:Bullet Physics by forgotmypassword · · Score: 2, Informative

      kevlar's great for stopping a bullet, yet if someone tries to stab you, you might as well be wearing denim.

      My Kevlar gloves aren't there to protect my hands from bullets.

      Are you just dead wrong, or is there some big difference here?

    41. Re:Bullet Physics by Captain+Splendid · · Score: 1

      Well, superhero costumes are usually made out of 'unstable molecule', but that's in the Marvel Universe, courtesy of Reed Richards. What's the DC excuse? Anyone know?

      --
      Linux, you magnificent bastard, I read the fucking manual!
    42. Re:Bullet Physics by gavri · · Score: 1

      Well, they could have just shot the sonofabitch in the face then.

    43. Re:Bullet Physics by Graff · · Score: 1
      Generally a contrived answer that is self-consistant is better than a simple answer that begs more questions.

      And before the pedants strike - yes, I do know what "begging the question" means. I know the works I used were similar even though they don't point towards the same meaning.
    44. Re:Bullet Physics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you could focus all the energy of the swing of the hammer directly onto the head of the nail (ie: the head of the hammer is shrunk to the size of the nail and you head dead-on center) then you might have a chance... If you do it that way you essentially just have a much heavier bullet travelling at a much lower speed. Of course, seeing as how they don't really make hand hammers with heads as small as I'm talking, the point is strictly academic.

    45. Re:Bullet Physics by uvsc_wolverine · · Score: 2, Funny

      Hey! Don't go giving my physics prof. any ideas. I'm having enough trouble without having to worry about the mass of the rope and the friction of the pully. I like massless ropes and frictionless pulleys!

      --
      This space for rent...
    46. Re:Bullet Physics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no no no no! it's his cape that gives him his super powers!

      everyone knows this!

      (just in case the mods didn't know, i was trying to be funny)

    47. Re:Bullet Physics by forgotmypassword · · Score: 2, Funny

      I like massless ropes and frictionless pulleys!

      And spherical cows!

    48. Re:Bullet Physics by Lord+Kano · · Score: 4, Informative

      Are you just dead wrong, or is there some big difference here?

      He's a little wrong.

      Kevlar vests are designed to fail. That's why there are multiple layers of Kevlar. Each layer slows the bullet as it fails. The plan is that before the bullet penetrates your flesh, it gives all of its energy to making the Kevlar fail.

      I have a Kevlar vest and I stabbed the rear panel with a survival knife. No penetration at all, but I have read of police who were shot with broadhead hunting arrows and the vests were only useful to them as big band-aids.

      You're Kevlar gloves aren't uncuttable, they just don't cust as easily as your skin, hopefully you'll get your hand out of the way before the Kevlar in the glove fails.

      LK

      --
      "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
    49. Re:Bullet Physics by qc_dk · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Looking around on the internet i found the energy of a bullet fired by a desert eagle to be around
      1200 J.
      Say i have a hammer weighing 2 kg. To obtain the same energy i would have to swing it at
      sqrt (1200) = 34 m/s or 120 km/h.
      I think this is quite possible.

      With a heavy hammer like a sledgehammer (10 kg) i would only have to swing it at:
      sqrt(240) = 55 km/h.
      This is possible.

      I know because i have just torn down a wall with a sledgehammer. On one of my swings i strafed a pipe and lost my grip on the hammer and it went flying through the 10 cm thick wall rebounded on the next wall flew past me in the other direction and landed 2 m behind me. All in all it flew about 7 m and tore down a 20*20*10 cm piece of cement wall. I am very glad it didnt hit me or my friend who was on the other side of the wall. :)

    50. Re:Bullet Physics by 1u3hr · · Score: 1
      However, this raises the question, how could it be cut and tailored? If it's immune to bullets, then one would expect it to resist being cut quite well.

      As I recall, Mrs Kent unravelled the baby blanket and wove the costume. Then Superboy used his heat vision to cut the threads. But that doesn't explain how it can withstand nuclear blasts, etc. Maybe she temporarily weakened it with green K.

    51. Re:Bullet Physics by asdf+101 · · Score: 1

      It's probably like the notional concept of "force-fields".. you can walk through them, but you can't fire through them.

      The field deflects or absorbs high energy / high velocity particles while allowing for free passage otherwise.

      Mirrored in reality today: you can drive a knife through a bullet-proof vest, you can probably also trim it with a scissor, but you can't shoot through it.

    52. Re:Bullet Physics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      W??comic books claimed that Superman's costume was made from Kryptonian fabric in the escape rocket. Said fabric was almost as "super" as the Kryptonians themselves.

      In one of the more recent continuities, writers explained it by saying that Kryptonians generate personal force-fields (shades of Alan Moore's "Miracleman" revamp!), and that the force field protects anything close to the body. Thus, while Clark's clothes are made of ordinary materials, his "Superman" shirt and trousers are safe. The cape isn't all that close to his body, so in a fight, it should get ripped or blown to shreds.

      For a while, Superman lost capes on a regular basis. Then the writers and artists stopped paying attention, and Clark's monthly bill for fabric went WAY down.

    53. Re:Bullet Physics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "un-wove them thread by thread "

      That's my memory of the physics of superman's outfit also. Also derived from 1960s.

    54. Re:Bullet Physics by Kierthos · · Score: 1

      Actually, if you've picked up some of the comics in the last few years, it does get torn up all the time. As I recall, he's got a bunch of the capes, all made by his mother.

      Kierthos

      --
      Mr. Hu is not a ninja.
    55. Re:Bullet Physics by Ba3r · · Score: 2, Interesting

      If the shirt is of tough enough, thin enough fabric, its impact with Superman's super-chest will either 1. deflect it, or 2. mushroom it. Either way there is little as far as penetration of the shirt.

      Now my question is how can Superman pick up a locomotive without destroying whatever he is standing on (i.e. the 500,000 lbs (google) on 2 points *maybe* totaling 1 sqft, so thats about 500,000/144 = 3472 psi). I doubt the surface strength of concrete can take that pressure (Let alone the torque he exerts when he chucks the locomotive 100 miles, or the mere ability to pick up a locomotive by one end, i mean the torque would be ridiculous).

      But i suppose all of Superman's super-feats pale in comparison to Batman's ability to conceal his identity for so damn long.

    56. Re:Bullet Physics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny
      Generally a contrived answer that is self-consistant is better than a simple answer that begs more questions.
      OK. Tiny demons cause all of physics to happen. They made the Universe, too. You can't see them because they move too fast and they're invisible. This explains all of physics without leaving any unanswered questions. Satisfied?
    57. Re:Bullet Physics by Kierthos · · Score: 1

      No, no... the actor would duck the thrown gun because getting hit in the face with a gun hurts, but the 'bullets' were just blanks and special effects for the ricochets.

      As far as your statement goes, shooting Superman in the face wouldn't work either.

      Kierthos

      --
      Mr. Hu is not a ninja.
    58. Re:Bullet Physics by Genrou · · Score: 0, Redundant

      A man unloads his gun in Superman's chest, and the bullets bounce off, that I can buy. But, out of ammunition, the villain throws his empty gun, and then Superman dodges so he is not hit. That I could never understand.

    59. Re:Bullet Physics by Per+Abrahamsen · · Score: 2, Informative

      The mirror was a piece of shiny metal from the space ship that brought him to Earth.

    60. Re:Bullet Physics by hummassa · · Score: 1

      In one of the recounts of the seventies, it was said that he came with the clothes, sans cape, and it grew up with him, ... something like a special kripton undergarment.

      --
      It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
    61. Re:Bullet Physics by fredrik70 · · Score: 1

      hmmm, I always thought it was his mother (on earth) who made the costume using a sharp shard and something reasembling a needle from superman's crashed ship

      --
      if (!signature) { throw std::runtime_error("No sig!"); }
    62. Re:Bullet Physics by Angstroem · · Score: 1
      Why the same way he cuts his hair!
      Actually, the only Superman comic book I ever read, accidentally covered this topic. It looks like Superman is susceptible to magic. In that very book he used the help of some witch named Zatanna (or something like that) who speaks their spells backwards to be able to give blood as Clark Kent.
    63. Re:Bullet Physics by CGP314 · · Score: 1

      Now, he radiates a small field that protects anything within about two millimeters of his skin.

      So... how does he damage anything? It's hard to hurt someone if the protection field around your fist covers the area of their body you strike.

      -Colin

    64. Re:Bullet Physics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're the eighth person to point that out. Go to bed...

    65. Re:Bullet Physics by Spreetin · · Score: 3, Informative

      His hair don't grow.

      Except in one episode of the comic, where some red Kryotonite makes his hair, nails and beard grow.

      He then needed both Supergirl and Superdog to use their heatsight to cut it off.

      --
      8 * 7 = 42
    66. Re:Bullet Physics by Mhtsos · · Score: 1

      In a Lois and Clarck episode he does shave using his eye beam and a mirror.

    67. Re:Bullet Physics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Actually, they changed that. Now, he radiates a small field that protects anything within about two millimeters of his skin.

      Er, I think you got that from the "Lois and Clark" TV series. In fact, it seems a lot of commenters got
      their "Superman" knowledge from there. You should be aware that the series isn't that truthful to
      the original comics story, and in some areas even less consistent (physics wise) than the comic books.

    68. Re:Bullet Physics by Rogerborg · · Score: 1

      Dude, you really, really, really need to move out of your parents' basement.

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    69. Re:Bullet Physics by Rogerborg · · Score: 1

      Really? They didn't shoot real bullets at him? Where do you get this kind of insider information?

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    70. Re:Bullet Physics by Jonathan+Platt · · Score: 1

      Treated kevlar, cut then treated. I think they make current bullet proof vests out of kevlar. Kevlar in it's self is quite thin, bullet proof vests are thick for padding, otherwise the bruise could take a man out of action by it's self.

      Superman wouldn't need to worry about that as much. In fact he wasn't bulet proof, only his suit was, he just has a much higher resistance to pain.

      --


      VENI, VIDI, VICI, DIXI
    71. Re:Bullet Physics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "His hair don't [sic] grow."

      Doesn't grow...

      http://www.supermanhomepage.com/comics/2000-post -c risis-reviews/c-review-2000.php?topic=21-action765

      In a darkened bathroom in the Kent apartment, Clark carefully burns away his beard. Lois comes in, and bluntly points out how disgusting the smell of burning hair is. While Clark struggles to apoligize, Lois leaves.

      If his hair doesn't grow, then he should be absolutely sure he wants to remove it... unless of course, he knows about extensions.

    72. Re:Bullet Physics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When they restarted Superman and a bunch of other comics some years ago in "Crisis of Infiinite Earths", they reset his power levels a *lot* lower and did the field effect change.

      And as they explained later, his mom made the outfit for him. I do wonder how she explained putting in the giant zucchini in his shorts?

    73. Re:Bullet Physics by kria · · Score: 5, Funny

      There was actually a joke about the Hulk and his purple pants. (They were always purple in the comic book for a long time.) Anyway, it was in Power Man and Iron Fist. Power Man was superstrong and while I don't think he was invulnerable, he was difficult to damage. Anyway, he favored wearing yellow silk shirts as part of his costume and they were ALWAYS getting torn up.

      One issue he was stopping by to pick up a bunch of yellow silk shirts and they clerk was handing a pile of purple pants to a Dr. Banner. :)

    74. Re:Bullet Physics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I swing a sledgehammer from over my head to the ground - a 2 m distance. And I can accelerate it at 4g (four times the gravitational acceleration). Its speed at impact will be some 12.5 m/s - like 45 km/h. (speed squared is double the product of distance and acceleration).
      I don't feel capable of such an acceleration (with a 10 kg sledge) but certainly there are men capable of that.

      Calin

    75. Re:Bullet Physics by mdielmann · · Score: 1

      However, this raises the question, how could it be cut and tailored? If it's immune to bullets, then one would expect it to resist being cut quite well.

      Why the same way he cuts his hair!

      With his laser vision and an ideal vanity mirror...


      Sucks to be his parents..."Clark? ... Ow! Dammit, how many times to I have to tell you to put up a warning sign when you're cutting your hair!?!?"

      --
      Sure I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?
    76. Re:Bullet Physics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's so sad when they don't realize Superman isn't real and that the whole thing was done by a bunch of actors.

    77. Re:Bullet Physics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I suppose the shirt is made of the material used for bullet - proof gas tanks (the kind used on the planes, keeping the gas inside even after being perforated by bullets).
      Just my .02$ :D

      Calin

    78. Re:Bullet Physics by Xandu · · Score: 1

      With his laser vision and an ideal vanity mirror that he apparently got from physics class along side the massless rope and frictionless pully.

      Trust me, you want your frictionless pully to be massless as well. Nobody wants to integrate to solve for I (moment of inertia) when they are studying about linear energy and momenta.

      --


      --Xandu
    79. Re:Bullet Physics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      just in case the mods didn't know, i was trying to be funny

      Try a little harder next time.

    80. Re:Bullet Physics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      less impervious to damage

      I don't think that word means what you think it means.

    81. Re:Bullet Physics by Sprite+Remix · · Score: 1

      Ever got hit by anything that can block bullets? Ever had one THROWN at you? Yea, ok...

    82. Re:Bullet Physics by Scrameustache · · Score: 4, Funny

      Martha Kent took the kid's baby blankets, un-wove them thread by thread (since trying to cut them was a good way to break scissors, although eventually they could trim the thread with his x-Ray heat vision), and then re-wove them into his outfit, re-un-weaving and re-re-weaving as he grew from boy to man.

      That was before women's lib. Now its all "magical force fields" and none of that opressive sewing and weaving. ;-)

      --

      You can't take the sky from me...

    83. Re:Bullet Physics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      And before the pedants strike - yes, I do know what "begging the question" means.

      That's even worse. You know what it means, and you still use it incorrectly? Next time write "invites more questions," and save us pedants the trouble of straightening you out.

    84. Re:Bullet Physics by hubie · · Score: 1

      I first heard the comment about Superman ducking probably in 1986 or 1987 when some generic comic came to our college coffee house and used it in his routine (I'm not sure where he got it from, but I doubt it was origninal material. The caliber of comic we got was basically covering better known comics (about every other one would do a Steven Wright-style routine)). It stuck with me because at the time it was one of the funnier things I had heard, since I had seen pretty much all of the George Reeves shows that were in syndication in the 70's (growing up in the late 70's means that I've seen quite a large number of 50's and 60's reruns--we had to waste our time either playing outside or watching TV because of no Gameboys and such (come on, it wasn't like I was going to read! (boy, I noticed that I tend to use an awful lot of parenthetical statements))).

    85. Re:Bullet Physics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      OK. Tiny demons cause all of physics to happen. They made the Universe, too. You can't see them because they move too fast and they're invisible.

      If you can't see them, how do you know they're tiny?

    86. Re:Bullet Physics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      They were always purple for a long time.

      What an odd statement.

    87. Re:Bullet Physics by Paradise+Pete · · Score: 1
      34 m/s or 120 km/h. I think this is quite possible.

      A good golf swing produces club head speeds of 200km/h, so if the hammer doesn't work, hit 'em with your four iron.

    88. Re:Bullet Physics by Gilmoure · · Score: 3, Funny

      Flattened ovid cows will pack to a greater density in a barrel.

      --
      I drank what? -- Socrates
    89. Re:Bullet Physics by Gilmoure · · Score: 1

      It's foil wrapped so he can check on the efficiency of airport security!

      --
      I drank what? -- Socrates
    90. Re:Bullet Physics by Gilmoure · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I've had a bullet bounce back and hit me at the range (not my shot, someone a couple lanes down). It tore a hole in my jeans (skin tight-still wearing jeans I had in high school, several pounds later), cut open my leg and bounced back into the range.

      --
      I drank what? -- Socrates
    91. Re:Bullet Physics by LuxFX · · Score: 1

      I always thought the cloth itself, coming from Krypton's red sun atmosphere, would be less impervious to damage in Earth's yellow sun environment.

      I'm curious about your logic. I would think the opposite, since red stars are cooler than yellow stars.

      (note: I don't know any Superman lore, I'm only responding to what has been written)

      --
      Punctanym: alternate spelling of words using punctuation or numerals in place of some or all of its letters; see 'leet'
    92. Re:Bullet Physics by LuxFX · · Score: 1

      and #3 if the underlying material was solid enough that deformation did not account for a significant percentage of the energy loss, then the material could possibly be burned as well, since some energy loss would be exchanged as heat.

      --
      Punctanym: alternate spelling of words using punctuation or numerals in place of some or all of its letters; see 'leet'
    93. Re:Bullet Physics by tgibbs · · Score: 1

      That explanation always sounded fishy to me. The material won't get ruined by extreme heat/bullets/corrosive chemicals but it can be cut with scissors and tailored with a needle? Hmm...

      Needles aren't a problem--a needle goes between the threads, which if memory serves she got from unraveling the blankets. I believe the young superman cut the threads with his heat vision.

    94. Re:Bullet Physics by jandrese · · Score: 1

      Superman is a blood doner? I have to appreciate his civic enthusiasm, but it seems unlikely that his blood chemestry is even remotely similar to ours. He's probably going to give the lab guys fits when they try to determine his blood type. Given the way comic book physics work, the transfusion recipiant will probably end up with Superman's powers for a day (instead of merely being horribly posioned by the incompatable blood).

      --

      I read the internet for the articles.
    95. Re:Bullet Physics by LuxFX · · Score: 2, Insightful

      he stands there with his chest out smiling as the bullets bounce off. The bad guy empties his gun, and with no other options in front of him he throws the gun at Superman, who then ducks so he doesn't get hit.

      This should be covered in the physics class!

      Dodging bullets aimed at the chest means 1) Superman would have to move his entire body to avoid getting hit in the chest, and 2) Superman would have to move extremely fast to avoid the bullets in the first place. Moving that much mass (Superman must have a lot of mass) that quickly uses a LOT of energy! More energy, it would appear, than it takes to simply absorb the impact of the bullets.

      On the other hand, a gun throw at the head means that 1) Superman only has to move faster than the bad guy can throw (much slower than bullets!), and 2) Superman only has to duck his head instead of move his entire body. This would take very little energy. Less energy, it would appear, that it would take to absorb the impact of the gun on his face (and still maintain his smug smile).

      Superman might be all muscle but he isn't stupid -- he's efficient. He knows better than to waste energy when he might fight the big fight in just a few pages/scenes.

      --
      Punctanym: alternate spelling of words using punctuation or numerals in place of some or all of its letters; see 'leet'
    96. Re:Bullet Physics by Angstroem · · Score: 1
      I have to appreciate his civic enthusiasm, but it seems unlikely that his blood chemestry is even remotely similar to ours. He's probably going to give the lab guys fits when they try to determine his blood type.
      Now that you name it...

      How's C++ for Superman's blood type and Rhesus factor? :-)

    97. Re:Bullet Physics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have another question, Why is it he just stands and the bullets bounce of his chest yet he ducks when they throw the gun?

    98. Re:Bullet Physics by voidware · · Score: 3, Informative

      ASTM Grade 1 Titanium:
      E = 103 GPa
      %EL ~ 25 (Ductility)
      Ti is not considered a brittle material (5%EL). It is about the same as a common steel alloy (1020). However, it is 2.5x as strong. It might not shatter, as Lead is much more ductile than either steel or titanium (~30-60%EL).

      Ford

    99. Re:Bullet Physics by TheLink · · Score: 1

      I suspect one of my uncles' blood type is XO+ :).

      --
    100. Re:Bullet Physics by TheLink · · Score: 1

      Well if Superman can fly, there's no problem with him not breaking the concrete he's over. The issue is how the locomotive doesn't bend under its own weight.

      As for Superman's feats, many people are unaware that Superman has mental powers. How else can he disguise himself with just a pair of glasses?

      Or in one of the movies wipe a very specific portion of Lois' memory whilst kissing her?

      Maybe he just keeps the other bits of the locomotive up with a little telekinesis.

      The public and powers that be could probably accept a Superman who was very strong and near invulnerable, but they might not accept a Superman with telepathic powers. :)

      --
    101. Re:Bullet Physics by StenD · · Score: 1

      So add the prop department to the list of guilty parties. :) The point was, if they didn't want Superman to be ducking out of the way of the thrown gun, the production team shouldn't have been tossing real guns at George Reeves.

    102. Re:Bullet Physics by endofoctober · · Score: 1

      Well, I can't claim it as *my* logic, but the assumption the creators of Superman wanted readers to make (I think) would be that if Kal-El came from a red-sun world, traveled to a yellow-sun world and became invulnerable to harm, then any inanimate objects native to the red-sun world would inherit those properties, too.

      I don't think the authors of Superman's origins really took into account much by way of science when they thought about it, but you could extrapolate:

      1) If Superman's Suit is Made of Organics

      If you think about the plant material growing on the bottom of our own oceans where pressures are great and light is almost completely absent, those plants have evolved to overcome their environment of near-zero light and several hundred atmospheres.

      Along those lines, if Superman's suit were constructed of organic material from a world where the sun was dimmer/cooler, the plant material may have evolved to exist in a much more hostile environment (colder, less light), and to us seem indestructible.

      or

      2) If Superman's Suit is Inorganic/Fabricated

      If Superman's suit were a result of Krypton's higher level of technology, it may have been designed to protect him much the same as a Kevlar vest would be for law enforcement. Granted, something that is more dense than diamond and can still be folded/cut/sewn doesn't sound like it'd be all that comfy to wear.

      Just two quick stabs at it. It's all comic book logic, true, but I think this instructor has come up with a novel idea to teach physics. I'd love to sit in on his class.

      --
      - Jack
    103. Re:Bullet Physics by endofoctober · · Score: 1

      True...I had it originally as "susceptible", and changed it by mistake.

      --
      - Jack
    104. Re:Bullet Physics by RenaissanceGeek · · Score: 1

      From what I remember about the making of the SR-71, all of the titanium parts of the plane (a very large portion of the structure) had to machined from billet titanium which had been cast in an inert gas atmosphere, as Titanium will form an alloy with Nitrogen gas, making it quite brittle.

      So, apparently, all that you have to do to keep titanium from being brittle is immerse it in a pool/atmosphere of argon gas before you melt it.

      But, that's all off of the top of my head, and I'm anything BUT a metallurgist.

      --
      What is the difference between a small revolutionary change and a large evolutionary change?
    105. Re:Bullet Physics by EriktheGreen · · Score: 1

      Dumb, dumb idea.

      Kevlar is designed to resist blunt force trauma, not penetration from sharp objects. There are numerous documented reports (check the darwin awards site for a few) of people "testing" vests by being stabbed while wearing them, and dying from having their heart or lungs penetrated.

      If you want to test a kevlar vest, have someone wear it while you hit it with a baseball bat.

      If you want to avoid knife penetration, wear chain mail over it (if you can find any that's real; the stuff most SCA folks make from wire would only resist a pocket knife).

      Oh, and unless your vest is one of the newest military models, a standard FMJ round from a M-16 or AK-47 will go through it. The AK-47 will actually go through both panels - and the wearer - and still have the velocity left to kill someone standing behind you.

      The main use of a kevlar vest is to give you a second chance if someone hits your center of mass with a low velocity ballistic object. They're not suits of armor meant to deflect all attacks.

      Erik

    106. Re:Bullet Physics by Lord+Kano · · Score: 2, Informative

      Oh, and unless your vest is one of the newest military models, a standard FMJ round from a M-16 or AK-47 will go through it. The AK-47 will actually go through both panels - and the wearer - and still have the velocity left to kill someone standing behind you.

      The vests are rated. Level IIA and IIIA are the ones you're most likely to encounter, those will stop 9mm, .38 Special, and the IIIA will stop .357 Magnum. If you can find a level IV vest, that will stop 5.56mm Nato and 7.62x39mm.

      LK

      --
      "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
    107. Re:Bullet Physics by EriktheGreen · · Score: 1

      Aye. The IV-A is the one I was referring to above, I believe. A as I recall specifies that a trauma plate is included, which is needed to deal with the energy from the 7.62x39 round's impact.

      Of course, the IIA and IIIA vests will prevent penetration of normal bullets, but not the blunt force trauma from same. All bets are off on "illegal" bullets made from super hard materials designed to penetrate armor...

    108. Re:Bullet Physics by Graff · · Score: 1

      Well the thing is I didn't say "begging the question" I said "begs more questions". It's similar but not the same, I didn't think about the similarity until after I submitted the post. If I could have edited it I would have but...

      I figured I'd just post the mea culpa and head off criticism. Ahh well, to err is human but to really mess things up you need a computer.

    109. Re:Bullet Physics by cylcyl · · Score: 1

      Another reason:

      Stopping bullets prevents people behind him from getting hurt. No point in not dodging a thrown gun that won't seriously hurt anyone

    110. Re:Bullet Physics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tried one of those IV-A... It had pockets on the inside for the trauma plates. But you wouldn't want to go around too long with the plates in - it added a not-insignificant amount of weight...

    111. Re:Bullet Physics by kria · · Score: 1

      Odd, but true. For a long time, all of his pants were purple. And after that, perhaps they were occasionally purple.

      Isn't the English language fun? :)

    112. Re:Bullet Physics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      It's similar but not the same

      I think you're right. Sorry.

    113. Re:Bullet Physics by babbage · · Score: 0
      I have read of police who were shot with broadhead hunting arrows and the vests were only useful to them as big band-aids.

      Yeah, but think about that for a minute. This is a physics article -- don't you remember the old F = MA formula? If we assume that a bullet flies at roughly the same speed that an arrow does, then the main determinant of force is the mass of the projectile.

      Bullets are tiny -- even a big one from an assault rifle probably weighs no more than an ounce or so. Arrows, on the other hand, are comparitively heavy -- maybe half a pound or a pound for a big compound bow's hunter's arrow or a crossbow bolt.

      Therefore, if the projectiles are going at the same speed when they hit their target, an arrow is going to hit that target with perhaps ten times more force than the bullet would.

      Plus -- and I have no idea how to quantify this, but I'm sure it only amplifies things -- bullets tend to have blunt tips (only moderately sharp for assault rifles), but arrowheads can be razor sharp. I'm sure that only widens the gap between bullets and arrows.

      Arrows are a much bigger threat to typical body armor than bullets. Weird, eh?

  6. I took this guy's class. by mr_luc · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I found it very engaging. It was somewhat lightweight, but very entertaining! The U of MN is doing good with this guy.

    However, he mentioned a few superheroes that I've never heard of before -- maybe /. can help me out? Lefsa-Man, The IceFisher, SnowmoBelly . . . maybe these are DC characters?

    1. Re:I took this guy's class. by CheeseTroll · · Score: 4, Funny

      Oh, ja - dey are from de Hall of Lutefisk!

      Sorry - it's late.

      --
      A post a day keeps productivity at bay.
    2. Re:I took this guy's class. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Clearly, he's talking about Yooperman, not Superman!

    3. Re:I took this guy's class. by Amiga+Lover · · Score: 4, Funny

      I think he made them up. I wasn't sure how dubious the characters were until he started talking about GravityMan, The Planetaryelectricfield, StrongNuclearForceGirl and Mr.Inertia

      The link between The Combustible and FartBoy was pretty neat, when explaining the hindenberg...

    4. Re:I took this guy's class. by TXG1112 · · Score: 1
      How about Mr. Neutron?

      --
      I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed, or numbered. My life is my own.
    5. Re:I took this guy's class. by atlasheavy · · Score: 0

      eh, doncha know! Lefsa-Man is fer sooper cool, ya! In all seriousness, there's a place in south minneapolis, called ingebretsen's (I think it's at the corner of Lake St and Cedar Ave), where you can buy Lefse. It's a flat potato bread, and goes very well with lots of butter and sugar. roll it up and eat!

      --

      iRooster, the Mac OS X a
    6. Re:I took this guy's class. by Reziac · · Score: 1

      Minnesota is heavily Norwegian. Levsa** is Norwegian potato flatbread. Levsa-Man is clearly the secret identity of Mr.Potatohead. ;)

      ** Mix mashed potatoes (instant will do in a pinch) and flour about half and half, work into a dough, roll as thin as possible, bake each side on a hot skillet (no grease) until dappled with little brown spots, let cool, spread with butter and sugar, roll up, eat, mmmmm-good!!

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  7. I though otherwise, so did my physics teacher. by 0x1337 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I remember last year for the mid-year intercession at my high school> , there was a whole week long class devoted to showing the FLAKEYNESS and INCORRECTNESS of comic book physics. Hell - even my Calc-Based Physics Book by Halliday and Resnick from last year had an exercise on p=mv, proving that superman wouldn't be able to just stand there and deflect bullets.

    1. Re:I though otherwise, so did my physics teacher. by jrockway · · Score: 1

      BTW, it's intersession. Intersession is a session that's between two other sessions. Intercession is a Church thing, IIRC. Be careful. English is tricky :)

      --
      My other car is first.
    2. Re:I though otherwise, so did my physics teacher. by 0x1337 · · Score: 1

      Yea yea yea - its intersession, not intercession. Mistype.

    3. Re:I though otherwise, so did my physics teacher. by Jace+of+Fuse! · · Score: 4, Interesting

      One of my favorite examples of incorrectness is the classical Lois falling from atop the building and Superman, the man of steel, catching her in his arms.

      Since he's the man of steel, she would have been injured hitting his arms just as she would have had she hit the ground, or perhaps some steel structure along the way.

      "Don't worry, I've got ..." **CRACKA-SQUISH** "...your arm."

      --

      "Everything you know is wrong. (And stupid.)"

      Moderation Totals: Wrong=2, Stupid=3, Total=5.
    4. Re:I though otherwise, so did my physics teacher. by FooAtWFU · · Score: 1

      Well, it's easy enough. The guy can fly, right? He obviously has some sort of propulsive force which he can apply at will. And so if the momentum of a bullet would be pushing him back, he just leans forward a little higher.

      IF it doesn't seem to make sense, devise a new mechanism by which it would. You may or may not find the need for a new pseudoscientific principle. Also, remember that even the most knowledgeable characters in a comic/etc are just people, and they are perfectly capable of making mistakes in their rationale, explanations, et cetera.

      --
      The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
    5. Re:I though otherwise, so did my physics teacher. by TheOnlyCoolTim · · Score: 5, Funny

      Superman isn't an idiot. He knows to match velocities before he catches her.

      Tim

      --
      Omnia vestra castrorum habetur nobis.
    6. Re:I though otherwise, so did my physics teacher. by skifreak87 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      In my high school physics class we watched an instance where superman dove off the top of what I believe was a waterfall to catch someone who was falling. We calculated how high the fall would have to be in order superman to actually have the 5 seconds he wasted before even jumping to save the person (and then we assumed that he jumped downwards to provide himself with more acceleration even though it doesn't look like that's what he did from the movie). The waterfall would've had to have been several times the height of Niagra Falls (I don't remember the actualy height by now but I believe if you walked off the top of Niagra Falls you would have about 2-3 seconds before you hit the water). Talk about movies getting their physics wrong.

    7. Re:I though otherwise, so did my physics teacher. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Notice that the article is about comic books, not movies.

      In the old spidermans, Peter had a girlfriend before MJ. She was captured by the green goblin and thrown off a bridge like in the movie. Spiderman catches her. She breaks her neck.

      That shapes spiderman's character for a long time. Much, much later he finds out that she was already dead when she fell, but anyway...

    8. Re:I though otherwise, so did my physics teacher. by Jace+of+Fuse! · · Score: 2, Informative

      Superman isn't an idiot. He knows to match velocities before he catches her.

      Is that so? Watch the movie and tell me you honestly think it looks like he matches her velocity. In fact, if memory serves me correctly, he's slowly moving upwards while she says "You've got me! WHO'S GOT YOU!?"

      Like I said. **CRACKA-SQUISH**

      --

      "Everything you know is wrong. (And stupid.)"

      Moderation Totals: Wrong=2, Stupid=3, Total=5.
    9. Re: I though otherwise, so did my physics teacher. by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1


      > I remember last year for the mid-year intercession at my high school> , there was a whole week long class devoted to showing the FLAKEYNESS and INCORRECTNESS of comic book physics.

      Well of course, if you ignore all the stuff that's incorrect you can write a paper about all the stuff that's correct.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    10. Re:I though otherwise, so did my physics teacher. by CrowScape · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What I find funny are those instances where a superhero will pick up something like a cruise liner and nothing bad will happen to the structure considering its entire weight is resting on a surface area the size of the hero's palms. Just once I'd like to see a superhero try to save that falling jet and accidentally tear it apart.

      --
      common sense: noun
      What those who are ignorant of the subject matter think; usually wrong.
    11. Re:I though otherwise, so did my physics teacher. by lrt512 · · Score: 1

      Well, that'd be the whole "Comic books get their science right more often than one would expect" part. Your class focussed on comics that got it wrong. Those who RTFA will learn that this class is based on those that got it right.

      A physics text is great for telling you that a 250lb. Superman hit by a 150 grain bullet moving at 1000 ft/sec should have a final backwards velocity of about 12 ft/sec. It also doesn't account for any reaction by Superman to set his weight and muscle against the impact he knows is coming. An incomplete analysis is as bad as a wrong one.

    12. Re:I though otherwise, so did my physics teacher. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Better that than Neo breaking the sound barrier (buildings exploding in his wake) and no (additional) damage to Trinity after catching her. Hmmm.... [Not quite a comic book, but close enough in quality.]

    13. Re:I though otherwise, so did my physics teacher. by Lehk228 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Actually a sonic boom is much more damaging to glass than it is to flesh, toss a glass bottle and a piece of steak onto some concrete and see what happens (even better, twist a piece of steak a few degrees and try the same with a piece of plate glass)

      --
      Snowden and Manning are heroes.
    14. Re:I though otherwise, so did my physics teacher. by bluGill · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It is the delta-V that counts though, hitting the ground is more or less instant. A catch, even by a man moving upwards can be executed to slow that down. (Ie start the catch above your head, and slowly decelerate by moving your arms down). Mind there is still a large delta-V at any given instant, but not nearly as large.

      It is left as an exercise to the reader to determin if spreading out the change in this way is enough to save a life.

    15. Re:I though otherwise, so did my physics teacher. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not sure what you mean by "150 grain" bullet. But by my calculations, for Superman to obtain a velocity of 12ft/s from the bullet travelling 1000ft/s, the bullet would need to weigh 3-lbs. That's a pretty heavy bullet.

    16. Re:I though otherwise, so did my physics teacher. by anethema · · Score: 2, Insightful

      He can fly up, defying gravity. I assume he doesnt have to obey gravity to fall.

      --


      It's easier to fight for one's principles than to live up to them.
    17. Re:I though otherwise, so did my physics teacher. by Jace+of+Fuse! · · Score: 1

      Notice that the article is about comic books, not movies.

      I actually noticed that after making the post. I realized that the Movie-Superman was off topic since this is in fact about Comics.

      Still...

      The example always amused me, and made me more aware of that type of thing in movies.

      --

      "Everything you know is wrong. (And stupid.)"

      Moderation Totals: Wrong=2, Stupid=3, Total=5.
    18. Re:I though otherwise, so did my physics teacher. by anethema · · Score: 1

      I think he was talking about trinity's velocity going from whatever speed straight downwards, to supersonic speeds in neo's direction of travel. Ouch!

      --


      It's easier to fight for one's principles than to live up to them.
    19. Re:I though otherwise, so did my physics teacher. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not going to argue that superman doesn't defy the laws of physics, but I think any argument based on p=mv would be totally bogus.

      If the guy shooting the bullets out of the gun is standing still, then why the hell can't superman be standing still? it's the same p=mv=p bla bla. :/

    20. Re:I though otherwise, so did my physics teacher. by bcrowell · · Score: 4, Informative
      there was a whole week long class devoted to showing the FLAKEYNESS and INCORRECTNESS of comic book physics.
      What are you talking about, dude? I know for sure that all the physics in the Fantastic Four is right -- Reed Richards knows this shit cold, man!

      Hell - even my Calc-Based Physics Book by Halliday and Resnick from last year had an exercise on p=mv, proving that superman wouldn't be able to just stand there and deflect bullets.
      But seriously (well, not so seriously), I have a copy of H&R here (I'm a physics professor). The problem says a gangster is shooting 100 bullets per minute at Superman. Each bullet has a mass of 3 grams, and their speed is 500 m/s. You're supposed to calculate the average force on his chest. The answer is 2.5 N, which isn't even enough to topple my 4-year-old daughter.

      What really rapes the laws of physics is that Superman can fly in violation of Newton's third law (or conservation of momentum, which amounts to the same thing). For instance, when he's coming in for a landing, he just kills his momentum. What's he interacting with? Objects can't make forces on themselves! Whatever mysterious method he has for creating and destroying momentum at will, presumably it also accounts for his ability to stop a jumbo jet without recoiling, etc.

      BTW, Larry Niven wrote a really funny article called "Man of Steel, Woman of Kleenex," about the horrific consequences if Superman was to attempt to have sex with an Earth woman. You can still find it in print -- it's been anthologized.

    21. Re:I though otherwise, so did my physics teacher. by sirsex · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well, assuming action-reaction, the bullet cannot have any more momentum then the gun does when it kicks against the shooter's shoulder. Therefore the impulse of the bullet hitting you cannot be more then the impulse of shooting same bullet

    22. Re:I though otherwise, so did my physics teacher. by EvanED · · Score: 1

      "What really rapes the laws of physics is that Superman can fly in violation of Newton's third law (or conservation of momentum, which amounts to the same thing). For instance, when he's coming in for a landing, he just kills his momentum. What's he interacting with? Objects can't make forces on themselves! Whatever mysterious method he has for creating and destroying momentum at will, presumably it also accounts for his ability to stop a jumbo jet without recoiling, etc."

      If antigravity can exist, Superman's flying can exist. I'm not saying this is the case.

    23. Re:I though otherwise, so did my physics teacher. by Have+Blue · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Likewise, there's the paradox of heros who have super-strength but not invulnerability (e.g. spider-man). He'd have to have at least some level of increased structural cohesion (and the increased resistance to physical harm in general that accompanies it) just so his super-muscles wouldn't destroy his body when he tenses them, and so he won't be crushed by the car he's holding over his head.

    24. Re:I though otherwise, so did my physics teacher. by AeroIllini · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Hmmm. So when Neo caught Trinity, it would have been like she was getting hit with a Neo-sized rifle bullet. In a best-case scenario, she simply breaks every bone in her body, not counting the bullet wound she got before she was caught. (I'm not sure I want to think about the worst-case scenario-- bug on a windshield, anyone?)

      OK, so she breaks bones in the Matrix. According to Morpheus, "Your body makes it real." So would her bones spontaneously crack as she was sitting in the chair? Aside from the sheer creepiness factor (imagine Link's reaction to the horrible cracking noise) that just doesn't seem possible, even for the diehard mind-over-matter sect. Dying I can see... since as you die, your "mind" -- meaning the thought processes (perhaps soul), not the physical brain matter -- leaves your body. In Neo's case, he floated around the hallway for a bit and then found his way back to his body. Injuries, on the other hand ... you may ache when you wake up, but I find it hard to believe that a bone would spontaneously break.

      On the other hand, if it happened fast enough, Trinity's mind would not be able to comprehend what just happened, and it would be as if it never did. Which is probably what happened.

      --
      For security, the MD5 hash of this message and sig is 09f911029d74e35bd84156c5635688c0.
    25. Re:I though otherwise, so did my physics teacher. by bcrowell · · Score: 1

      If antigravity can exist, Superman's flying can exist. I'm not saying this is the case.
      Well, antigravity does exist on a cosmological scale. But even if Superman was Powered By Cosmological Constant(TM), that would only let him accelerate vertically. What about his horizontal accelerations?

    26. Re:I though otherwise, so did my physics teacher. by alphaseven · · Score: 2, Informative
      That reminds me, I read somewhere that Superman has the power of telekenesis, but only with things he is touching. Sounds useless but that allows him to pick up things like ships and buses without ripping them apart.

      Good point though, I vaguely recall the hero of Starbrand contemplating lifting a cruise liner to safety but then realizing it would rip apart if he did.

    27. Re:I though otherwise, so did my physics teacher. by Fred+Ferrigno · · Score: 1

      For instance, when he's coming in for a landing, he just kills his momentum. What's he interacting with?

      He doesn't have to physically touching the object he's interacting with to, well, interact with it. My own thought was by some unspecified force, Superman acts on the ground but over a large area. It's similar to the same way helicopters conserve momentum, only they push air and the air pushes the ground. Also like a helicopter, I'd expect that if you were standing near Superman when he took off or landed, you'd feel like you were being pushed down.

      The Matrix seems to work this way too, though technically the Matrix doesn't have to obey the laws of physics. When Neo or Agent Smith takes off, that neat looking creator they leave migt actually serve a purpose.

      Of course all of this completely flies out the window when Superman starts zipping around in space.

    28. Re:I though otherwise, so did my physics teacher. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In End of Evanglion eva-02 lifts a battleship out of a lake which then ALMOST breaks apart. here is a pic.

      So they got it quite right except that then eva throws it into a group of tanks in a move that would have made Newton cry :)

    29. Re:I though otherwise, so did my physics teacher. by paganizer · · Score: 1

      Perhaps he is reacting against the mass of stars? Not just Sol, but say another 1 or 2 that would provide him with momentum in addition to his +/- attraction to Sol?
      Or perhaps he reacts against gravitons in general? or the Electromagnet field of the sun? then he would be, in effect, just swimming.

      --
      Why, yes, I AM a Pagan Libertarian.
    30. Re:I though otherwise, so did my physics teacher. by Niggle · · Score: 4, Funny

      Better that than Neo breaking the sound barrier (buildings exploding in his wake) and no (additional) damage to Trinity after catching her.

      I think that's not a valid comparison. Inside the matrix, Neo does NOT have super powers in the same sense that superman etc. have. Neo's power is basically that he can manipulate "reality". If he can rewrite one law of physics, why should momentum be an issue? Even Trinity (and Morpheus etc.) could rewrite physics to a lesser extent to enable them to jump huge distances and so on.

      To be honest, the only real question is why he decided to fly rather than say, teleport. Another option might be turning the floor to sponge like in the training leap. The only answers I can come up with are:
      "It generates more tension in the film."
      "Neo is an idiot and never considered the idea."

      As an aside, I've always wondered why he bothered with martial arts once he had discovered his powers. Simple tactics like ramming agents at supersonic speeds would be much more effective. He may have had no choice against agent Smith (something of a special case), but normal agents shouldn't even have made him slow down.

      I think this all goes to prove that you should never let a gamer near dodgy physics. Or dodgy backgrounds. We'll rapidly find a way to exploit the holes.

      --
      - Blah blah blah, missing scientist. Blah blah blah, atomic bomb. -
    31. Re:I though otherwise, so did my physics teacher. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The trick is that Superman can violate most conservation laws at will, and he can expend this effect to anything he touches: witness the ability to lift buildings, airliners and so on, without breaking them up. So, what happens is that the moment Superman touches Lois Lane, her momentum and kinetic energy simply do not matter -- her momentum is telekinetically realigned with his, and her kinetic energy instantaneously changes to another value.

      Indeed, when first inspecting the problem of Superman stopping Lois Lane's fall, any competent physicist should notice that there's something fishy going on, and the usual laws might not apply: namely, the starting assumptions include a guy changing his own momentum by the force of will...

    32. Re:I though otherwise, so did my physics teacher. by Eivind · · Score: 2, Insightful
      the Matrix uses martial arts for the same reason martial arts works perfectly well alongside machine-guns in the Final-Fantasy series, or any other number of Fantasy/Science Fiction;

      Because it looks cool on film.

      There's no other reason. In the real world calling karate "useless" against attackers with machine-guns is the understatement of the century or something.

      I like the Indiana Jones episode where he is faced by some martial-arts ninja who hops around screams and shouts, waves his hands around menacingly and prepares to attack. Indiana lifts his gun and pulls the trigger once. "Bang". Attacker drops dead. End of scene.

    33. Re:I though otherwise, so did my physics teacher. by rishistar · · Score: 2, Funny

      Given he can change velocity, he must have some sort of propulsion system in order to allow for conservation of momentum. So the question is - what orifices does he use as outlets for his emissions? And on days when he knows he's going to have to go really fast, does he fill up on Baked Beans?

      --
      Professor Karmadillo Songs of Science
    34. Re:I though otherwise, so did my physics teacher. by unixbob · · Score: 1

      "For instance, when he's coming in for a landing, he just kills his momentum. What's he interacting with? Objects can't make forces on themselves! Whatever mysterious method he has for creating and destroying momentum at will, presumably it also accounts for his ability to stop a jumbo jet without recoiling, etc"

      Why can't he just kill his momentum? He doesn't have wings so he isn't flying the same way an aeroplane or a bird does. Perhaps his flying power is the ability to control his own momentum. Perhaps it's an ability to manipulate force. Perhaps it's an ability to control gravity.

      Whilst it's interesting to see where some parrallels can be drawn between comic book physics and real world physics, it's still a fantasy based on laws different to our own. A dose of radiation would kill most people. In comics it allows someone's in built self loathing and hate to turn them into a green monster. Or alter their genetic structure to let them climb walls. It's a fantasy. Over analyse it and it doesn't work.

      --
      The Romans didn't find algebra very challenging, because X was always 10
    35. Re:I though otherwise, so did my physics teacher. by wagemonkey · · Score: 1
      Also the little matters of traction and pressure come to mind. If a human sized superhero tries to pick up a liner (and assuming as per parent that the liner remains intact) why doesn't he fall over? I mean he may have super strength but he still hasn't got the leverage to take advantage of it. Sort of like the chinese pole acrobats, you try to pick up a liner and you end up with your feet in the air...
      Similarly, if you have someone holding a (small) thousand ton ship overhead he'd disappear into the ground like a driven pile - A thousand tons exerted on the area of the soles of the feet is a ridiculous pressure. Your superhero would be OK but the ground probably would give up. For a cruise liner your probably up to ten thousand tons plus, and an aircraft carrier (I think that was the Hulk) is 70-100 kilotons.

      This is why even as a kid I could never quite take the Six Million Dollar man even (not) seriously enough to be entertaining.

    36. Re:I though otherwise, so did my physics teacher. by 3Suns · · Score: 1

      No, I think the movies did a good enough job of showing how all the non-cattle had different "superpowers" in the Matrix. The comparison was to computer hacking... Neo is an excellent hacker and has a large bag of powerful tricks. But this does not allow him to do just anything at will. Other beings in the Matrix have other superpowers, like different hacks into the system. Neo just doesn't know how to do them.

      Neo has exteme speed and strength and fighting ability, obviously. He can do that rocket-boost flying thing, he can stop bullets (but not fists) with his mind, and some other assorted things. Smith has other tricks... he's fast and good at fighting, but not nearly as good as Neo. He can duplicate his program into other vessels, which is his own unique hack. The albino twins, whatever their names were, could become intangible at will. Neo didn't know how to do this, although it would have helped in several situations. They probably could have taught Neo how to do it if they weren't trying to kill him.

      --

      -3Suns

      ~~~~
      The Revolution will be Slashdotted
    37. Re:I though otherwise, so did my physics teacher. by SlamMan · · Score: 1

      Still beats intersecession. "Get back here with half my class!"

      --
      Mod point free since 2001
    38. Re:I though otherwise, so did my physics teacher. by razjml · · Score: 1

      I intrepreted the use of martial arts as a necessity because Neo could control inanimate things like bullets, but cannot control people (maybe a comment on free will?), making the martial arts a more viable option for attacking him. He might be able to stop a sword with his hand, but he can't stop the guy from swinging the sword at him.

    39. Re:I though otherwise, so did my physics teacher. by anethema · · Score: 1

      Nah I dont think they would breakin in the 'real world'.

      Remember when Neo got wasted by that agent? He shook around, but no bullet holes apeared.

      I guess the brain just assumes these things have happened..and gives up. Lazy brain.

      --


      It's easier to fight for one's principles than to live up to them.
    40. Re:I though otherwise, so did my physics teacher. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The way Superman flies is through a mysterious "Force of Will". This is actually a fairly common plot device used in comics. Characters who fly without any visible means of support (such as Iron Man's boot jets or Wonder Man's belt jets before he entered his fully ionic form) do not even address what laws of physics allow them to fly about. This is usually tangentially addressed in comics, if at all, when we see the elsewhere-mentioned phenomenon of superstrong characters lifting enormous objects which then maintain their shapes in violation of the laws of physics, such as airplanes and battleships. Early in Byrne's relaunch of Superman there is an issue where Supes flies into outer space carrying a HUGE bowl of earth, and he observes in a thought bubble that it becomes "lighter" when he takes to the air as compared to its weight when he is lifting it on Earth, and guesses that it has something to do with how his force-of-will flight powers work in the first place.

      There are also excellent discussions of this topic in a variety of role-playing game books; I'd especially recommend the Hero Games book Champions ( http://www.herogames.com/Products/championsbook.ht m ).

    41. Re:I though otherwise, so did my physics teacher. by kisrael · · Score: 1

      Good points.

      I think maybe he doesn't teleport because he's too worried he'll get embedded in rock.

      (Or maybe the world in the Matrix is flying through a Matrix solar system in a Matrix galaxy...it would be too tough to calculate all the vectors of the planet, you'd teleport and end up in open space, because the planet 'moved away from you')

      --
      SO YOU'RE GOING TO DIE: The Comic for Dealing with Death
    42. Re:I though otherwise, so did my physics teacher. by tgibbs · · Score: 1

      That reminds me, I read somewhere that Superman has the power of telekenesis, but only with things he is touching. Sounds useless but that allows him to pick up things like ships and buses without ripping them apart.

      This comes from John Byrne's revisionist retelling to the Superman story. He did a pretty good job of coming up with psuedoscientific explanations for the ridiculous things that Superman had been doing for years.

    43. Re:I though otherwise, so did my physics teacher. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Woohoo, thanks for the answer, man! I was having so much trouble solving that problem...

    44. Re:I though otherwise, so did my physics teacher. by mysticgoat · · Score: 1

      To be honest, the only real question is why he decided to fly rather than say, teleport. Another option might be turning the floor to sponge like in the training leap. The only answers I can come up with are:
      "It generates more tension in the film."
      "Neo is an idiot and never considered the idea."

      Oh, I can answer that one.

      The interesting thing about the matrix is that while none of it is real and Neo can change any of the rules at any time, he is still bound by his habitual thought patterns. He can only do what he thinks he can do. Although there is no spoon, the habit of spooniness remains in his head, and he can bend the thing but he can't fork it.

    45. Re:I though otherwise, so did my physics teacher. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right, and that telekinesis thing also allows him to stop a falling Lois Lane without hurting her. So, it all makes perfect sense.

    46. Re:I though otherwise, so did my physics teacher. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The best explanation for this that I've seen in comics was from Kurt Busiek's Astro City , where the Superman-analog, Samaritan, actually catches things like skyscrapers, passenger aircraft, et c. in something called the "empyrean web," a force-field-like construct that provides support for these structures while they are being carried/thrown et c.

      Coupled with the above-noted concept of Superman's clothing being contained in some sort of personal force-field, it makes sense for him, as well.

      Note that both Superman and Kurt Busiek's Astro City are published by DC Comics, the latter through their Wildstorm/Homage label.

    47. Re:I though otherwise, so did my physics teacher. by madpierre · · Score: 1

      Its just a trivial example of inertial damping field technology. Sheesh even Star Trek has *that*. So you would expect the highly advanced Kriptonians to possess it.

      --
      siggy played guitar
    48. Re:I though otherwise, so did my physics teacher. by Gilmoure · · Score: 1

      Look at stigmata. Supposedly, people who believe/prey enough develop bleeding sores.

      As for the matrix, if your muscles contract hard enough, they could break bones. From what I remember, people rarely use all their muscle cells at the same time. If something caused your brain to send a signal turning all your muscle cells to contract, they could exert some tremendous force. 'Course, you'd likely just tear the anchor points or muscle tissue loose and then really be in a world of hurt.

      --
      I drank what? -- Socrates
    49. Re:I though otherwise, so did my physics teacher. by Gilmoure · · Score: 1

      I like the Indiana Jones episode where he is faced by some martial-arts ninja who hops around screams and shouts, waves his hands around menacingly and prepares to attack. Indiana lifts his gun and pulls the trigger once. "Bang". Attacker drops dead.

      Was a swordsman, swing a sword around. They'd filmed the scene several times, where Indy was supposed to fight the guy, but Harrison Ford was tired and so pulled his gun fired off a blank at the guy. Film history after that.

      --
      I drank what? -- Socrates
    50. Re:I though otherwise, so did my physics teacher. by Edax+Rarem · · Score: 1

      Yes... another good example would be the Bionic Man in Handcuffs.
      His right arm is Bionic and very strong, his left arm is just a regular arm.
      He begins to pull with his Bionic arm. Which can withstand more tension? The handcuffs or his shoulder socket?
      You do the math.

      This always bothered about that show.
      That and when the Bionic woman used her hearing, there was this pulsing noise. How could she hear anything over that racket?

      --
      I hate my sig.
    51. Re:I though otherwise, so did my physics teacher. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not all comics ignore this physical fact completely. In fact I remember a storyline in Thor some years back, where Hela takes away Thor's invulnerability, but let him keep his strengh. He ends up breaking most of his bones.

    52. Re:I though otherwise, so did my physics teacher. by ObiWanKenblowme · · Score: 1

      I can't explain away the leverage, but Superman has the ability to fly, so maybe when he lifts heavy objects his "flight power" removes enough pressure from the ground to keep it from collapsing under him. Rationalization is an important tool for comic book enjoyment.

      --
      Obvious exits are NORTH, SOUTH, and DENNIS.
    53. Re:I though otherwise, so did my physics teacher. by mad.frog · · Score: 1
      Actually, there was an excellent take on this in an old Fantastic Four (or was it Avengers?), if I recall correctly.

      (Warning, major comic book geekiness here)

      Anyway... Gladiator (roughly a Shi'ar equivalent of Superman) picks up a building by one corner, which Reed Richards correctly realizes is impossible to do by simple strength, due to structural issues. They end up taking advantage of this realization to stop him.

    54. Re:I though otherwise, so did my physics teacher. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IIRC, there are designs for guns that use some of the expanding gas to directly counteract the recoil against your shoulder. This should allow a bullet to have more momentum than the gun had kick, although I'm rusty on the exact design mechanism. Basically, some of the kickback is conducted into the air, rather than into the shooters body.

      Your basic point is more or less correct, though, as I think most of those designs were for Army heavy rifles. The kind that are mounted to trucks.

    55. Re:I though otherwise, so did my physics teacher. by Reziac · · Score: 1

      As I heard it at the time, Harrison Ford had the flu and was dead on his feet, and by then just shooting the guy was about all he was up to... of course, the result was also far better than if they'd followed the script.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    56. Re:I though otherwise, so did my physics teacher. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Like a rocket launcher. All the exhaust goes out the back.

  8. Maybe..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Gotta be careful, though.

    Sure seems there are a *LOT* more times when the science isn't too accurate than when it is.

  9. Impressive role models by BenSpinSpace · · Score: 5, Funny

    I've always found the physics to be amazing, and something to aspire to. I'm sure everyone has.

    Naturally, it's not possible.

    It's rather disappointing to be among the people on earth that don't have super powers, but I suppose we'll live. The fact is, us comic readers (as well as anime-watchers and game-players) constantly see heroes that seem to know when to do the right thing at the right time. No matter how stupid an anime hero can be, he (she?) always seems to be able to take on 20 enemies at once and see a punch coming a mile away. It's the same sort of thing with this comic book physics stuff. These heroes have super powers and they don't appreciate them the way we would. You know what I mean. If you were Superman, you would totally pick a fight with some big dude, and then punch him in the face. You know you would.

    1. Re:Impressive role models by Alcohol+Fueled · · Score: 1

      Yeah, and with Superman's strength, you'd be wearing his skull as a ring afterwards. :)

      --
      Ah am not a crook! (\(-__-)/)
    2. Re:Impressive role models by Wolfrider · · Score: 1

      --Haven't you ever seen Superman II? Clark Kent did exactly that, at the end.

      --MHO, Terence Stamp as General Zod == His Best Role Evar. And Sarah Douglas as Ursa was Teh Hottay.

      --
      .
      == WolfriderV6 == I'm willing to admit that *I just might* be wrong... Are you??
    3. Re:Impressive role models by originalTMAN · · Score: 0

      "With great power comes great responsibility." -Ben Parker

    4. Re:Impressive role models by BenSpinSpace · · Score: 0

      True... but then he died.

    5. Re:Impressive role models by originalTMAN · · Score: 1

      he had no power. he got screwed.

    6. Re:Impressive role models by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm just glad that whenever I, say, accidentally cut my finger, ten pints of blood don't come gushing out spraying all over the place.

    7. Re:Impressive role models by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No matter how stupid an anime hero can be, he (she?) always seems to be able to take on 20 enemies at once and see a punch coming a mile away.

      Well... at least in anime, stupid people have incredible dumb luck. It's like the universe feels sorry for them, so it grants them invulnerability. So the dumber ones are probably better off. Naturally they wouldn't appreciate it, they're completely oblivious to it.

    8. Re:Impressive role models by Tassach · · Score: 1

      If you want to have a mind-bending experience, watch Superman II and follow that up with The Adventures of Priscilla: Queen of the Desert, also starring Terence Stamp. Seeing him go from a macho evil villian to an ageing drag queen is enough to fry a few synapses. Just goes to show how well the man can act.

      --
      Why is it that the proponents of "one nation under God" are so eager to get rid of "liberty and justice for all"?
    9. Re:Impressive role models by Wolfrider · · Score: 1

      --Word. Hugo Weaving from the Matrix is in that one as well. (Haven't seen the entire movie, just parts of it - but that was trippy.)

      --
      .
      == WolfriderV6 == I'm willing to admit that *I just might* be wrong... Are you??
    10. Re:Impressive role models by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > If you were Superman, you would totally pick a fight with some big dude, and
      > then punch him in the face. You know you would.

      Um, no.

      I'm not sure exactly what you feel you have to prove or why you feel so insecure, but there are actually some people who refrain from abusing other people _by choice_, rather than simply because they lack the power to get away with it.

      We call the people who choose not to hurt and abuse others "good".

      We call the people who wish they could hurt and abuse others "sick fucks".

      Pick one.

  10. What is amazing by AlphaSector · · Score: 0, Funny

    What is physics defying is how fast that server went down when slashdotted. After 5 minutes at 11:30 it was DDoSed to death. Yay slashdot readers! -Chris

    1. Re:What is amazing by dann0 · · Score: 3, Funny

      What is physics defying is how fast that server went down when slashdotted. After 5 minutes at 11:30 it was DDoSed to death. Yay slashdot readers! -Chris
      Maybe it means that /. readers are finally reading the article before they post?

      --
      "The big question in our lives is how to be at the same time a hedonist and in a hurry" - Alain Ducasse (?)
  11. Gets the physics SPOT ON by Amiga+Lover · · Score: 2, Funny

    If the physics are so right...

    Where's superman? spiderman? batman? the xmen? omg. YOU'RE ALL HIDING THEM FROM ME

    scuse while my childhood dreams go down the toilet.

  12. Slashdotted. by ktakki · · Score: 4, Funny

    Faster than a speeding packet! More powerful than a Beowulf cluster! Able to leap tall datacenters in a single click!

    Apparently, the Slashdot Effect is the kryptonite of the net.

    k.

    --
    "In spite of everything, I still believe that people are really good at heart." - Anne Frank
    1. Re:Slashdotted. by leecho · · Score: 2, Funny

      Hmm, now I see why Slashdot's main color is green ;)

  13. Alas by Rhinobird · · Score: 3, Funny

    Alas, they couldn't widthstand the all powerfull Slashdot ray.

    Mirrors anyone?

    --
    If Mr. Edison had thought smarter he wouldn't sweat as much. --Nikola Tesla
  14. Surprising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    This principle is also surprisingly evident in "The Simpsons":

    Martin: I would've thought that being hit by an atomic bomb would've killed him.
    Bart: Now you know better.

    1. Re:Surprising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      In this house we obey the laws of thermodynamics.

  15. The websites following the laws of physics by HappyCitizen · · Score: 1, Funny

    Slashdot goes up
    Website goes down

    --
    http://www.beyourowneviloverlord.tk
    http://www.frozenchickenthrowing.tk
    http://www.killercamel.tk
    1. Re:The websites following the laws of physics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It sucks doesnt it, one cant even read the fucking story; guess thats why so many people are *'ers to /.

    2. Re:The websites following the laws of physics by icejai · · Score: 1

      > Slashdot goes up
      > Website goes down

      Gives new meaning to the phrase "Up! Up!... and away!"

  16. It's not the physics they bend... by Linux+Thought+Leader · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It's the biomechanics. I love to see superheroes bend the rules of biomechanics and the architecture of the human body. One of the reasons we suck at climbing and bounding around in trees is that our shoulders and wrists are not developed to do so. The freakiest thing you will ever see up close is a gibbon skeleton. I know ole Spidey was using his spider stuff, but you know he needs a sauna and a shiatsu to get the ache out of his shoulders.

    1. Re:It's not the physics they bend... by danmitchell · · Score: 2, Informative

      Here's a gibbon skeleton.

      Daniel

      --
      The problem with God is that he thinks he's Richard Wagner
    2. Re:It's not the physics they bend... by CrowScape · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Actually, it's the other way around. Our shoulders and wrists are not deveolped to climb and bound around in trees because we don't. If we started from a young age, our bodies would adapt. Discovery Channel has a series "More Than Human" and in one episode they examined a girl who was frieghteningly good at climbing darn near everything. Turns out her best friend while growing up happened to be chimp... or something... anyway she of course played with it and, kids being naturally fearless, thought nothing of the heights or falling. As a result her fingers and arms adapted. Quite interesting to find out how maleable the human body can be during its development.

      --
      common sense: noun
      What those who are ignorant of the subject matter think; usually wrong.
    3. Re:It's not the physics they bend... by JumperCable · · Score: 1

      Discovery Channel has a series "More Than Human" and in one episode they examined a girl who was frieghteningly good at climbing darn near everything. Turns out her best friend while growing up happened to be chimp... or something... anyway she of course played with it and, kids being naturally fearless, thought nothing of the heights or falling. As a result her fingers and arms adapted. Quite interesting to find out how maleable the human body can be during its development.

      Interesting, do you have any article links for this. I did a search and came up dry.

    4. Re:It's not the physics they bend... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Search for Tori Allen.

    5. Re:It's not the physics they bend... by Koyaanisqatsi · · Score: 3, Informative

      I believe you are talking about Tory Allen. A saw her climbing at Climb-Time/Indianapolis, and oh boy, is that impressive!

      The story about the chimp is true, check the bio, in the above link.

    6. Re:It's not the physics they bend... by WormholeFiend · · Score: 1

      body conditioning is not limited to young people.

      you can develop really hard fists by doing series pushups on your knuckles everyday (provided you do it properly).

      just as an example, i started practising kungfu to get back into shape, and at first i did pushups on my palms, then i gradually had to do it on my knuckles, and boy did those hurt at first!

      later, i started doing knuckle pushups with jumping and landing on the knuckles.

      now, i have to do jumping knuckle pushups going forward with each jump.

      besides, there's tons of other examples of people adapting their bodies later on in life due to some accident or illness.

      but if you want to direct your own adaptation, you have to adopt very specific daily habits.

    7. Re:It's not the physics they bend... by Goldsmith · · Score: 1

      Explain to me how that is not physics.

      Bio-mechanics. Sounds like physics to me.

    8. Re:It's not the physics they bend... by CrowScape · · Score: 1

      This is not simple conditioning, however, where you make your muscles bigger and bones denser, she actually changed the shape and proportions of her limbs while doing this. People who train for decades have not been able to match her skill at climbing simply because they started too late and their physical structure is already set.

      --
      common sense: noun
      What those who are ignorant of the subject matter think; usually wrong.
  17. donald duck adventures and the mad chemist by 0xfc · · Score: 5, Interesting

    finally i can talk about comics and not be off-topic!

    In issue 15 of walt disneys donald duck adventures, story "the mad chemist", from 1944 by carl barks.

    a letter arrived from joseph b lambert of the cali institute of tech, pointing out a curious refernece in, "the spin of states of carbenes", a tech article soon to be published by P.P. Gaspar and G.s. hammond in Carbene Chemistry.

    It seems donald's reference to CH2 was years ahead of its time: the existance of this elusive chemical intermediate had not been proven in 1944.

    http://www.uky.edu/Projects/Chemcomics/html/dd_1 5_ 2_c.html
    shows him in action on page 2!

    ah and i found the text i was trying to type out from the actual comic...

    http://www.seriesam.com/barks/detc_wdc0044-x1.ht ml

    god i love comic books.

    flaming carrot is top notch. go bob burden!

    1. Re:donald duck adventures and the mad chemist by miu · · Score: 1
      god i love comic books.

      Amen :)

      I loved Disney comics (Donald especially) so much that I even read those awful Gold Key and Whitman versions from the 60's and 70's. They had a couple good artists, but the best was the Barks stuff from the 40's and 50's.

      --

      [Set Cain on fire and steal his lute.]
  18. Hulk and Xmen2 by Wolfrider · · Score: 1, Troll

    --The Hulk movie basically sucked because it tried to go WAY beyond typical suspension of disbelief. I mean come on people, that movie was just WRONG. There's no frelling WAY the Hulk can throw a tank, or any of the other stupid crap they had him doing. The TV series with Bill Bixby and Lou Ferrigno was more believable, for Godsake.

    --Xmen2: I did like it on the whole for the most part, except when Jean Grey *pushes* a Cyclops eye-beam away with "mental force." For one thing, Cyclops should never have been able to do that; for another, you CAN'T deflect a beam of light with just "Mind Power!"

    --Bah. I hated the Spider Man movie, too. But the first X-Men movie was awesome, and I've liked all the Spawn movies (even the animated ones.) Some people just know how to give the genre the Right Treatment(TM).

    --
    .
    == WolfriderV6 == I'm willing to admit that *I just might* be wrong... Are you??
    1. Re:Hulk and Xmen2 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The original hulk tv show was bunk as far as hulk powers go :) I didn't care for the movie, but it was true to hulk's abilities from the comic books.
      As for the Cyclops thing, that kinda threw me, but she is telekinetic, so you can make up something about compacting air molecules to refract the light or something :) Or just tell yourself it's plasma and not a laser (in many cases this seems to be the case, as it doesnt ever seem to really go in a straight line)
      Spider-Man I loved except for one thing: Spidey is supposed to be a very sarcastic smart-ass...this didn't show through near enough

    2. Re:Hulk and Xmen2 by momerath2003 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Well, maybe you can't deflect a beam of light with just "Mind Power."

      Because I know I can.

      --
      I had but a simple dream, to destroy all humans.
    3. Re:Hulk and Xmen2 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Cyclops doesn't shoot lasers from his eyes. He shoots beams of concussive force.

      You get double Dumbass points for that and liking the live-action Spawn movie, which has the oh-so scientific premise of a dead man being resurrected by Satan.

    4. Re:Hulk and Xmen2 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      for another, you CAN'T deflect a beam of light with just "Mind Power!"

      But you can bend light with gravity?? I think you have no idea on what you can or cannot do with "mind power". I mean heck it appears your mind doesn't even have any power.

    5. Re:Hulk and Xmen2 by RodgerDodger · · Score: 4, Insightful

      you CAN'T deflect a beam of light with just "Mind Power!"


      But (assuming you buy into her power of telekinesis in the first place) you could cause the air to act as a natural lens or mirror, causing the beam to be distorted and deflected...
      --
      "Software is too expensive to build cheaply"
    6. Re:Hulk and Xmen2 by Lehk228 · · Score: 1

      there is no need to be dissing spawn, spawn is cool,
      so is m.a.n.t.i.s.
      ....and if you don't think satan raises people out of hell to stalk the living you have never met me.

      --
      Snowden and Manning are heroes.
    7. Re:Hulk and Xmen2 by CrowScape · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I've only seen the previews of the Hulk movie, but with the tank, IIRC, the hulk grabed the turret and swung the thing around? I really wanted to see the body suddenly fly off, leaving the Hulk only holding the turret, as, again, IIRC, tank turrets are held in place simply by gravity.

      --
      common sense: noun
      What those who are ignorant of the subject matter think; usually wrong.
    8. Re:Hulk and Xmen2 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Acctually, light can be bent by either a lens, or powerful magnetic or electric fields. Or Gravity. so assuming Jean Gray can manipulate one of those, You Lose! :P

    9. Re:Hulk and Xmen2 by IncredibleCrisis · · Score: 1

      But instead we got him chucking the tank about ten miles, and the soldiers inside crawling out from it after it landed, alive. Explain that, physics-boy.

    10. Re:Hulk and Xmen2 by forgotmypassword · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Actually most all telekinetic abilities are impossible.

      Pushing something with your brain completely violates Newton's 3rd law. You would have to explain where the equal and opposite force is.

      If Yoda is holding a spaceship up in the air, then there is a mighty big weight pushing down somewhere ... If it were on Yoda, then it would crush and kill him. If it weren't on Yoda, then that really complicates things, because now you have a 3 way interaction between the spaceship, Yoda, and the mysterious point in space that is "really" doing the pushing!

      Oh and don't think that Magneto's E&M powers can skirt around this. E&M conserves energy-momentum too. You can't do work from nothing.

    11. Re:Hulk and Xmen2 by anamexis · · Score: 1

      There's a reason why giants don't exist. Take a look at the math. Take human beings. We have an average wait of, say, 160 lb, and the surface area that touches the ground (the bottom of our feet) of perhaps 36 sq. in., and have a volume of 5x2x1 = 10 cu. ft. So lets say that we have an approximate density of 16lb/cu. ft. This means that there is a pressure of 4.4 psi exerted on our feet. Now take a 25 foot tall man. This would make for a volume of 25x10x5 = 1250 cu. ft., and a weight of 16*1250 = 20000 lb, exerted on an area of 900 sq. inches which makes for a pressure of 20000/900 = 22.2 psi, as opposed to the 4.4 psi of ours. The bigger you get, the pressure increases exponentially, which makes giants impossible.

    12. Re:Hulk and Xmen2 by anamexis · · Score: 1

      *weight It's late.

    13. Re:Hulk and Xmen2 by DavidBrown · · Score: 1

      The Hulk movie basically sucked because it tried to go WAY beyond typical suspension of disbelief. I mean come on people, that movie was just WRONG. There's no frelling WAY the Hulk can throw a tank, or any of the other stupid crap they had him doing. The TV series with Bill Bixby and Lou Ferrigno was more believable, for Godsake.

      Perhaps much less believable, but certainly much more authentic to the source material. The Hulk is HUGE, much bigger than Lou Ferrigno huge. And throwing tanks? The only problem with that is that the barrel and turret wouldn't withstand the stress of the Hulk picking it up and swinging it around.

      And why the should comic books be believable anyway? You need to run a phase-three diagnostic on your disbelief suspensors.

      Remember Joel & the Bots: "If you're wondering how they live and breath, and other science facts, just repeat to yourself it's just a show and I should really just relax."

      --
      144l. ph34r my 133t l3g4l 5k1lz!
    14. Re:Hulk and Xmen2 by evilad · · Score: 4, Interesting

      If you stipulate that it is possible for Yoda's brain to remotely exert a force on the spaceship, then it should also be plausible that Yoda can similarly cause his _surroundings_ to remotely exert a force on the spaceship.

    15. Re:Hulk and Xmen2 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Might have been more true to the comics, but at least Lou looked good. The movie Hulk looked like crap CGI.

    16. Re:Hulk and Xmen2 by The+Only+Druid · · Score: 1

      Actually, it doesn't make giants impossible, but rather giants that move like the hulk does (i.e. his absurd leaping).

      Consider the following animals: (info at http://www.gavinrymill.com/dinosaurs/giants/giants .html)

      The Bruhathkayosaurus was 144ft long, weighing 175-220 tons. The Seismosaurus was 148ft long, while its relative the Supersaurus was 131ft long (and also in the Diplodocid family) with 40-50 tons of bodywieght. The Argentinasaurus was only 35m long, but weighted 80-100 tons, while teh Paralititan was 114ft, at 65-80 tons.

      Okay, see how giants are possible, but its just that their movement must change?

      --
      "Stumble before you crawl"
    17. Re:Hulk and Xmen2 by Ender77 · · Score: 1

      Of course if you could have read yoda's mind at That moment you would have heard: "There is no spoon...!"

    18. Re:Hulk and Xmen2 by The+Only+Druid · · Score: 1
      And throwing tanks? The only problem with that is that the barrel and turret wouldn't withstand the stress of the Hulk picking it up and swinging it around.

      Actually, the problem is that given the Hulk's size, its impossible for him to rotate something of the mass of the tank around him. The force required to lift that tank would actually lift him up above it. In other words, the torque would rotate him, as opposed to lifting the tank off the ground.
      --
      "Stumble before you crawl"
    19. Re:Hulk and Xmen2 by David_Shultz · · Score: 1

      Argh. What do you mean "you CAN'T deflect a beam of light with just "Mind Power!""? Jean Grey typically uses her mind powers to manipulate objects. Presumably, this means she exerts some sort of force on the objects, probably a force similar to gravity. Now the question you have to ask yourself is, can gravity affect light? Is there any reason to suspect that her powers wouldn't be able to affect light as well? It would take alot of focus or 'mind-energy', i agree, but moving objects versus moving light with the power of your mind alone are in principle the same. The only difference between the two is the amount of energy required. So, could Jean Grey deflect a beam of light? No way, that would require SUPER-POWERS or something...

    20. Re:Hulk and Xmen2 by forgotmypassword · · Score: 2, Informative

      I won't pick at you for not reading, but I am quite ashamed that the moderators didn't read.

      If you stipulate that it is possible for Yoda's brain to remotely exert a force on the spaceship, then it should also be plausible that Yoda can similarly cause his _surroundings_ to remotely exert a force on the spaceship.

      I wrote that right here

      If it weren't on Yoda, then that really complicates things, because now you have a 3 way interaction between the spaceship, Yoda, and the mysterious point in space that is "really" doing the pushing!

      In this scenario, "Yoda's surroundings", the mysterious third party, would be doing all of the physical work and not Yoda himself. That seems very convoluted to me.

      I am going to drift off into something I didn't previously discuss.

      In that example Yoda makes the spaceship and the ground repell. It couldn't be the air or water, because they would move away and that would be too slippery, or there would be lots of noticable wind/current. You could also argue that Yoda uses a whole bunch of air, but I'm not going to get into that right now. So lets just say that Yoda makes the spaceship and the ground repell.

      Now in another situation where an older Luke creates a pocket of air to surround himself in the middle of space, he would have to be making air attracted to air on opposite sides of himself, or air attracted to himself.

      So we have this mysterious force that can attract or repell, it's a relatively long ranged force, and the energy levels are pretty dang low. It has to be E&M, there really is no other choice. From here things get an order of magnitude more fucked up, but I will stop for now.

    21. Re:Hulk and Xmen2 by quintessencesluglord · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I agree. The suspention of disbelief in the Hulk was way over-done. I mean Jennifer (oh please be still my beating heart) Connolly playing a geek girl AND having a thing for the detached type. WTF? Even the gamma radiation to mass transferance was more believable. I seem to remember rumors that Bill Bixby was gay... Seems spot on.

    22. Re:Hulk and Xmen2 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      oh oh! I can explain it! See, Yoda has "Jedi Powers" which allow him to do cool things like ignore physics! Didn't your physics textbook talk about those? Mine did. In fact, the last chapter was titled "If You're a Jedi, Forget Everything You Just Read Because None of it Means Jack to You".

    23. Re:Hulk and Xmen2 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Can't believe I'm replying to this, but then again maybe this will be my Geek Merit Badge for all time...

      You did not pay attention, young Padawan. Feel the Force, between the rocks and the trees... Yoda is not doing the lifting and size makes no difference. Yoda is simply suggesting directions for the force to flow.

      That your "complicated" third force. He's not Jean Grey.

    24. Re:Hulk and Xmen2 by kEnder242 · · Score: 1

      In discworld the force is placed directly on the magicians brain, so you dont really want to be lifting anything big or else you get a very bad headache.

      Strangely (probably intentionally) discworld 'magic' of all things, seems the closest to behaving properly from a physics standpoint. This from a place where light travels like molten gold over valleys and mountains... well not exactly molten since it would literally burn everything in its path. I think the final description for light turned out to be peach syrup.

      --
      my associative arrays can kick your hash - TCL
    25. Re:Hulk and Xmen2 by forgotmypassword · · Score: 1

      I know you are a troll, but an important point can be made here. This line of thinking doesn't just make Star Wars unbelievable, which it never was to begin with. That isn't the point at all.

      This debunks psychics and parapsychologists. If someone claims to be telekinetic, then they are probably full of shit just on the grounds of basic physics. Saying you are telekinetic is no more valid than saying you are an alchemist. Whereas normally it would be about as believable as a UFO.

    26. Re:Hulk and Xmen2 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmm, I think you mean polynomially, not exponentially :-)

      Volume, and hence mass, and hence weight, is proportional to length^3
      Area is proportional to length^2
      Presssure is proportional to Weight/Area, and so to length^3/2

      It's only 'exponential' if the variable is part of the power...

    27. Re:Hulk and Xmen2 by wagemonkey · · Score: 1
      Except it's not sticky and you can breathe when it goes over you...

      I was thinking of Pterrys take on magic too. Particulartly the conservation of err, I suppose mass and energy so that when Rincewind got teleported one way a roughly eguvalent mass was transported the other way, and it was heated up in the process, awkward as it was a loaded cannon.
      Of course you have to allow for the changes in angular and linear momentum because of varying distance from the Hub. Which is why nobody does it very much, it's hard and dangerous.

      Sorry, I spent too much time reading alt.fan.pratchett ...

    28. Re:Hulk and Xmen2 by Worminater · · Score: 1

      Ok, fanboy cap on, and say...

      You want realism, and you watched the Hulk? Someones on the pipe if thehy do... haha, theoretically, Hulk can bench press an aircraft carrior if he found a way to hold it where it wouldnt shatter around him in a million pieces. How do you translate somethiing like that to a movie, live action movie, and not lose "believeability?" Douche.

      As for X-Men II, She didnt deflect a beam of light, she deflected a concussive beam, which is powered by solar power. Also, your right when you say she shoudlnt have the power to do this, but she did because it was a manifestation of the "Phoenix Force" inside her. This foce will in the next movie manifest itself, take control of her, and turn her into a goddess bent on eating the universe basically. Its going to own. :D

      As for spiderman...? That movie was just cool:D (I liked spawn to, McFarline PWNS)

    29. Re:Hulk and Xmen2 by CrazyTalk · · Score: 1

      I think that mysterious point in space is called "The Force"

    30. Re:Hulk and Xmen2 by evilad · · Score: 1

      It's a moderator protest to the absence of a moderation for (Score: +1, Concise).

      Really, though, I do think I said something different. What I described is no more convoluted than the interaction of your mind and a ball which you have dropped. In that scenario, your mind (by opening your hand) allows gravity to do its mysterious work on the ball.

    31. Re:Hulk and Xmen2 by wizard992 · · Score: 1

      Come on now, where have you been? It's not Yoda the weight is pushing down on, it's the midichlorians!

      And since there are thousands or millions of them, they can easily support the weight. Sheesh!

    32. Re:Hulk and Xmen2 by forgotmypassword · · Score: 1

      Really, though, I do think I said something different.

      I am absolutely sure that we said the exact same thing. But now that I look at it, my physics-speak might have been a bit too thick.

      What I described is no more convoluted than the interaction of your mind and a ball which you have dropped. In that scenario, your mind (by opening your hand) allows gravity to do its mysterious work on the ball.

      In this case we have the force of the Earth on the ball, and in agreement with Newton's third law, the force of the ball on the Earth. There are no invisible rays of magic flowing between the ball dropper and the Earth and the ball. There is no 3-way interaction here. This is what I was getting at, sorry if it didn't translate.

    33. Re:Hulk and Xmen2 by Wolfrider · · Score: 1

      --I'm actually willing to consider *reasonable* explanations for the things I took issue with. The problem is that I haven't seen/heard any reasonable explanations for those very things.

      --Suspension of disbelief is a fine art, both in writing and moviemaking. Both Hulk and X2 crossed the line for me - Hulk blatantly, X2 in a few places.

      --Spiderman CGI just **did not** look good or believable, and I hated the ending (ok, I've got a thing for red-haired females. Willow fans, back me up here) but I'll see the sequel anyway. I was actually a fan of the cartoon series back in the 70's/80's. And Alfred Molina playing Doc Octopus - that's good casting.

      http://imdb.com/name/nm0000547/

      --
      .
      == WolfriderV6 == I'm willing to admit that *I just might* be wrong... Are you??
    34. Re:Hulk and Xmen2 by Wolfrider · · Score: 1

      --This is not a troll, but perhaps this is why they brought the "midichlorians" into the mix. Consider that the MC's might be a near-invisible race with what we would perceive to be super-powers. Yoda has control of the MC's. Therefore he is directing the MC's to do the work for him. Sort of a deus-ex-machina, but plausible on the surface. Feel free to discuss/dissect.

      --Recommended reading: "Out of the Silent Planet" - and any other book by C.S. Lewis. It was a life-altering book for me, and so were the Chronicles of Narnia.

      --
      .
      == WolfriderV6 == I'm willing to admit that *I just might* be wrong... Are you??
    35. Re:Hulk and Xmen2 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A lot of the dinosaurs spent a lot of time in water, where the water helped support them.

      The largest animals on earth live in the oceans (whales).

    36. Re:Hulk and Xmen2 by Wolfrider · · Score: 2, Funny

      --Thank you for the suggestion. Half a moment...


      ]READY
      $ export TARGET="disbelief-suspensors"
      ]READY
      $ time pahse-three diagnostic
      * SYNTAX ERROR *
      ]READY
      $ time diagnostic (phase3

      (whirling doodad)

      ] Diagnostic complete for disbelief-suspensors. == Results: INCONCLUSIVE.
      real 1m38.782s
      user 0m0.180s
      sys 0m0.050s

      ]READY
      $ _

      --
      .
      == WolfriderV6 == I'm willing to admit that *I just might* be wrong... Are you??
    37. Re:Hulk and Xmen2 by The+Only+Druid · · Score: 1

      A lot of the dinosaurs spent a lot of time in water, where the water helped support them.

      The sauropods I listed spent none of their time except drinking under water, based on current paleantological discussions. The smaller end (i.e. the 45-90 ton ones) are believed to occasionally get onto their hind legs to reach higher branches.

      --
      "Stumble before you crawl"
    38. Re:Hulk and Xmen2 by forgotmypassword · · Score: 1

      I thought they were just in the blood. But I tried to ignore/forget that stuff. Are midichlorians in dead matter too? If so that would be a much better explaination.

      That's a good idea. I give you my imaginary plus one.

  19. Anime by SisyphusShrugged · · Score: 4, Interesting

    An interesting thing along the same vein for readers of Battle Angel Alita (aka Gunnm) "The Physics of Tiphares" http://www.geocities.com/Tokyo/Fuji/7539/phys.html

    Turns out the comic book writers put more thought into it that you would have first thought!

    Although I dont know if I could still believe that superman could fly around the world and turn time backwards...

    Nerdy kid:I'm looking for a Batman for my Batmobile.
    Lee:Who about a nice "Thing" action figure?
    Nerdy kid:Uhh no,I need a Batman!
    (Lee smashes a thing figure into the Batmobile so it's legs are sticking out the floor)
    Nerdy kid:You broke my Batmobile!
    Lee:Broke,or made better!

    1. Re:Anime by augustjoe · · Score: 1

      lamest simpson's knockoff ever.

  20. Article text: by p4ul13 · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Seems the server isn't dead; just slowed down a bunch:

    'Uncanny physics of comic book superheroes'
    Posted on Sunday, February 15 @ 16:20:59 EST by bjs

    Can you teach a physics class with only comic books to illustrate the principles? University of Minnesota physics professor James Kakalios has been doing it since 1995, when he explained the principle of conservation of momentum by calculating the force of Spider-Man's web when it snagged the superhero's girlfriend as she plummeted from a great height. "Comic books get their science right more often than one would expect," said the gregarious Kakalios. "I was able to find examples in superhero comic books of the correct descriptions of basic physical principles for a wide range of topics, including classical mechanics, electricity and magnetism, and even quantum physics."

    From the University of Minnesota:

    Professor to describe 'uncanny physics of comic book superheroes'

    Can you teach a physics class with only comic books to illustrate the principles? University of Minnesota physics professor James Kakalios has been doing it since 1995, when he explained the principle of conservation of momentum by calculating the force of Spider-Man's web when it snagged the superhero's girlfriend as she plummeted from a great height.

    Kakalios will describe a freshman seminar class he teaches, "Physics of Comic Books," at 11 a.m. Sunday, Feb. 15, during the American Association for the Advancement of Science meeting in Seattle. His talk is part of the symposium "Pop Physics: The Interface Between Hard Science and Popular Culture," one of two symposia in the Science, Entertainment and the Media category.

    "Comic books get their science right more often than one would expect," said the gregarious Kakalios. "I was able to find examples in superhero comic books of the correct descriptions of basic physical principles for a wide range of topics, including classical mechanics, electricity and magnetism, and even quantum physics."

    Take, for example, the strength of Superman. To leap a 30-story building in a single bound, Superman's leg muscles must produce nearly 6,000 pounds of force while jumping, Kakalios calculates. The Man of Steel was that strong because he was designed to resist Krypton's powerful gravity. But for a planet with an Earth-like surface to have so much stronger gravity, it would need neutron star material in its core--a highly unstable situation. No wonder the planet exploded. Other topics considered in Kakalios' class include:

    # Is it possible to read minds as Prof. X of the X-Men does?
    # If Spider-Man's webbing is as strong as real spider silk, could it support his weight as he swings between buildings?
    # Can the mutant master of magnetism Magneto levitate people using the iron in their blood?
    # If you could run as fast as the Flash, could you run up the side of a building or across the ocean, and how often would you need to eat?

    "Once the physical concepts such as forces and motion, conservation of energy, electricity and magnetisms, and elementary quantum mechanics are introduced to answer these and other questions, their real-world applications to automobile airbags, cell phones, nanotechnology and black hole formation are explained," said Kakalios. "The students in this class ranged from engineering to history majors, and while not all were comic book fans, they all found it an engaging and entertaining way to learn critical thinking and basic physics concepts."

    --
    Paul Lenhart writes words!
  21. But the question is... by inertia187 · · Score: 5, Funny
    Does Windows crash at the same rate in comics as it does in the real world?

    "Meanwhile... Microsoft Reports Crazy Three Month Uptimes on Windows 2003!"

    Batman: Robin, take out your BatPDA and boot up PocketPC 2003.
    Robin: Golly gee, Batman, why is everthing BatThis and BatThat? I feel left out.
    Batman: Ok, boywonder, we'll call it the RobinPDA.
    Robin: Holy Bitrate, Batman. That sounds stupid.
    Batman: Ok, then we'll call it the BatPDA.
    Robin: Golly gee, Batman, why is everthing BatThis and BatThat? I feel left out.
    POW! BUFF! THUD!
    Batman: I've always wanted to do that.
    --
    A programmer is a machine for converting coffee into code.
    1. Re:But the question is... by c.emmertfoster · · Score: 1

      Dude. Don't use tinyurl unless you are linking to Bob Goatse. It looks suspicious.

      By the way, the parent's link is legit.

      --
      We can neither love nor pity nor forgive. If you make a slip in handling us you die!
  22. Re:*sigh* by Yonkeltron · · Score: 1

    So all of a sudden we are not expecting things from the "Nassholes" aren't we? we should expect everything. oh wait, that was Lockheed Martin who gave us the "invisible jet"!

    --
    Keep the faith, share the code
  23. One of the questions in the article by bersl2 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Can the mutant master of magnetism Magneto levitate people using the iron in their blood?

    The iron in our blood is mostly in the hemoglobin, specifically the heme half. Heme is an iron-based complex, in which the iron is IIRC diamagnetic.

    Therefore, I do not see how---oh, wait. I guess I'm wrong. Oops. Looks like I need to review my sigma/pi bondage.

    1. Re:One of the questions in the article by freeJustin · · Score: 1

      Diamagnetism and paramagnetism have to do with the polarity of the bond and weather that is magnetic. The iron and heme chelating agent would be magnetic never the less, look in to how homing pigeons are able to navigate and you will get more information on this. two semesters of pchem make you go cuckoo

    2. Re:One of the questions in the article by 0mni · · Score: 1

      Other than that the blood would become some of the supporting structure of the body, somehow I think that it is more likely to some out of you than be able to support your weight.

    3. Re:One of the questions in the article by dj245 · · Score: 1
      If Magneto can levitate people using the iron in their blood, then magnets used for medical purposes should make humans fly all over the place. This includes wrist, back, butt etc... mounted magnets, and MRI machines. Put a human in a MRI machine and the human stays put, provided all the ferromagnetic material in their pockets is removed. They are strapped down only to keep them still to make a sharper picture.

      Dan answers the question on medical magnets right here, scroll down a bit.

      --
      Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
    4. Re:One of the questions in the article by bersl2 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Consider the density of the cardiovascular system in your body. Any given cell in your body cannot be 4-5 cells away from a blood vessel; otherwise, it'd die; thus the reason for artery (big) -> arteriole -> capillary (small) -> venule -> vein (big) progression (well, that and blood pressure). If all you saw of a person were his vessels, you'd easily be able to identify him.

      Being that dense, the magnetic attraction would be evenly distributed throughout the entire body.

    5. Re:One of the questions in the article by EvanED · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What? Isn't it possible that a much stronger magnetic field would be able to do it?

      From what I can read from your argument, it's close to "if a tiny push from a toddler can't move a car then it can't be pushed at all."

    6. Re:One of the questions in the article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      > Looks like I need to review my sigma/pi bondage.

      Do you really want to go through your fraternity hazing all over again?

    7. Re:One of the questions in the article by dj245 · · Score: 1
      oh, now you've done it, some ignorant clod has modded you up, +1, insightful!

      An MRI machine typically uses a strength of 20,000 Gauss, which is a pretty insane amount of gauss. They're are MRI machines out there that use 47,000 gauss, and the people that used them didn't spontaneously dissasemble because of all the iron flying out of their body. The hugest, most powerful NdFeB magnets, in comparison, can manage about 9,000 gauss directly on the poles, but they're bloody huge and cost loads of money. See here. A credit card can stand about 1,000 gauss before it becomes an ordinary rectangular piece of plastic. Hard drives can stand even more. The sad fact is, people are just not affected by powerful magnetic fields in any significant or remarkable way.

      Sure, you can preach to whomever will listen that "a bigger magnetic force will do it! sure it will! just wait and see!", but the evidence just doesn't support that. People have been subjected to 47,000 gauss, and nothing happened. They felt no tug on their bodies pulling them around, they didn't feel 'funny', their iron in their blood didn't start to come undone and then go back where it belonged when they turned the machine off. Nothing. Absolutely nothing happened. You're simply barking up the wrong superhero here.

      --
      Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
    8. Re:One of the questions in the article by klaasvakie · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Dude,
      Here is a picture of a frog levitating in a 16 Tesla (160,000 Gauss) magnet. According to this page, humans have a similar diamagnetic susceptibility to frogs.
      Thus, if you could apply 16 Tesla or more over the volume of a human, he/she will levitate.

      Cheers,
      Johann

      --
      # ssh -l neo the_matrix; killall -9 agent_smith
    9. Re:One of the questions in the article by clarkcox3 · · Score: 1

      "look in to how homing pigeons are able to navigate"

      Well, according to recent research, homing pigeons simply follow landmarks (like roads)

      --
      There are no tiger attacks in my area and it's all because this rock I'm holding keeps the tigers away.
    10. Re:One of the questions in the article by Noren · · Score: 1
      Note also that a blob of water levitates in that strength of magentic field (see the same page he linked to). That frog isn't levitating because of the 'iron in its blood', it's levitating because it's mostly water! (and other diamagnetic chemicals)

      Diamagnetic systems are weakly repelled by magnetic fields. Most things you'd not normally consider to be 'magnetic' are diamagetic... like water. You just have to go to very very powerful magnetic fields to see much of a repulsive effect. The 'iron in the blood' explanation for magnetically moving people is still nonsense.

  24. Education in the USA going to the dogs by Hein_or_Henk · · Score: 1, Informative

    This must be a fun course for arts students or something....

    --
    -- This message was made with 100% recycled electrons.
    1. Re:Education in the USA going to the dogs by paradesign · · Score: 1
      As an art student i dont appreciate your remarks. Just because i havent taken a math class since highschool...

      Actually I am taking a math course this semester, but its theoretical math.

      --
      I want 2D games back.
    2. Re:Education in the USA going to the dogs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The classes that aren't "theoretical" math, we call "physics".

    3. Re:Education in the USA going to the dogs by Hein_or_Henk · · Score: 1

      I am sorry. Meant to say: This must be a fun course for arts or architecture students or something....

      --
      -- This message was made with 100% recycled electrons.
  25. Slashdotted by shfted! · · Score: 2, Funny

    Yeah, but does any comic explain the Slashdot Effect?

    --
    He who laughs last is stuck in a time dilation bubble.
  26. this cannot be proven by pyrrho · · Score: 3, Interesting

    proving that superman wouldn't be able to just stand there and deflect bullets.

    you cannot prove what is claimed, you can only set up specification boundaries for exactly what Supermans makeup must be in oder to do it.

    Throw in an infinite amount of strange physics and you have a pointless excersice, and unsuprising. Much better to find the examples where physics was well understood, and promote that.

    --

    -pyrrho

    1. Re:this cannot be proven by tgibbs · · Score: 1

      Throw in an infinite amount of strange physics and you have a pointless excersice, and unsuprising. Much better to find the examples where physics was well understood, and promote that.

      I don't agree. There is nothing particularly interesting about physics that is correct ("Oh, look, here's a guy walking around without flying through the air. That's correct physics.) Trying to figure out what the physics would have to be to make the comic book feats work can also be instructive as well as fun. Of course, to make it challenging, and avoid the "infinite amount of strange physics" syndrome, you have to apply Occam's Razor: "Let's suppose that you actually observed somebody doing this. Come up with a the simplest hypothesis about how it could happen that is not inconsistent with known physics."

  27. For Further Reference: by RobotRunAmok · · Score: 4, Informative

    "The Science of Superheroes," (Wiley Books 2002) by Lois Gresh and Robert Weinberg (introduction by Dean Koontz). Same duo who brought you "The Computers of Star Trek." Weinberg also wrote "Cable" for Marvel.

  28. Insultingly Stupid Movie Physics by propellor_head · · Score: 5, Informative

    For a different point of view, go to Insultingly Stupid Movie Physics. In particular, check out their write-up on Spider Man.

    1. Re:Insultingly Stupid Movie Physics by SlashdotLemming · · Score: 2, Informative

      For a different point of view, go to Insultingly Stupid Movie Physics. In particular, check out their write-up on Spider Man.

      From the link: The bully end up flying horizontally down a hallway.

      I think the "Insultingly Stupid Website Grammar" guys need to pay them a visit.

  29. Here you go by BlueTrin · · Score: 4, Informative

    'Uncanny physics of comic book superheroes' Posted on Sunday, February 15 @ 16:20:59 EST by bjs

    Can you teach a physics class with only comic books to illustrate the principles? University of Minnesota physics professor James Kakalios has been doing it since 1995, when he explained the principle of conservation of momentum by calculating the force of Spider-Man's web when it snagged the superhero's girlfriend as she plummeted from a great height. "Comic books get their science right more often than one would expect," said the gregarious Kakalios. "I was able to find examples in superhero comic books of the correct descriptions of basic physical principles for a wide range of topics, including classical mechanics, electricity and magnetism, and even quantum physics."



    From the University of Minnesota:

    Professor to describe 'uncanny physics of comic book superheroes'


    Can you teach a physics class with only comic books to illustrate the principles? University of Minnesota physics professor James Kakalios has been doing it since 1995, when he explained the principle of conservation of momentum by calculating the force of Spider-Man's web when it snagged the superhero's girlfriend as she plummeted from a great height.

    Kakalios will describe a freshman seminar class he teaches, "Physics of Comic Books," at 11 a.m. Sunday, Feb. 15, during the American Association for the Advancement of Science meeting in Seattle. His talk is part of the symposium "Pop Physics: The Interface Between Hard Science and Popular Culture," one of two symposia in the Science, Entertainment and the Media category.

    "Comic books get their science right more often than one would expect," said the gregarious Kakalios. "I was able to find examples in superhero comic books of the correct descriptions of basic physical principles for a wide range of topics, including classical mechanics, electricity and magnetism, and even quantum physics."

    Take, for example, the strength of Superman. To leap a 30-story building in a single bound, Superman's leg muscles must produce nearly 6,000 pounds of force while jumping, Kakalios calculates. The Man of Steel was that strong because he was designed to resist Krypton's powerful gravity. But for a planet with an Earth-like surface to have so much stronger gravity, it would need neutron star material in its core--a highly unstable situation. No wonder the planet exploded. Other topics considered in Kakalios' class include:

    # Is it possible to read minds as Prof. X of the X-Men does?
    # If Spider-Man's webbing is as strong as real spider silk, could it support his weight as he swings between buildings?
    # Can the mutant master of magnetism Magneto levitate people using the iron in their blood?
    # If you could run as fast as the Flash, could you run up the side of a building or across the ocean, and how often would you need to eat?

    "Once the physical concepts such as forces and motion, conservation of energy, electricity and magnetisms, and elementary quantum mechanics are introduced to answer these and other questions, their real-world applications to automobile airbags, cell phones, nanotechnology and black hole formation are explained," said Kakalios. "The students in this class ranged from engineering to history majors, and while not all were comic book fans, they all found it an engaging and entertaining way to learn critical thinking and basic physics concepts."

    --
    Don't you know it is now both immoral and criminal to think beyond the next quarterly report?
    1. Re:Here you go by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, no, not neutron star material. And there's no hint that Krypton was an earth-size world.

      But Larry Niven (once again, Larry steps up) had fun with the concept. See, early in the galaxy's history, these Oans, the first sentient race and the crators of the Green Lanterns and a very orderly people, found all this messy magic lying around. So they bundled it up, and used part of it to create the Green Lantern rings. (Which have the stupid flaw to yellow because they're magic and *HAVE* to have a vulnerability in the spell!) But the rest of it, they bundled up where it accreted a planetary crust, had beings evolve on it who metabolize so much local magic they don't dare use it. It would be like lighting matches inside a gas tank. So they becomem entirely technological, which drives their world *insane* and it blows sky high. The fragments of it still really, really hate the natives, who were called "Kryptonians", but there's only one of them left anyway. How much trouble could a single being that metabolizes magic and has his entire physical evolution and cultural history tuned to *not* use it directly be?

  30. I wish I had that physics text by foidulus · · Score: 5, Funny

    All my physics text book had(and I'm being completely serious here) was a bunch of drawings of men looking at little girls in short skirts(the worst was when they were describing tension and had a man staring directly at the behind of a 7 year old girl when she was bent over in an elevator), shirtless boys, and monkeys. What wonderful human beings these physists must have been.

    1. Re:I wish I had that physics text by c.emmertfoster · · Score: 1

      You must have grown up in the dark ages, before revisionism and political corectness.

      --
      We can neither love nor pity nor forgive. If you make a slip in handling us you die!
    2. Re:I wish I had that physics text by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1998?

    3. Re:I wish I had that physics text by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the worst was when they were describing tension and had a man staring directly at the behind of a 7 year old girl when she was bent over in an elevator

      Now THAT'S tension.

  31. Suspension of disbelief considered harmful by RealProgrammer · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I grew up on comics - I still have over 1000 of them from the '70s and '80s, stuck back in a closet, wrapped in plastic.

    What the good Professor says is not that all comic book situations are based in physical reality -- that's absurd. You don't get to teach at a Big Ten university by being a knucklehead.

    He's saying that there are instructive cases, and furthermore that those cases are often the essential ones needed to understand the underlying physics. He's saying that look, this situation that seems like over-the-top unreality is in fact pretty close to the way the universe actually works.

    I give him credit for having the guts to teach that way.

    --
    sigs, as if you care.
    1. Re:Suspension of disbelief considered harmful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, you don't get to teach hard science at a Big Ten university by being a knucklehead. However, you do have to be a knucklehead to teach some of the other classes...

  32. Comic Book Physics by Orion+Blastar · · Score: 2, Flamebait

    If I remember correctly it was Krypton's sun that exploded and destroyed the planet, or at least in one version it did. A red sun that went super nova.

    Does Physics provide an answer why pieces of Krypton can harm Superman yet pieces of Earth do not harm Earthlings? ;) Also if Krypton had neutron star matter in its core, how come Kryptonite which came from Krypton's core is not super heavy?

    Also if Superman is unable to be harmed and bullets bounce off of his chest, how come there are no holes in his clothes? Current storyline on Superman had him arrive in a pod with no blankets, so they did not use them to create his costume. Kal-El was a test tube baby and sent to Earth in the ship inside of a pod.

    Also how does Superman lose his strength when exposed to Kryptonite or Red Solar Radiation, if he was exposed to high gravity he still should have his muscles unless they wore out over the years of growing up in a lower gravity environment. Another theory is that his body absorbs yellow sun radiation like a solar cell and he gets his powers from that. Kryptonite or Red Solar radiation apparently discharges that energy.

    Also his relationship with Lois, man of steel and woman of kleenex, need I avoid the details of that intiment relationship should they decide to have children? ;)

    Also how can Clark Kent pass physicals when they cannot even draw blood for blood tests from his arm as it is super hard? Also what about prostate tests, I'd hate to be the doctor who does those. :) Clark Kent is also an illegal alien having not been born on Earth, and obviously any papers saying so must have been forged or are false. So Clark Kent aka Superman is breaking Civil Law by claiming to be a US Citizen. So much for his good image. :)

    Other things I seem to have a problem with:

    Time travel by spinning the Earth backwards, I do not think that this will work and should only cause major earthquakes and other problems.

    Just how many powers does Superman have anyway? They seem to keep on inventing them. Super Ventriliquism, Super Hypnosis, Super Telepathy, Super Accounting, are they just making these up as they go along? Maybe they should rename him as Unclear Man as his powers seem to be Unclear.

    Also they had Superman in space without the need for air. How is this possible? Just how long can he hold his breath and avoid the effects of decompression?

    With muscles that powerful, he should weigh a ton or more. People would be able to notice this as he walks on weak surfaces like wood floors.

    Also how is it possible to disguise yourself by combing out that s-curl, putting on glasses, and changing clothes? Someone with the intellect that Lex Luthor claims to have should be able to see through that transparent disguise, but apparently not.

    --
    Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
  33. Spider-Man and the death of Gwen Stacy by rusty_razor · · Score: 5, Informative

    Here's an article (pdf) that Kakalios wrote for the Star Tribune. It discusses the simple physics behind a 1973 Spider-Man issue.

  34. Sounds a bit like my super power by Chuck+Chunder · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'm invisible to attractive women.

    As spys/superheros/supervillains always seem to have attractive women as their offsiders I'd be the perfect person to infiltrate their lair.

    --
    Boffoonery - downloadable Comedy Benefit for Bletchley Park
    1. Re:Sounds a bit like my super power by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      With the user name of "Chuck Chunder", I am NOT surprised.

    2. Re:Sounds a bit like my super power by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      > I'm invisible to attractive women.

      Strange! I'm attractive to invisible women. :)

    3. Re:Sounds a bit like my super power by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      And I'm ATTRACTED to invisible women...

    4. Re:Sounds a bit like my super power by sadomikeyism · · Score: 1
      I'm attractive to women whose superpower is to rapidly inflate...

      --
      "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves
    5. Re:Sounds a bit like my super power by Gilmoure · · Score: 2, Funny

      I'm invisible to all women except lesbians. And all they want is a drinking buddy and a shoulder to cry on. Oh well, at least I get to hear about lesbian sex.

      --
      I drank what? -- Socrates
    6. Re:Sounds a bit like my super power by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Check the margins of this post for some really HOT PIX.

    7. Re:Sounds a bit like my super power by syn3rg · · Score: 0

      Mod parent up! Very funny!

      --
      The contents of this message have been doubly encrypted by ROT13
  35. IANASH by Trikenstein · · Score: 0

    I Am Not A Super Hero, but I think the reason is *Just 'cos*

  36. Original Article by nrlightfoot · · Score: 5, Informative
    --
    what sig?
  37. the comic book guy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  38. xmen by TechniMyoko · · Score: 0, Insightful

    I doubt Xmen follows any physics Blades of steel no matter how strong, still require immense pressure to cut through metal yes Wolverine cuts through it like butter Flying? oh please. Transferance of abilities through touch? Controlling the weather? Where do these follow any known laws of physics?

    1. Re:xmen by Alcohol+Fueled · · Score: 3, Funny

      You can transfer abilities through touch. If you touch someone hard enough, you'll give them the ability to bleed. :P

      --
      Ah am not a crook! (\(-__-)/)
    2. Re:xmen by Lehk228 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      the blades are adamantine (i think i got the metal right.... sure as hell isn't steel) and blades sharp enough down to an atomic level wouldn't need alot of force.

      --
      Snowden and Manning are heroes.
    3. Re:xmen by The+Only+Druid · · Score: 2, Informative

      They're adamantium. Adamantine is a real english word that means essentially to have the qualities of a diamond (i.e. its strength, in particular) while adamantium is a fictional alloy that is extremely rare in Marvel comics, and apparently extremely difficult to handle (only Weapon X has reliably manipiulated it besides Magneto), although its trailed by Carbonium (i.e. the coils that Omega Red has) which is easier to find/manipulate but less ...adamantine.

      --
      "Stumble before you crawl"
    4. Re:xmen by TechniMyoko · · Score: 0

      True, but it would dull extremely fast

    5. Re:xmen by pclminion · · Score: 1
      the blades are adamantine (i think i got the metal right.... sure as hell isn't steel) and blades sharp enough down to an atomic level wouldn't need alot of force.

      This isn't right. The sharp edge of a blade is used to initially cut the material so the rest of the blade, which is tapered into a wedge, can spread the cut open. The sharp edge just gets the process started.

      You can split wood with an extremely dull ax, if there is a pre-existing crack in the wood, and you aim well. This demonstrates that it is the wedge shape of the blade which does the cutting, not the sharp edge.

      It doesn't matter how sharp or hard the material of the blade is. It would require an unbelievable amount of force to spread metal apart with a blade.

    6. Re:xmen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > adamantium is a fictional alloy that is extremely rare in Marvel comics, and apparently extremely difficult to handle

      What's more, it was discovered by Adam Ant! How cool is that?!? :-D

  39. Re:Comic Book Physics by AnotherBlackHat · · Score: 4, Funny

    Also his relationship with Lois, man of steel and woman of kleenex, need I avoid the details of that intiment relationship should they decide to have children? ;)


    You don't need to avoid it, but there's little reason to post it here - a link should be enough.

    -- this is not a .sig
  40. Additional article, similar content by rusty_razor · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The U of M's IT magazine Inventing Tomorrow interviewed Kakalios for its Spring 2002 issue. My favorite quote from the lengthy article:

    One of Kakalios' favorite stories acknowledges this leap of faith. "There's a panel in which The Atom and another character have shrunk to submolecular size, and they're sitting on an electron," he recalls with a grin. "The Atom's companion says, 'We're smaller than an oxygen molecule. How are we breathing?' The Atom replies, 'I've never really figured that out.'"
  41. Does this mean by ivan1011001 · · Score: 1

    that I can shoot webs out of my wrists and swing around cities and jump over buildings and all that other neat stuff?

    --

    I was thinking of converting to paganism, but where the hell can you find sacrificial virgins these days?
    1. Re:Does this mean by corbettw · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yes, yes it does. In fact, I suggest you try this at your first opportunity. Just remember, the webbing you shoot from you wrists may be very fine. So you may not see it, or even feel it. But trust me, it is there, so go ahead and jump off the ledge and start swinging.

      --
      God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
    2. Re:Does this mean by pipingguy · · Score: 3, Funny

      the webbing you shoot from you wrists may be very fine. So you may not see it, or even feel it. But trust me, it is there, so go ahead and jump off the ledge

      Tom and Clark were standing on the roof of their building drinking a few beers on their break and Clark said, "Hey Tom, did you know that if you jump off this building, after you get down so far, a draft will pull you back inside the building on the third floor?"

      "Get outta here," said Clark.

      "No I'm serious, watch me."

      Clark hopped off the building and sure enough, he was taken in by the draft at the third floor window. He took the elevator back to the top and Tom and a security guard that arrived were standing there, Tom in awe.

      "I can't believe it." Said Tom.

      "I know you should try it Tom."

      So Tom hopped off and plunged into the ground.

      "Superman, you're a real asshole when you're drunk." said the security guard.

  42. More links and info by Alien54 · · Score: 5, Informative
    Here is an article from Physics today (Nov 2002) that has essentially the same story, but which provides lots of extra links at the bottom, and which is fleshed out much better.

    Also seen on Slashdot here in May 2002, so it's a repeat, but from a while ago.

    --
    "It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
  43. What was the explosion called? by Chuck+Chunder · · Score: 3, Funny

    Flaming'el?

    --
    Boffoonery - downloadable Comedy Benefit for Bletchley Park
    1. Re:What was the explosion called? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      > What was the explosion called? Flaming'el?

      Nah, I'm pretty sure it was "Bloody'el."

  44. Re:WHAT KIND of physics???? by 0xfc · · Score: 1

    http://frogstar.com/wav/displaywav.asp?fil=duckjob .wav

    heheh

  45. Larry Niven has thought about this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  46. Yes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    CBG: Worst. Episode. Ever.
    CBG: Needless to say, I was on the Internet within minutes, registering my disgust around the globe.

    (Sums up /. pretty well...)

  47. What's really amazing... by tholomyes · · Score: 1

    ...is that this is one of the top links on both Slashdot AND Fark right now... AND... I can still get to it.

    As Darth Vader would say: "Impressive. Most impressive."

    --
    When did the future switch from being a promise to a threat? -C. Palahniuk
  48. "Man of Steel, Woman of Kleenex" by Planx_Constant · · Score: 5, Informative

    Larry Niven dealt with a lot of this an essay about why Superman is always free on Saturday night.

    It deals more with biology and psychology, but there's a lot of physics involved, too.

    --
    Heisenberg might have been here.
    1. Re:"Man of Steel, Woman of Kleenex" by freeweed · · Score: 4, Funny

      Niven's essay has always reminded me of a joke:

      Superman is flying around one night, and spies Wonder Woman sleeping through her open window. Well, Superman has Super-speed, so he figures he can be "in and out" before anyone's the wiser. So, he zips in, does his business really fast, and takes off.

      Shortly after, Wonder Woman sits up and asks "what the hell was that?"

      The Invisible Man, lying next to her, sits up and says "I don't know, but damn, does my ass ever hurt."

      --
      Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
    2. Re:"Man of Steel, Woman of Kleenex" by wild_pointer · · Score: 1

      Reminded me of one also:

      A very drunk man is in a bar on third floor when this annoying guy comes in.
      The drunk guy says:
      "Hey I have a great drink for you! You will feel very energized" and then tells the bartender to make two of this drink.
      The drunk man drinks first, his eyes pop out, he gets red in the face, shoots out the window, flies around the building one time and back in the window.

      The annoying guy is impressed and tries the drink. The same happens to him, his eyes pop out, he turns red and shoots out the window.... but straight on the sidewalk below.

      The bartender: "I hate it when you do this Clark Kent!"

  49. Yes, one does! by Alcohol+Fueled · · Score: 3, Informative

    I would think that this comic explains the Slashdot Effect pretty well. :)

    --
    Ah am not a crook! (\(-__-)/)
  50. Gravity defying boobs by bozojoe · · Score: 1

    My favorite part of comic book super heroins were their !!!BLAM!!! in your face perky boobs

    --
    lick the cancle button (at least thats what our Chinese QA says)
  51. Human imagination is limited by human knowledge by MMaestro · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Its only natural that comic book physics would be based off real life knowledge on physics. Simply because its easier.

    Sure you could create a program or a chart carefully detailing what the mass and content of the planet is, and then you could find out how much gravity is created, followed by the thickness/thinness of the atmosphere, followed by the way evolution has grown on the planet (such as a world where the majority of land mass is earth rather than water), etc etc.

    Or you could just reach for a high school physics book and base your comics on simple, easy to understand and apply physics. Its common to see this in everything from novels to video games. (We're playing video games that are supposed to take place in hundreds of years in the future where portable handheld rocket launchers can reload in less than 2 seconds and interstellar travel is possible, but we're still using a bread-and-butter assault rifle and grenade launcher attachment as our main weapon. Wheres the laser beam weapons? The jetpacks? The microwave guns? The robot armies? The pistol sized one shot super gun? A version of Windows which doesn't crash... ok maybe thats a little too imaginative.)

  52. Classic Superman Question by fidget42 · · Score: 1
    A man shoots a bullet toward superman's chest, the bullet bounces off. No problem... I can buy that.

    What I can't accept is, why is there no bullet holes in the shirt? Do superheroes wear some special brand? Study that...
    No, what I can't get is why Superman ducks when they throw their gun at him! (for those of you who haven't seen it, watch the 50s TV series)
    --
    The dogcow says "Moof!"
  53. But... by mokiejovis · · Score: 4, Funny

    How about when Lois Lane falls from a building (accelerating at 9.2 m/s^2), and Superman zooms up (accelerating at, oh, let's say, -30 m/s^2 relative to Lois) and catches her, soaring off into the wild blue yonder. This leaves Lois instantaneously changing directions from +9.2 m/s^2 to -30 m/s^2, with a delta of -20.8 m/s^2.

    Wouldn't she be better off just hitting the pavement?

    1. Re:But... by geekoid · · Score: 1

      there was a story that touched on that sort of thing.

      In the story, superman is holding a building, someone see this and relizes that the building isn't designed for that and should crumble,becasue it had all its wait on a point so small. Giving way to the theory that Superman is telekenetic.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    2. Re:But... by can56 · · Score: 1

      It depend on the timing. If Lois fell off a fifty story building (on earth) and hit the pavement, splat. If Superman caught her when she passed the 40'th level (with a pillow), no worries. It's not A(celleration) that hurts, it's V(elocity)

    3. Re:But... by Dash-o-Salt · · Score: 1

      I would imagine either consequence would rather hurt.

      I do feel I should point out that gravity is 9.8 m/s^2 or 32 ft/s^2 (if you lean towards non-standard measurements).

    4. Re:But... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not A(celleration) that hurts, it's V(elocity)

      Sorry but you got that backwards. Force = mass * acceleration.

      If Superman caught her when she passed the 40th level, and Superman was flying upward as this thread originally described, Lois has a big problem.

      Simply hitting the pavement would cause her to decelerate more-or-less instantly from her final velocity to zero.

      Superman applies the same deceleration, plus he tacks on additional acceleration in the other direction. Since it's Superman, we can consider it more-or-less instant, also.

      Lois's mass isn't changing, so force has to increase in the equation.

    5. Re:But... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OF course superman knows to slow down before catching her..

      but obviously teh director didnt

    6. Re:But... by mdielmann · · Score: 2, Informative

      The delta is 39.2 m/s^2. Don't believe me, make a scale on graph paper and count the little blocks. And yes, we'd have all been better off if Lois hit the pavement once or twice.

      --
      Sure I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?
    7. Re:But... by jgoemat · · Score: 1
      You guys are missing the point. If you look in the movie, superman somehow slows down her descent, then starts going back up. Look at the building go by in the background. Maybe he got up far enough and then started flying back down to match speed with her. When he caught her he then gently started trying to fly upwards, which slows their descent then starts to make them ascend.

      The force from the impact of Lois with Superman wouldn't have to do with their differing accellerations, but with their different speeds at the point of impact and their weights. You could calculate by her change in speed and how quickly it happened by the force of the collision and you could represent that in units of accelleration, but the only relation of the force of the impact to their accelleration before the impact is in that the acceleration affected their speeds at the point of impact.

      Think of it this way. Compare dropping an egg onto a concrete surface from 6 cm and from 6 meters. In both cases the accelleration of the egg would be 9.8m/s^2 and the ground would be 0m/s^2. Obviously the egg from 6 meters up would be hitting the pavement with much more force, changing it's velocity from 10.78 m/s to 0 m/s in a very short time. The egg at 6 cm would only be going 1.05 m/s, but the accelleration would be the same.

      Likewise, there isn't an instantaneous change in direction, it could happen over a minute amount of time though and produce huge acceleration in Lois, possibly killing her. But if you look at the film, superman "catches her" and they continue to move downwards for a second or two as superman slows their descent gently so she won't be harmed. They don't really show the point where superman stops moving upwards and starts moving downwards, it zooms into a closeup right when he catches her. However from seeing how fast he can fly and move, I would say it wouldn't be a problem for him to decelerate and change directions in a fraction of a second.

  54. My high school physics teacher made us do this by StandardCell · · Score: 1

    Our term papers in Physics from Grades 10 to 12 required us to present information on a physics topic using a creative method. You weren't allowed to simply write your findings down on paper; you actually had to do it in the form of a skit, song, art, or whatever other creative form. The purpose of it was to see if we really understood what we were talking about and to be able to convey information in non-standard ways.

    Between physics and high school calculus, that woman saved my ass when I went to university because I was so well prepared to deal with the realities of applied physics. A lot of other folks didn't make it through first year of engineering, and I figure that was part of the reason.

    1. Re:My high school physics teacher made us do this by boobsea · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Whatever happened to reading the book and applying the concepts?

      Its this "creativity" bullcrap I have to put up with in high school that is retarding my education. Instead of giving me points for effectively showing knowledge of and applying the concepts, I get points deducted for not having neat cutesy skits, posters, etc.

      They don't hand-hold you in university, why should you be hand-held in high school?

  55. Very creative, but... by NaCl · · Score: 3, Interesting

    From the pratical point of view, not every physics student will have enough knowledge of comics. So imagine someone not learning physics because of a, hmmm, calculus issue, but because he/she doesn't read enough comics!

    --
    I shot the sheriff
  56. Ob. Simpsons Radioactive Man reference by alien_blueprint · · Score: 1, Redundant

    Martin: I would've thought that being hit by an atomic bomb would've killed him.

    Bart: Now you know better.

  57. Green Lantern Light by buckhead_buddy · · Score: 4, Funny

    I think my difficulties at understanding my electromagnetism classes were partially because of my preconceptions caused by my understanding of light from Green Lantern comics.

    Light can be both a particle and a wave... and a big boxing glove or baseball bat depending on the controlling thoughts.

    Quantum mechanics dictates that the observer can effect the observed... but only if you have a ring on your finger, otherwise you'll just get your head beaten in by a big green boxing glove or baseball bat.

    Color can be emissive (from the light wavelength itself) or reflective (from interacting with something it hits)... but nothing will change, interact, or stop green light unless it happens to be yellow.

    The perception of color itself is really just an evolved way humans measure different wavelengths of light but there's nothing particularly special about the range of light we see... except that we can see the two most useful wavelengths: green and yellow.

    It's been a while. I don't read Green Lantern nor perform emag calculations so perhaps I've misstated something from continuity or text. C'est La Vie.

  58. Some simple answers... by Spuffin · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Disclaimer: Some/all of this information may be false.
    Does Physics provide an answer why pieces of Krypton can harm Superman yet pieces of Earth do not harm Earthlings?
    Kryptonite affected all people on Krypton so they were, in a sense, just like earthlings. They did not have super powers because the kryptonite kept them normal.
    Clark Kent is also an illegal alien having not been born on Earth, and obviously any papers saying so must have been forged or are false.
    Ma Kent claimed him as her child, and since they lived in the country, were never questioned about it. So all records would be based on good faith
    Just how many powers does Superman have anyway?
    He didn't have an instruction manual in the pod. No one on Krypton had any super powers because of the kryptonite, so he doesn't know what he can do and sometimes discovers latent powers.
    With muscles that powerful, he should weigh a ton or more. People would be able to notice this as he walks on weak surfaces like wood floors.
    He can fly, remember? He just cancels out all but about 190-200lbs.

    The answer to all the other questions are this: He's Superman
    1. Re:Some simple answers... by EvanED · · Score: 1

      "Kryptonite affected all people on Krypton so they were, in a sense, just like earthlings. They did not have super powers because the kryptonite kept them normal."

      Except that mere exposure to kryptonite is fatal to Superman. But him next to a block even in conditions that would be comfortable for any Earthling and he'd be dead. So it can't just make him normal.

    2. Re:Some simple answers... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except that mere exposure to kryptonite is fatal to Superman. But him next to a block even in conditions that would be comfortable for any Earthling and he'd be dead. So it can't just make him normal.

      Because he can't survive on our alien planet.

    3. Re:Some simple answers... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Umm. Kal-el was artificially gestated, according to the more recent books. Since his artificial womb was in the ship that brought him here and the Kents took him out of it, he was born on US soil, and is ergo a citizen.

      Of course, the falsification of his adoption papers was quite illegal and may cast some doubt on his status.

    4. Re:Some simple answers... by Tassach · · Score: 1

      It's a combination of the interaction of Kryptonite and solar radiation:
      Red Sun + Kryptonite = No Powers
      Yellow Sun + Kryptonite = Fatal
      Yellow Sun - Kryptonite = Superpowers
      Red Sun - Kryptonite = ?? (Probably no powers)

      --
      Why is it that the proponents of "one nation under God" are so eager to get rid of "liberty and justice for all"?
  59. Wrong motivation by KalvinB · · Score: 1

    it wasn't to prove he couldn't do it. It was to show how much force he was deflecting. It never claimed he couldn't do it. In order to claim that you'd have to know his tolerance.

    And that physics book still sucks. Note to teachers: STOP USING IT.

    Ben

  60. Your example happened in Spiderman by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Spiderman was trying to save his girlfriend Gwen Stacy who was falling off a building and he catches her foot at the last second with his web, the whiplash effect breaking her neck and killing her instantly.

  61. Worst. Link. Ever. by njan · · Score: 2, Funny

    wow. Even a thread link has been slashdotted. '403.9 too many users..'

    Your last link was without doubt the worst slashdot post ever. Rest assured that within minutes I was on slashdot registering my disgust throughout the thread ;)

    --
    I am a viral sig. Please copy me and help me spread. Thank you
  62. Conservation of angular momentum by EnterpriseNCC-1701 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Since when does Superman obey the laws of the conservation of angular momentum??

    --
    "Most interesting how often you humans seem to obtain that which you do not want" -Spock
    1. Re:Conservation of angular momentum by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Since when do horny 13yearolds give a shit?!?

    2. Re:Conservation of angular momentum by falsification · · Score: 1
      Since when are all 13-year olds horny?

      Will you please let children enjoy their childhoods?

  63. Man of Steel Woman of Kleenex by Alien54 · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Larry Biven has an excellent analysis on the difficulties of of the the physics of beingfg superman, called Man of Steel, Woman of Kleenex which is both a good read, and funny as well.

    For example

    What turns on a kryptonian? What arouses Kal-El's mating urge? Did kryptonian women carry some subtle mating cue at appropriate times of the year? Whatever it is, Lois Lane probably didn't have it. We may speculate that she smells wrong, less like a kryptonian woman than like a terrestrial monkey.

    Can human breed with kryptonian? Do we even use the same genetic code? On the face of it, LL could more easily breed with an ear of corn than with Kal-El. But coincidence does happen. If the genes match...

    --
    "It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
    1. Re:Man of Steel Woman of Kleenex by Trikenstein · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Philip Jose Farmer's The Wold Newton Universe has its own take on Superman.

      He's more like the Golden Age Superman, leaps instead of flying, not nearly as strong.

      And the Kryptonians are a genetically modified branch of humanity.

  64. Here's a couple I really want to know by xant · · Score: 5, Interesting

    His class covers other topics such as these, that I'd really like to know the answers to:
    # Is it possible to read minds as Prof. X of the X-Men does?
    # How much does Flash have to eat?

    The second one I'd like to know because I figured out, when I was a kid, how much a regenerating troll would have to eat. (Yeah, I'm a computer geek *and* a dungeons and dragons geek.) Basically it works out that even if they're eating pure sugar, there's not enough hours in the day for them to do that.

    The Professor X one is interesting because I took a psychology class in which the professor told us in no uncertain terms why telepathy was impossible. He went into the mechanics of information processing in the brain and the differences between patterns in two different brains, and concluded based on this set of facts that even if you could detect the signal generated by someone else's brain, you wouldn't be able to parse it.

    To me this was preposterous, and I defended my position (unconvincingly, at the time) during his office hours. Signal processing is signal processing, and it doesn't matter whether the signal generated by the receiving station has any relationship with the signal generated by the sending station, as long as the receiver can process it. The human brain's ability to process the signal generated by the human mouth is probably not significantly more complex a task than the hypothetical ability to process the brain signal. You're not, after all, trying to glean the meaning of every nerve firing, just see what the person is thinking about. In a very real sense this is only a step away from what the person is saying, so why would the signal be more difficult to parse than human speech?

    In my mind the only question remaining is whether there is any signal to be processed at all. I say that because you can detect the brain signal without drilling a hole in a person's head, that it is there to be detected, it's just a matter of having sufficiently sensitive equipment to detect it. Does the brain have this? Hard to say.

    I want to know what conclusion the prof reaches.

    --
    It's rare that you're presented with a knob whose only two positions are Make History and Flee Your Glorious Destiny.
    1. Re:Here's a couple I really want to know by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The way we speak is more or less a structured language, bound by certain rules. Thus, we can interperet people's speech. The way we think has no such rules. Sometimes you do think in words, maybe when writing something or thinking of what to say, but this is essentially speaking without making noise, not thinking.

    2. Re:Here's a couple I really want to know by xant · · Score: 1

      But it makes no sense to say that there's no structure to those other modes of thinking. First of all there are rules. You're not really interested in more than the speech and maybe visual components of thought. In these modes, the structure is there; it's the neural structure at the lowest level, then the neuropil (organizations of neurons), then the cognitive components those compose. You only have to be able to get a scraping of all that to do what Xavier does.

      You basically ignore all the rest; it's too low-level to bother with.

      --
      It's rare that you're presented with a knob whose only two positions are Make History and Flee Your Glorious Destiny.
    3. Re:Here's a couple I really want to know by jkantola · · Score: 1

      He went into the mechanics of information processing in the brain and the differences between patterns in two different brains, and concluded based on this set of facts that even if you could detect the signal generated by someone else's brain, you wouldn't be able to parse it.

      As evidenced by all attempts at communication between myself and the rest of mankind.

      Seriously though, I think both your professor and you have a point. The difference is that your professor is talking about telepathy at a very fundamental level, as in transferring *experiences* between two brains. That is, for the most part, impractical for the reasons broadly outlined in the quote. On the other hand I also agree with your signal processing theorem -- or in other words, I see speech as just a crude form of telepathy.

    4. Re:Here's a couple I really want to know by alphaseven · · Score: 2, Funny

      And what I'd like to know is, how can Xavier read the mind of someone who first language isn't English? I'd like to see a comic character say "I can read his thoughts, unfortunately they're in Chinese."

    5. Re:Here's a couple I really want to know by Kelmenson · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Your comment is basically the same as my attitude against Searle's Chinese room argument. Quickly summarising, he says that if you had a book that gave you rules on how to convert seemingly random symbols to other seemingly random symbols, that get converted to Chinese, nobody would say the book understands Chinese. And if you get so good at following the book's rules that you don't need the book, you still don't understand Chinese, just the random symbols.


      My attitude on that was that it was a silly analogy, because if I were given the raw impulses going on in my brain I wouldn't be able to decipher it, yet clearly my brain can. Would Searl say my brain knows more than I do?


      This seems to be the same as the telepathy issue: Sure, given a printout of the impulses you couldn't figure it out, but if somehow you could map someone else's impulses onto your brain, it seems quite likely that the brain would figure out what to do.

    6. Re:Here's a couple I really want to know by bakes · · Score: 1

      so why would the signal be more difficult to parse than human speech?

      I don't think it would. Ever look at the waveforms of digitised human speech? Can you read them? Of course not. When you hear the sound though you understand it without analysing every minute component making up the overall sound. I don't think telepathy is about looking at every single piece of information making up the current brain activity, but the overall picture that the activity makes up.

      Is the brain capable of detecting the brain waves of others? Yes it is hard to say. Sceptics would say 'no' because there is no proof, and a number of people would say a definite 'yes'. I say 'possibly', because although there is no proof it can, there is also no proof it can't. Some people might have the ability at some level and not even know: they just get a 'feeling' from people, not specific thoughts but just general emotive pictures or impressions.

      --
      Ho! Haha! Guard! Turn! Parry! Dodge! Spin! Ha! Thrust!
    7. Re:Here's a couple I really want to know by humankind · · Score: 1

      He went into the mechanics of information processing in the brain and the differences between patterns in two different brains, and concluded based on this set of facts that even if you could detect the signal generated by someone else's brain, you wouldn't be able to parse it.

      I think the probability of this ultimately comes down to the gender of the subject involved. Man = possible. Woman = unlikely.

    8. Re:Here's a couple I really want to know by Mike+A. · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Right on. I don't find Searle's rejoinders to some of the counterarguments - especially his rejoinder to the Systems Reply - particularly convincing. If I were to memorize the book, I would actually be an entity which understands Chinese - it's just that there's no way to communicate, except by way of an interpreter, between the mind I think of as "me" and the mind which speaks Chinese. Just like you, as you point out, have no direct understanding of the neurons firing in your head.

      --

      --
      Do I look like I speak for my employer?
    9. Re:Here's a couple I really want to know by CrazyTalk · · Score: 1

      Ever see the newer Justice League animated series? This is finally addressed. The Flash is shown as extremely skinny, and is constantly eating. Since he has super-speed, he can consume enormous quantities of food super-fast.

    10. Re:Here's a couple I really want to know by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 1

      You're looking for a book called 'The Science of Superheroes.' Good read.

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
    11. Re:Here's a couple I really want to know by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 1
      I don't think it would. Ever look at the waveforms of digitised human speech? Can you read them? Of course not.

      Ever look at, say, Japanese katakana? Perl? Pretty much any form of communication that you don't already know? Can you read them. Of course not.

      Could you learn? Of course.

      When you hear the sound though you understand it without analysing every minute component making up the overall sound.

      Of course you analyze every minute component. You also draw in lots of metadata, including facial expression, body language, environment/context, recent history, and so on. This is why we have such a bitch of a time teaching computers to communicate like humans.

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
    12. Re:Here's a couple I really want to know by falsification · · Score: 1
      Oh my. How much the younger generation has to learn.

      The constantly eating Flash was first seen in Flash's rejuvenated book, about the third Flash, Wally West.

      You should know that the second Flash, Barry Gordon, died heroically in 1985 in the process of saving the universe during the Crisis on Infinite Earths.

    13. Re:Here's a couple I really want to know by CrazyTalk · · Score: 1

      Younger Generation? Hmmm maybe I'm so old I'm turning senile. I used to read The Flash in the late 60s and early 70s, and I dont remember the constant eating from that era. Thanks for the info, tho.

    14. Re:Here's a couple I really want to know by falsification · · Score: 1

      The 60s and 70s Flash would have been the second Flash, Barry Gordon. He did not have to eat voraciously. See the Wikipedia article.

  65. Re:Comic Book Physics by Kirsha · · Score: 2, Informative

    Does Physics provide an answer why pieces of Krypton can harm Superman yet pieces of Earth do not harm Earthlings? ;)

    There ARE pieces of Earth that harm Earthlings, like plutonium, uranium, etc, etc. You could say we got it worse than Superman. He only has to worry about kryptonite. We have to watch out for several elements that could kill/harm us!

  66. Re:Comic Book Physics by prockcore · · Score: 1


    Time travel by spinning the Earth backwards, I do not think that this will work and should only cause major earthquakes and other problems.


    I'm assuming you're talking about the movie. The thing is, this isn't what is happening, although it is still wrong.

    He's not spinning the earth backwards, he's flying really fast (theory of relativity). Technically this should have sent him into the future, not the past.

  67. Real Superheroine by TheOtherKiwi · · Score: 0

    Not that kind of heroin, this "real life" kind of xray vision from an ex-superpower [http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_855907.html]

    Xray vision would be cool if we good all do it...imagine airport security with everyone having X-ray vision?!

    --

    -- Sig meltdown immine...
  68. Re:Comic Book Physics by TheLoneDanger · · Score: 1

    Clark Kent is also an illegal alien having not been born on Earth, and obviously any papers saying so must have been forged or are false. So Clark Kent aka Superman is breaking Civil Law by claiming to be a US Citizen.

    To deal with this, use your own statement above from above:

    Kal-El was a test tube baby and sent to Earth in the ship inside of a pod.

    I believe that the official DC Comics line (from an issue of Wizard magazine long ago) is that Superman was still GESTATING while inside the pod (it would take quite a while for the pod to get to earth right?), and that he was officially "birthed" when the pod opened on American soil. So they can still say he's an all-american superhero (blah, blah, blah).

    On a couple of your other points, Superman's strength and all his other powers are supposed to be due to his cells absorbing our sun's yellow solar radiation, and not I believe due to any sort of gravity effect.

    --

    "But I trust in the people's capacity for reflection, rage and rebellion." -Oscar Olivera
  69. Blame Canada! by AndroidCat · · Score: 3, Funny
    Going back a step or two, since Joe Shuster, half of the team that created Superman, was born in Toronto, at least half of the fault for Krypton's explosion can blamed on Canada.

    (Although Cleveland, Ohio definitely catches a lot of that too.)

    --
    One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
  70. Forget bullets -- physics of superhero sex by devphil · · Score: 4, Funny


    In one of the most hilarious short science essays ever written, Man of Steel, Woman of Kleenex, Larry Niven tackles the problem of how Superman is going to reproduce.

    For example, during orgasm, one loses control of one's muscles. Superman has been known to leave fingerprints in steel and concrete accidentally. What happens to Lois while she's in his arms?

    Another example, which I'll quote directly:

    Ejaculation of semen is entirely involuntary in the human male, and in all other forms of terrestrial life. It would be unreasonable to assume otherwise for a Kryptonian. But with Kryptonian muscles behind it, Kal-El's semen would emerge with the muzzle velocity of a machine gun bullet.

    Followup scenarios (for artificial insemination) assume that he's on an airless moon, to prevent the semen from exploding into vapor due to air friction at supersonic speeds. It eventually turns out artificial insemination doesn't work either.

    --
    You cannot apply a technological solution to a sociological problem. (Edwards' Law)
    1. Re:Forget bullets -- physics of superhero sex by jobbleberry · · Score: 0

      Yeah and what about some form of protection to stop any super accidents in the back of the car.
      I mean would the condom need to be made out of lead or would some kind of spermacide made of Kryptonite be needed?

    2. Re:Forget bullets -- physics of superhero sex by paganizer · · Score: 1

      Yes, and the only Living thing he could reproduce with was his cousin Supergirl, or criminals from the Phantom Zone.
      He could have sex with other invulnerable superheros, though.
      Hmm. a red kryptonite condom?

      --
      Why, yes, I AM a Pagan Libertarian.
    3. Re:Forget bullets -- physics of superhero sex by SolvayGuy · · Score: 1

      This has allready been answered of course, in Mallrats.

      "Brodie: Lois could never have Superman's baby. Do you think her fallopian tubes could handle the sperm? I guarantee he blows a load like a shotgun right through her back. What about her womb? Do you think it's strong enough to carry his child?

      T.S.: Sure, why not?

      Brodie: He's an alien for Christ sake! His Kryptonian biological makeup is enhanced by Earth's yellow sun. If Lois gets a tan, the kid could kick right through her stomach. Only someone like Wonder Woman has a strong enough uterus to carry his kid. The only way he could bang regular chicks is with a kryptonite condom. That would kill him."

    4. Re:Forget bullets -- physics of superhero sex by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      But with Kryptonian muscles behind it, Kal-El's semen would emerge with the muzzle velocity of a machine gun bullet.

      That's why Superman had to give up his porn career. The girls refused to do facials.

  71. Typical Slashdot "Informative" post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "In a Lois and Clark episode...."

    Worst. Series. Ever.

  72. Misread by quinkin · · Score: 2, Funny
    Did anyone else (mis)read it as: "Comic Book Guy Physics"???

    I had visions of algorithms used to model the cyclic tidal ripples of fat, a sweat/clothing border distribution theorem, statistical analysis of taco/time samples, and linear regression of "Worst ever" comments with respect to Bart displacement.

    Q.

    --
    Insert Signature Here
  73. +5 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    that was great

  74. Superman and his powers by gcore · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Superman, while on earth, can hear someone scream on a spacestation beyond jupiter. He can blow out stars while caughing. He can travel several tousand time the speed of light. He can fool people he is a completely different person with just a pair of glasses. What kind of physics can explain that?

    1. Re:Superman and his powers by isopossu · · Score: 1, Funny
      Yes, the might of the Superman is beyond our comprehension. That's why we only have to believe in Him and that he was born as a human being among us and crucified for our sins.

      Not believing in Superman is a religion too, and you can't prove our Kryptonian friend isn't our lord and saviour. I, for one welcome our new red-caped overlord.

    2. Re:Superman and his powers by falsification · · Score: 1

      Maybe he could do that before, but in recent years (in the comics) he is just a really strong guy who can fly.

  75. I took this course by aarku · · Score: 5, Informative

    This is what is called a "Freshman Seminar" which is a 2-3 credit class (this one was 2) just to get you comfortable with talking to professors and crap. It's not supposed to be all that serious. I also took "Science of Space Travel", and got an easy A but learned quite a bit. Both were fine classes, U of M is a good school.

    1. Re:I took this course by harvey_peterson · · Score: 1

      I took Humor Writing and got an A.

      What, you were expecting a joke?

  76. quantum physics... by dnahelix · · Score: 3, Funny

    is so Bohr-ing.

    hyuk-hyuk

    --
    Slashdot Eds Link Anonymous Posts With Logged Posts
    They Are Vermin Feeding On Each Other's Feces.
    I Hate \.
  77. Re:Hulk and Star Trek II by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    >> Actually, the problem is that given the Hulk's size, its impossible for him to rotate something of the mass of the tank around him.

    Even assuming the Incredible Hulk is incredibly strong, it doesn't work because of balance and friction.

    This reminds me of an argument I had with a friend while watching "The Wrath of Khan." If you watch Khan pick up Chekov, he just reaches out and lifts him straight up. He doesn't shift his own weight at all. As I pointed out to my friend, no matter how strong you are, if you shift the center of gravity from over your feet, you're going to tip over.

  78. physics at the U of MN by atlasheavy · · Score: 3, Interesting

    having suffered through Physics for Engineers 1 and 2 at the U of Minnesota three years ago, I only wish I had been able to take this class; that would've made the whole experience just a wee bit more enjoyable. oh well. At least I showed up often enough to my classes to still get my computer science degree...

    --

    iRooster, the Mac OS X a
  79. It's not the physics they bend...Masturbation. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Quite interesting to find out how maleable the human body can be during its development."

    So what does that say about the geek body?

  80. mm, except... by SuperBanana · · Score: 1
    Turns out the comic book writers put more thought into it that you would have first thought!

    Except for that little bit where her body(the size of a ten year old kid) generates enough power to turn her arm into a super-duper-ionized-plasma cutter, that seems able to instantly cut through/smash anything...

    1. Re:mm, except... by SisyphusShrugged · · Score: 1

      I dont know if she is that small, I think it is just that most of the baddies are quite huge (and she changes bodies regularly as well..)

  81. A Big Mystery-What's the "hold-up"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Apparently Louie Anderson has the same power.

  82. Comics? Physics? by jay-be-em · · Score: 0, Redundant

    NERD ALERT!

    Disclaimer: I'm a physics undergrad

    --
    "Orthodoxy means not thinking--not needing to think. Orthodoxy is unconsciousness." --Eric Blair
  83. What was the explosion called?-Unfriendly fire. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Taco B'el

  84. minimum mass of Krypton! by David_Shultz · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Pieces of kryptonite are found scattered about the planet. We are told these are shards from the destruction of Krypton. If we assume that the shards were evenly distributed in all directions, we can determine the minimum size the planet Krypton must have been.

    First off we need the distance. Let's assume Krypton circled the nearest star to our own (we are looking for the minimum size of Krypton). Proxima Centauri (or Alpha Centauri C) is only 4.22 light-years away. (393 927 289 812km)

    Imagine a sphere whose radius extends from where the planet Krypton used to be, to the earth. The surface area of this sphere represents the 3-d area across which the shards of kryptonite were distributed. This sphere has a surface area of 4.87508x10^23km(standard calculation).

    The earths radius represents a fraction of this total surface area. The earths radius is 6.3781 x 10^3km. multiply by pi to get the area (the area is 2-d -ie not squared- because the surface of a sphere is 2-d). The next step is comparing this 2-d surface area to the surface area of the imaginary sphere we got above. The result: the earth represents a TINY 4.110086 x 10^-18% of the surface area of our Krypton-explosion sphere. If we multiply the amount of kryptonite on earth by the inverse of this number, we get the amount of Krypton that is scattered around the entire surface area of the sphere.

    And how much kryptonite is on the Earth? damned if I know, so let's just estimate based on what we know of the series. It's been made into various weapons and devices, been sold over the blackmarket, been hidden in secret storage areas, been acquired by every evil organization or villian ever, so presumably the amount on Earth is quite high. BUT, we are calculating for a minimum size of Krypton, so we'll estimate low. 10kg seems more than fair. Now, 2/3 the Earths surface is water, and i haven't heard of any kryptonite being recovered from undersea explorations, so that 10kg found on earth was the 1/3rd that hit the land. So, 30kg hit the Earth. Also consider burning up on reentry. I don't know of kryptonite being indestructible, and it has been made into a liquid at least once in Superman history. Its Probable that at least 90% was burned up in reentry. (If someone with more precise figures and re-do calcs t'would be appreciated). so, the 30kg that hit the earth represents only 10% of the 300kg that hit the atmosphere.

    multiply this by the inverse of this by the inverse of the fraction that represents the surface of our Krypton-explosion sphere over our earths surface area sphere. The result: The planet Krypton weighed an absolute minimum of 7.299x10^19kg. By comparison, our sun weighs 2x10^30kg.

    1. Re:minimum mass of Krypton! by Carthag · · Score: 1

      Not to rain on your parade, but they explained that in one comic by Kal-El's shuttle "dragging" the kryptonite in its path. I can't explain that, though, other than some weird sort of super-gravity.

    2. Re:minimum mass of Krypton! by Pentagram · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The earths radius represents a fraction of this total surface area. The earths radius is 6.3781 x 10^3km. multiply by pi to get the area (the area is 2-d -ie not squared- because the surface of a sphere is 2-d). The next step is comparing this 2-d surface area to the surface area of the imaginary sphere we got above. The result: the earth represents a TINY 4.110086 x 10^-18% of the surface area of our Krypton-explosion sphere. If we multiply the amount of kryptonite on earth by the inverse of this number, we get the amount of Krypton that is scattered around the entire surface area of the sphere.

      What about the effect of the Earth's gravity?

    3. Re:minimum mass of Krypton! by phamNewan · · Score: 1

      Prof. in the article stated that neutronium would have had to be in the planet Krypton for the gravity needed to explain Supermans strength.

      Once that enters the mix, all kinds of strange things are possible. A "heavy" shuttle with Kal-El in it dragging debris along would not be out of the question.

      Wonder what kind of grade the Comic Professor would give /. comments?

    4. Re:minimum mass of Krypton! by Bastard+Operator+Fro · · Score: 1

      If Ktypton was that big, no wonder Superman is so strong...

      --
      Shaun Nelson - Bastard Operator (From Hell / For Hire)
    5. Re:minimum mass of Krypton! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The result: The planet Krypton weighed an absolute minimum of 7.299x10^19kg. By comparison, our sun weighs 2x10^30kg.

      And 30 seconds on Google would tell you that the Earth has a mass of approximately
      6x10^24 kg. So here's a new problem for you:
      Assuming that:
      - Krypton was approximately 1000 times denser than Earth, and
      - Kryptonite was scattered mostly in the Northern hemisphere, landing chiefly in North America and Soviet Asia,

      ... where was Krypton, really?

    6. Re:minimum mass of Krypton! by locofungus · · Score: 1

      Proxima Centauri (or Alpha Centauri C) is only 4.22 light-years away. (393 927 289 812km) 365*24*3600*4.22*300000 39924576000000.00 Hmm, you seem to be out by two orders of magniture there. 4*3.14159*39924576000000*39924576000000 20030423076323425935360000000.00000 The earths radius is 6.3781 x 10^3km. multiply by pi to get the area projected area is pi r^2 not pi r 6378*6378*3.14159 127796375.18556 20030423076323425935360000000/127796375 156737020720058968302 Or about 1.6*10^20 Doesn't hugely affect the conclusion though.

      --
      God said, "div D = rho, div B = 0, curl E = -@B/@t, curl H = J + @D/@t," and there was light.
    7. Re:minimum mass of Krypton! by Carthag · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't a "heavy" shuttle have made a significant impact on earth? As far as I recall it just made a large-ish hole in the Kent fields.

    8. Re:minimum mass of Krypton! by MagFox · · Score: 1

      And the mass of Earth is 5.9742x10^24 kg.

  85. Tori Allen by koshimetsu · · Score: 2, Informative

    More Than Human eps. 3, on Oct. 17 2003.

  86. Re:Plot device-Short-changed. by Lord+Kano · · Score: 2, Funny

    Does that mean Superman was circumsized?

    Would they have to use a Kryptonite Mogem clamp?

    --
    "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
  87. Forget bullets -- physics of superhero sex by Magada · · Score: 0

    Actually, this may be the reason why Superman does NOT boink Lois in the original comics. Also, if you try to calculate exit velocity you run into all sorts of trouble, since the density and viscosity of said liquid is, well, unknown.
    I would suggest that a material similar to the one used for the cape is what mr. Kent's condom is made of , too.

    --
    Something bad is coming when people are suddenly anxious to tell the truth.
  88. Re:WHAT KIND of physics???? by DonaldDuckBigO · · Score: 0

    Ha ha ha. Thanks a lot; now I have something for the .sig in my Donald Duck account. BTW, there is alo a Darth Vader Orgasm floating around the internet.

  89. Further reading by tr0llb4rt0 · · Score: 1

    Not comic book related but in the same vein.

    The Science of Discworld

    http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0091865 15 8/026-5266350-7084459

    --
    Worst .sig ever!
  90. Telepathy or brain wiping? by benwaggoner · · Score: 4, Interesting

    But if you put someone else's impulses on your brain, wouldn't you become them?

    Telepathy is basically an emulation problem. Even if there was some way of extracting the neural state of someone else's brain, what would you do with that information?

    What you're suggesting is that you would have enough brain-power (fuzzy concept) to emulate someone else's mind, AND be able to interpret that emulation in some fashion. Assuming you're both human, how would that work?

    And what would a telepathy actually perceive? Someone's sub-vocalized self-commentary? An echo of how they're feeling. Drill deep, and you'll realize you really don't have much of an idea of what telepathy would actually be like.

    Heck, it's not like our own self-awareness is much beyond post-hoc justification.

    1. Re:Telepathy or brain wiping? by dustmite · · Score: 1

      Why not view telepathy as a 'simple' communication problem rather? (1) Develop some machinery to read person A's thoughts (could be either passively, or directed by person A). (2) Convert the content to some standardized form and send via some already well-known communications mechanism (e.g. Bluetooth, 802.11, Cellphone network, Internet, whatever), (3) Develop some machinery to convert the signal into a form that person B's brain can "listen to" or "see" (I am assuming we'd have to use an existing sense, as I suspect our brains probably cannot create new senses "willy-nilly" from new weird types of input, i.e. that that 'machinery' for sight and sound are fairly specific and part of the 'hardware' design of the brain.). Thus, the signal could be reconverted to speech and played back into the ear (or straight onto the ear's nerves), in which case you'd 'hear the other person thinking' much like listening to a person talking on a telephone. Or, the signal could be converted to text and overlayed as part of a software HUD on your eye signal (in which case you could, for example, see someone else's thoughts scroll by at the bottom of your vision, a bit like the scrolling headlines on CNN).

      With something like Bluetooth, a self-arranging 'network' could automatically connect all the nodes nearby one another --- as you walked in a mall, for example, you could have several streams of text running by, showing other people's thoughts, and at the same time have your own thoughts revealed to others. Something like the cellphone network could be linked in too, allowing you to have the equivalent of phone conversations, just via thought.

      Of course all this is just enhanced communications, i.e. "cellphones on steroids". It is not the same as truly perceiving what someone else is perceiving, but then telepathy doesn't necessarily imply that - it just implies being able to "read someone else's thoughts". Which technology will probably be able to make possible. (If you think about what the 'human machinery' already does when we communicate verbally, one realises it's probably not that far-fetched, as our bodies & brains have already 'developed' most of the required 'technology' - the last little bit is not such a stretch, is it).

  91. this is a waaaay old dupe by blargorama · · Score: 2, Informative

    Does anybody search for dupes beyond the past week? This was posted to Slashdot in May of last year. http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/05/1 0/1827244&mode=thread&tid=133

  92. bollix by CAIMLAS · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I don't remember who said it, but there's a saying, "Given enough steps, anything can be proven."

    I think this applies. Consider the physics of someone like the Hulk - as he grows, his strength -must- grow exponentially, simply to be able to deal with his larger body mass. Not proportionately.

    --
    ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
  93. Superman is a redneck?? by twoslice · · Score: 2, Funny
    Yes, and the only Living thing he could reproduce with was his cousin Supergirl

    So let me get this straight then. Superboy was the product of Superman and his cousin Supergirl getting it on? - shades of the Ozarks...

    --

    From excellent karma to terible karma with a single +5 funny post...
    1. Re:Superman is a redneck?? by unixbob · · Score: 1

      Superboy is teenage Superman. Most of his adventures are set in the future with the Legion of Superheroes. Well, pre-crisis Superboy is anyway. The current superboy is a clone from the Death of Superman storyline.

      --
      The Romans didn't find algebra very challenging, because X was always 10
  94. The movies does count by Per+Abrahamsen · · Score: 1

    This is comic book physics, not movie physics. In comic books, all the physics and plot holes get explained away in the white space between the drawings.

  95. It's Larry Niven by Svartormr · · Score: 0

    but for the QWERTY keyboard typo. And it is a very good article.

  96. Re:Comic Book Physics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Time travel by spinning the Earth backwards, I do not think that this will work and should only cause major earthquakes and other problems"

    +5, Insightful surely? :)

  97. For the physicists among us... by killermal · · Score: 2, Funny
    Batman: Quick Robbin! Through the Tunnel!

    Robin: \psi_1=A{\rm e}^{ikx}+B{\rm e}^{-ikx}, \psi_2=C{\rm e}^{ik'x}+D{\rm e}^{-ik'x},\psi_3=A'{\rm e}^{ikx}

  98. Because it requires our past experiences... by PhotoGuy · · Score: 4, Interesting
    In movies, the producers can play fast and loose with physics, because they have the benefit of motion and sound, to make things seem more plausible (if only slighly plausible, to someone who understands basic physics logically).

    In comic books, being still frames with no sound, any action, motion, sound, can be implied, but it's really up to our imaginations to create the vivid scene that is real to life; and we do that with the feel for real world physics that we experience in real life. I would guess that this has something to do with comic books tending to be a bit more realistic; so they can leverage our own experience with the physics of the world, for a more realistic and vivid experience.

    --
    Love many, trust a few, do harm to none.
  99. Evil popups with trojans! by Trracer · · Score: 0

    Did anyone else see evil popups that initiates trojan downloads when they visited the site?
    I have no popupblocker at work :(

    --
    English is not my first language, so cut me some slack -: Om du kan lasa det har sa kan du Svenska :-
  100. Favorite 'bad physics' moment by Garg · · Score: 3, Funny

    Likewise, there's the paradox of heros who have super-strength but not invulnerability (e.g. spider-man).

    Yep, this brings up one of my all-time favorite roll-your-eyes scenes, from a Superman in the 70's.

    Some doofus found a magic flute which stole Superman's powers, one at a time, and transferred them to himself. So he takes away Supe's flight and invulnerability. When Superman catches up to the doofus, he still has his super-strength, so he bursts through a brick wall.

    Now, I'm no physicist, but I know if I could somehow move my arms with enough force to smash through a brick wall, I'd end up with a pair of stumps and something resembling bloody jelly.

    Garg

    --
    Garg
    Alumnus, Xavier's School for Gifted Youngsters
  101. The slow blade... by NumbThumb · · Score: 1

    penetrates the shield.

    --
    I have discovered a truly remarkable sig which this 120 chars is too small to contain.
    1. Re:The slow blade... by Abreu · · Score: 1

      Nothing like bringing up Dune on a discussion about physical impossibilities...

      --
      No sig for the moment.
    2. Re:The slow blade... by nounderscores · · Score: 2, Funny

      OSX: Kosciusko *MS* USA

      now that's ironic

    3. Re:The slow blade... by Sprite+Remix · · Score: 1
      Maybe you should've made it:

      OSX: Kosciusko *M$* USA

      omfg thaen you are motherfucking 1337!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This'll give me more magic voodoo points!!!!

  102. That's nothing, this gothiloli teaches CPU design. by fuggsy · · Score: 3, Interesting

    My collegue has this book "CPU no tsukurikata", or "How to create a CPU". The lovely Japanese gothic lolita manga character guides you through breadboarding a CPU with descrete components.
    http://cdn-images.amazon.com/images/P/4839909865.0 9.LZZZZZZZ.jpg
    (japanese amazon page for the book http://www.amazon.co.jp/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/bo oks/4839909865/249-8715141-2165156)

  103. Wyle E. Coyote! by RayBender · · Score: 3, Funny
    My favorite is the "Mobius Wall"; our hero looks around this wall and sees a tail. He puts a stick of dynamite under it, then too late realizes it's his own... :) A great demonstration of non-Euclidean geometry.

    The rest of the Wyle E. Coyote ones are just as good. 'Though I don't think he handles momentum in a physically accurate way, he does have an engineers' appreciation for Murphy and His Laws...

    --
    Human genome = 3 billion base pairs = 6 GBit. Windows + Office = 20 Gbit. Which is more impressive?
  104. Can't explain for Supes, but... by kria · · Score: 1

    While I don't recall what they do for DC comics, I know in Marvel most costumes are made of a special material invented by Reed Richards of the Fantastic Four. They say it's made out of unstable molecules. While I won't defend the science of THAT statement, it is intended to stretch very well, including to the point where it disappears, but un-stretches and is visable again. The example of THAT is for Colossus of the X-Men - when he goes from human to metal, he gets quite a bit bigger and some portions of his costume disappear, but return when he goes back to human.

    Anyway, I imagine for a material like that, it wouldn't be too tough for it to heal small holes like from bullets, though I have seen it torn.

  105. To Anyone Who Goes to UMN by C_Lo_Fresh · · Score: 1

    I'd like to see the syllabus for this class. I tried to look on their website but it's password protected.

    1. Re:To Anyone Who Goes to UMN by falsification · · Score: 1

      They just call it "U of M."

  106. ducking the gun by nounderscores · · Score: 4, Funny

    One more explanation:

    Superman would duck the thrown gun because just standing there like a doofus while a pistol bounces off your forehead looks stupid.

    Even superheros who pretend to be mild mannered reporters have their pride, ya know?

  107. Concrete, the comic series by kria · · Score: 1

    Here, we have a hero made of Concrete. I don't read it, so I can't really say what other powers he has.

    Anyway, apparently Concrete was standing near a building where someone fell. "Catch her, Concrete, save her!"

    SPLAT.

    *Concrete looks down at his arms covered in goo.* I'm made of CONCRETE!

  108. The "Alternate" Cartoon Laws of Physics, Sci-Fi by hustin · · Score: 1

    See also Cartoons, and Sci-Fi.

    My favorite is Law IX: "Everything falls faster than an anvil."

    Enjoy...

  109. Re:That's nothing, this gothiloli teaches CPU desi by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 2, Interesting

    In Japan, you'll find Manga for everything from world history to automobile repair. It's just one of those things.

    --
    Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
  110. wrong by portscan · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Take, for example, the strength of Superman. To leap a 30-story building in a single bound, Superman's leg muscles must produce nearly 6,000 pounds of force while jumping, Kakalios calculates. The Man of Steel was that strong because he was designed to resist Krypton's powerful gravity.

    This is wrong. Superman is as strong as he is because of the yellow sun of the Earth (as opposed to the red sun of Krypton). The comics say nothing about how massive the planet is, just that the Earth's sun gave him super powers. Plus, he is not really jumping, he's flying. This description does not lend itself to description by the laws of physics, but that's okay.

    Most phenomena in comic books is completely wrong according to the laws of physics (the law of conservation of energy is the most often flauted--with energy fields being created spontaneously, and the law of conservation of momentum is violated every time somebody flies without any means of propulsion).

    We like comics because they are fantasy. Even if you can find some accurate depictions of physical phenomena in comics, it is a dangerous enterprise to use comics to teach physics. If students are taught that some "comic book physics" is accurate, then they may come to believe that all such physics is accurate.

    For a dose of semi-reality in comics, I turn to Batman, the most bad-ass human ever to be dreamed up. But even Batman is not that physically accurate. The first time he shot up a grappling hook to save him from falling off a building, his arms would be ripped clean off. But I don't care. Batman is cool.

    In my opinion, physics should stay away from comics, because thinking about the physics involved in comics makes them not fun, since nearly every cool thing that happens in comic books defies the laws of physics.
  111. Hebrew 'sh' looks like 'w' by simon_clarkstone · · Score: 1
    The Hebrew letter 'shin' looks very like the phonecian 'shin' and both look like:

    \/\/


    BTW, the Greeks mucked the Phonecian sibilants up and shin's shape and position became sigma.

    --

    C:\>spell -b slashdot_submission.txt
    Bad command or file name.
  112. Re:That's nothing, this gothiloli teaches CPU desi by fuggsy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It ain't manga, it's looks somewhere between a hobbyist book and serious text, not that i could read it beyond the diagrams. All i know is that cute gothiloli chick is the sensei, and she's the first thing that came to mind with the article title "Comic book characters teach physics" :)

  113. Of course! by dexter+riley · · Score: 1

    This also explain why so many characters have two L's in their names.

  114. The most common comic physics error... by tgibbs · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ...is the failure to understand weight, gravity, and balance. Very often, one sees a "superstrong" character lifting, say a truck, by grabbing it at one end and picking it up. But no matter how strong you are, if you are going to lift something, the combined center of gravity of the object plus you has to be be between your legs, or you will fall over. So you might be strong enough to carry a truck if you were underneath it, but no matter how strong you were, you couldn't pick it up from one end unless you were considerably heavier than the truck itself. Superman, by the way, is presumably an exception to this, since he is apparently immune to gravity--so he could probably lift a big weight from one end by "flying downward". A classic older cover drawing of Superman, back when he couldn't fly, but only "leap tall buildings," showed him lifting a car "realistically"--over his head like a weight lifter.

    A related error is an unrealistic notion of the strength of materials. You can't pick a car up by the bumper; it will just break off.

  115. A "real" Mr. Inertia in G.P.F. by simon_clarkstone · · Score: 1
    I wasn't sure how dubious the characters were until he started talking about GravityMan, The Planetaryelectricfield, StrongNuclearForceGirl and Mr.Inertia

    Readers of the web-comic G.P.F. will remember a "Mr. Intertia" who was featured in one chapter.

    (Warning! Homepage not completely office-safe in a large browser window as of 2004/02/16, due to surreal dream of one of the characters.)

    --

    C:\>spell -b slashdot_submission.txt
    Bad command or file name.
  116. Why a cape? by Gilmoure · · Score: 0

    So why a cape? Was he trying to impress Elton John or Liberachi?

    --
    I drank what? -- Socrates
  117. Specialized Telekinesis by Tassach · · Score: 1
    A whole lot of superpowers can be explained as specialized or limited forms of telekinesis. Super-strength can be explained as a telekinetic field which only extends to things the user is touching. Flight can be explained as limited telekinesis which allows the user to push his body off the ground. Powers like flame jets can also be considered as telekenetic -- the user is telekineticly manipulating air molecules to create the heat via molecular friction. Body modifications (like wings, shapeshifting, or a body of stone) are created by subconcious telekinetic manipulation of the user's own DNA and cellular mechanics

    The premise of the Wild Cards series of novels is superpowers in the real world. They use exactly this explanation for superpowers. The series postulates that the psychological limits on powers are very deeply rooted and almost impossible to overcome.

    --
    Why is it that the proponents of "one nation under God" are so eager to get rid of "liberty and justice for all"?
    1. Re:Specialized Telekinesis by wirde · · Score: 1

      The problem then becomes how to explain telekinesis. It does not jive well with physics...

      --
      in GNUin GNUin GNUin GNUin GNUin GNUin GNUin GNUSegmentation fault
  118. Adonai is Hebrew, silly by tigre · · Score: 1

    Adonai is a more literal word for "Lord", so just as we use "The LORD" when the original says YHWH, the Jews, at least from some point onward, said "Adonai" instead of "Yahweh" or whatever it originally was. Names like Yehoshua do not contain the entirety of the divine name, only an abbreviation thereof, and there are also numerous variants on the vowels which are used in them, so I don't think we can be very conclusive at all about what the pronunciation was like using your line of reasoning.

    1. Re:Adonai is Hebrew, silly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indeed. It's not at all certain which vowels were the correct ones, but Jehovah is due to Latinization (Y->J, etc.) and most of those I know who believe it to be correct are Jehovah's Witnesses...

      Anyhow, in English, we either use the tetragrammatron (YHWH) or just say the LORD (which is how it is in KJV and others, at least, to make sure that this point isn't lost, so Adonai->Lord, YHWH->LORD, and you can read the translation notes if you need more info)

  119. Re:That's nothing, this gothiloli teaches CPU desi by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 2, Interesting

    But it is manga. It's a textbook in manga form, and it's common. For example, "Introduction to the Japanese Economy."

    Information manga exploiting the illustrative function of the manga form to serve as study aids for children have existed since before the Second World War. With the extraordinary development of manga as an expressive form during the 1970s, so-called "academic manga" began to appear in general magazines mostly read by businessmen. They do not necessarily have a narrative structure, but the protagonists are shown applying themselves to the study of the origins of and various anecdotes about food, liquor and annual festivals.

    It was in this context that A Manga Introduction to the Japanese Eco nomy appeared in 1986. Unlike most manga in Japan, this work was released not in serialization but in book form from the start. Nonetheless, its three volumes sold a million copies, and it was even read by people born before the war. In this way even those who had previously shown no interest in manga and who did not belong to the so-called "manga generation" were compelled to recognize the expressive power of the manga form.

    This led to the appearance of ever more manga dealing with subject matter such as history, science, and classical literature. At the same time, manga even began to be employed as a public relations tool by governmental agencies. As a whole this new category of manga began to be referred to as "information manga," "expository manga," or "textbook manga." In some cases, they were referred to, with some measure of irony, as "educational manga for grown-ups."

    From http://www.dnp.co.jp/museum/nmp/nmp_i/articles/man ga/manga2-1.html

    --
    Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
  120. Telepathy / Mind-reading by simon_clarkstone · · Score: 1
    # Is it possible to read minds as Prof. X of the X-Men does?

    Apparent telepathy would be quite easy: telepaths could simply communicate in some way that most people cannot detect; radio would be fine, if you can figure out how to biologically generate radio waves.

    Mind-reading is more difficult. You must:

    Detect which neurons are firing. The signals are rather weak to detect using known physics. Any information stored by quantum tricks can probably be ignored. Memory-reading can be done by remotely stimulating some neurons and seeing which others fire (Neuron stimulation would allow some mind-control, or even the ability to cause heart-attacks or paralysis.) Process the information. Probably rough calculations will do mostly. Tricks such as concentrating on simple stuff such as motor output, eye direction, dominant sense, etc will also help. Emotions will appear as large-scale patterns. Despite this, a large processing lobe will be needed.
    --

    C:\>spell -b slashdot_submission.txt
    Bad command or file name.
  121. Re:Sig-Assault Weapon by Gilmoure · · Score: 1

    I have a government issued assault weapon, sold to me by a government sponsored agency. It's an M1 Garand. It has a *shudder* bayonet lug! It also only holds 8 rounds of .30-06 and fires semi-auto (each time you pull the trigger, it fires one round, ejects the spent casing a loads a new round from the fixed magazine). This weapon was one of the reasons we were able to win WWII. Most of the axis troops were armed with bolt action rifles, which took longer to fire.

    --
    I drank what? -- Socrates
  122. The moderators were clearly on crack. by mr_luc · · Score: 1

    . . . how else do you explain my post getting modded "Interesting"?!?

    1. Re:The moderators were clearly on crack. by Reziac · · Score: 1

      Easy. The moderators are Norwegian. ;)

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  123. Worst. Correction. Ever. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    (CBG voice)
    Bah! For someone touting hyphens, you should know that it is spelled Spider-Man, with the hyphen. Now please return your obessive nerd badge. You are no longer worthy to wear it.
    (/CBG voice)

    1. Re:Worst. Correction. Ever. by unitron · · Score: 1

      You should have posted while signed on for proper credit. I have a feeling that I accidently got a +1 Funny that should have gone to you.

      --

      I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.

  124. Re:Comic Book Physics by tgibbs · · Score: 1

    If I remember correctly it was Krypton's sun that exploded and destroyed the planet, or at least in one version it did. A red sun that went super nova.

    It was certainly the planet exploding in some versions. Don't know if there was ever a supernova explanation advanced.

    Does Physics provide an answer why pieces of Krypton can harm Superman yet pieces of Earth do not harm Earthlings? ;)

    Actually, in more recent storylines, it is harmful to earthlings, but not so rapidly. But Superman isn't human, so differential sensitivity to radiation hardly seems surprising. Still, the fact that he is sensitive to fragments of his own planet seems more like sympathetic magic than science. I've heard it suggested that the laws of physics were actually different in the part of the universe where Krypton is, in which case it might make more sense, but I don't know if this was ever an "official" explanation.

    lso if Krypton had neutron star matter in its core, how come Kryptonite which came from Krypton's core is not super heavy?

    Maybe it's from the shell, not the core.

    Also if Superman is unable to be harmed and bullets bounce off of his chest, how come there are no holes in his clothes? Current storyline on Superman had him arrive in a pod with no blankets, so they did not use them to create his costume. Kal-El was a test tube baby and sent to Earth in the ship inside of a pod.

    In the current explanation, Superman has a force field that protects his skin-tight suit (but not his cape). Originally, he did have blankets, and Ma Kent unravelled the indestructible threat and rewove them into his suit.

    Also how does Superman lose his strength when exposed to Kryptonite or Red Solar Radiation, if he was exposed to high gravity he still should have his muscles unless they wore out over the years of growing up in a lower gravity environment.

    I get weak when I'm sick, even though I still have all my muscles.

    lso how can Clark Kent pass physicals when they cannot even draw blood for blood tests from his arm as it is super hard?

    This sort of thing was commonly dealt with in the old stories. Short answer: trickery.

    Clark Kent is also an illegal alien having not been born on Earth, and obviously any papers saying so must have been forged or are false.

    Obviously. But Ma Kent claimed him as hers, and in rural Kansas who's to know she was lying?

    Time travel by spinning the Earth backwards, I do not think that this will work and should only cause major earthquakes and other problems.

    I don't recall the earth spinning backwards, I recall Superman flying around the earth. The "faster than light" part makes a certain amount of sense under relativity (once you get past the impossibility of going faster than light in the first place).

    Also they had Superman in space without the need for air. How is this possible? Just how long can he hold his breath and avoid the effects of decompression?

    Whether Superman really needs to breathe seems to have varied over the years. With superstrong integument, explosive decompression is hardly a problem

    With muscles that powerful, he should weigh a ton or more.

    Strength is not necessarily related to weight

    People would be able to notice this as he walks on weak surfaces like wood floors.

    We don't actually know what he weighs, but since he is immune to gravity, this will hardly be a problem.

    Also how is it possible to disguise yourself by combing out that s-curl, putting on glasses, and changing clothes? Someone with the intellect that Lex Luthor claims to have should be able to see through that transparent disguise, but apparently not.

    The original notion was that Clark is such a good actor, that nobody even thinks to make the connection. Although I seem to recall a revisionist explanation in which Superman vibrates his face really fast so that nobody ever sees him clearly. Although it seems like a guy whose face was always a blur would spook people out...

  125. Eye Lasers by Chrontius · · Score: 1

    Actually, one theory that would fit better with Cyclops' pyrotechnics is that the eye-beam is really a particle beam - lasers wouldn't have nearly as much airglow in their beam path, and it would be far more orderly.

  126. Cuting very slowly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Perhaps the material - and his hair - are similar to the personal shields from Dune, or the nightsheep wool in LE Modesitt's Legacies series... They can stop a high velocity attack, whether it's a bullet or a knife, but if you cut very very slowly, they give.

  127. Question for the experts by sloptaco · · Score: 1
    Okay, now that I'm in the right crowd. I've often wondered but been too lazy to open a dictionary to find out for myself: Is the word 'schmegma' of Yiddish derivation?

    --sloppy

  128. Other Questions by yerfatma · · Score: 2, Funny
    There has to be more than just Superman. He's boring (except for that Red Son trade paperback-- that was solid).
    • Is Captain America's undentable, energy-absorbing shield possible (I think it's made of vibranium, unless that's the one the Black Panther gives him when he's just The Captain and is only kinda unbreakable)?
    • How far can Reed Richards, Plastic Man, et al strech before they would run out of material?
    • What's the average tumor size of a Marvel Hero from the '60s?
    • Isn't it more likely Max Cassidy (aka Electro) would have been killed than turned into a master of electricity (speaking of which, do you think the actor who played a similar role in Misfits of Science still calls Courtney Cox looking for jobs)?
    As for stand-up comedians on the topic, I think Dave Chapelle's line about Wonder Woman's trusth lasso ("Damn you got some big titties!") is the best recent stuff.
    1. Re:Other Questions by falsification · · Score: 1
      undentable

      The only physical problem I see with material that is "undentable" would be what happens when an undentable object meets an irresistable force. As for vibranium, yeah, no problem. Y'know the US military is using that in the next generation of tank shells. Cap's shield is made out of a combination of vibranium and adamantium, and as was said in Fantastic Four #546, it is a totally unique creation of Galactus and can never be duplicated, not even by Steven Hawking.

      How far can Reed Richards, Plastic Man, et al strech before they would run out of material?

      Not sure, but I would say about 42.

    2. Re:Other Questions by yerfatma · · Score: 1

      Sucker. I posted all of that to trap other geeks. Sincerely, Paste Pot Pete

    3. Re:Other Questions by falsification · · Score: 1

      Sucker on you. I made that shit up.

    4. Re:Other Questions by yerfatma · · Score: 1

      Weird. That's not how this went down in the parallel universe I tested it out in.

  129. Flash could so run on water by Chuk · · Score: 1

    Turns out an average sized adult human male could run on water as long as they run about sixty miles per hour.

    --
    chuk
    1. Re:Flash could so run on water by falsification · · Score: 1

      Yeah right. Prove it.

    2. Re:Flash could so run on water by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Think about it, if those lizards can run across water, but fall in when they stop, why couldn't people do the same thing provided they could run fast enough...

  130. YOU SAID "Jehova"!!!!! by free_badger · · Score: 2, Funny

    Stone 'im!!! ... Are there any women here?

  131. Re:Hulk and Star Trek II by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Kahn also has to PULL Checkov DOWN to the ground again!

  132. True, true. by David+M.+Sweeney · · Score: 2, Funny
    If you were Superman, you would totally pick a fight with some big dude, and then punch him in the face. You know you would.

    Two men are drinking in a bar at the top of the Empire State Building. One turns to the other and says: "You know, last week I discovered that if you jump from the top of this building, by the time you fall to the 10th floor, the winds around the building are so strong that they carry you around the building and back into the window."

    The Bartender just shakes his head in disapproval while wiping the bar.

    The 2nd Man says: "What, are you a nut? There is no way in hell that could happen."

    1st Man: "No, it's true, let me prove it to you." So he gets up from the bar, jumps over the balcony, and careens toward the street below. When he passes the 10th floor, the high wind whips him around the building and back into the 10th floor window and he takes the elevator back up to the bar.

    The 2nd Man tells him: "You know, I saw that with my own eyes, but that must have been a one time fluke."

    1st Man: "No, I'll prove it again!" and again he jumps and hurtles toward the street where the 10th floor wind gently carries him around the building and into the window. Once upstairs he urges his fellow drinker to try it.

    2nd Man: "Well, what the hell, it works for you, I'll try it." He jumps over the balcony, plunges downward, passes the 11th, 10th, 9th, 8th floors ... and hits the sidewalk with a splat.

    Back upstairs the Bartender turns to the other drinker: "You know, Superman, you're a real asshole when you're drunk."

  133. wrap-up by falsification · · Score: 3, Interesting
    The thread is wrapping up. Unfortunately, a whole bunch of posters found it necessary to make off-topic comments. If you want to see lots of discussions of Manga, animated television shows, movies, and other boring stuff, read the whole thread.

    The topic is supposed to be comic books and physics. Comic books are a much-maligned, yet fascinating form of art. The conjunction of art and science should have made for a fascinating thread, but alas, it didn't.

    Classic physics nonsense from the comic books includes:

    • Superman flies faster than a speeding bullet but does not make a sonic boom.
    • Iron Man flies thanks to his boot jets, but does not have incredibly strong stomach muscles.
    • Lots of problems where the energy for Superman style mentally guided flight, force fields, and the like. It's not enough to say "manipulation of gravitons." What is the mechanism for manipulating gravitons? Where does the energy come from to power the mechanism? How exactly does the superhero control the mechanism?
    • Many powers come from "another dimension." I'd like to visit one of those. Oh. I guess that's impossible. Because they don't exist.
    • Extra-dimensional travel seems ridiculous. There are no "parallel Earths."
    • Time travel, like the second Flash (Barry Gordon). Teleportation, like Nightcrawler. Bleargh. Nuff said.
    • How does Batman stay young after all those decades of crimefighting?
    • Shrinking or growing, like Hank Pym. Where does the mass go?
    • The whole telepathic communication with other beings, whether with humans or aniamls, makes no sense. Aquaman is silly. Another problem is the "danger sense" of Spider-Man.
    • Any really strong character needs to have body armor or tough skin, or he is going to get seriously hurt. Take Sub-Mariner. He can punch holes in steel, but he cuts easily. He should have bled to death by now.
    • Biological processes are never really explained. Just how does Wolverine's "fast healing" work? They never explain.
    The best superhero characters are those that are most plausible. These include Batman, Iron Man, and the relatively low powered characters. It shouldn't be surprising that these are the characters with the most developed and most interesting back stories.

    A highly powered character like Superman can be made into a great character by weaving in a tragic flaw or two. Superman not only has to watch out for Kryptonite, he never has a satisfying love life that can last. (Yeah, the physics of him having sex. Har har.) Kal-El (Superman) is a brokenhearted man. He is the last of his race. He wants to help mankind, and will do whatever he can with his superpowers to be of service. But in the end, he is lonely, isolated. In some ways Kal-El is like a religious figure.

    The other route is to make a character based on principles that are far beyond what modern physics can suggest. The prototype is Silver Surfer. While Silver Surfer is a great character, the reader can never really relate to a totally alien being like him.

    The best route is a superhero without superpowers, or very few superpowers. Gadgets, martial arts, and wits fill the gaps. That's how to make a great superhero character.

  134. What is the signal of thought? by benwaggoner · · Score: 1

    So what's the signal of thought? What symbols would tell me what you're thinking?

    1. Re:What is the signal of thought? by dustmite · · Score: 1
      Could be something we all already have some grasp of: language, of course. So if I think, "Hmm, I'd love a Coke right now", the 'brain signal decoder' would break that down into some logical structure/construction representing what I am thinking, e.g. "first-person-singular (Potential) (Verb: strongly-desires) (Object: Drink: Coke) (When: Right now)", this is then packed and sent over the transmission medium, unpacked and run through the English-encoding system (or whatever language I am), and converted to in-memory ASCII representation "I would love a Coke right now". From the ASCII it is trivial to convert to rasterised text (if for the eye), or use text-to-speech if for the ear. The only part we're not yet capable of doing, amongst all that, is the actual part where you send the final rasterised image (or generated sound wave) to the eye or ear respectively, and the first step where we 'read' and interpret the orginal brain signal.

      But we know these things are possible, of course, because there is already machinery in our brain to do these things, for example I already have a "module" of sorts in my brain that can convert the thought "Hmm, I'd love a Coke right now" to either (typed) text or (spoken) speech. All we need to do is (a) duplicate the functionality of that machinery, and (b) interface it with existing "hardware" (human bodies) and with the network communications infrastructure.

    2. Re:What is the signal of thought? by benwaggoner · · Score: 1

      And in what form is the speech coded in the brain? It isn't like there is one neuron per letter or sound or something. Different parts of the brain are responsible for different parts of speech.

      Also, at best you'd then have a way to find out what someone is saying without listening to them. But how about when someone isn't talking? Even though your perception of consciousness may seem verbal, that doesn't mean that there is anything like a verbal "signal" that could be extracted.

      Even if we had a moment by moment reading of the status of every neuron in your brain, knowing what you're thinking is likely impossible.

      The brain is kind of like macroeconomics. We know a lot about the high level behavior, and the very low level behavior, but how one controls the other is only very vaguely understood.

    3. Re:What is the signal of thought? by dustmite · · Score: 1

      Even though your perception of consciousness may seem verbal, that doesn't mean that there is anything like a verbal "signal" that could be extracted.

      But my point is the brain does this all the time (i.e. convert some "verbal-seeming thoughts") to an EXACTLY CORRESPONDING, REAL verbal stream, even, if you like, as you think those very thoughts. That is 'simply' some neurological and mechanical piece of "machinery" that does that, and we do it all the time - clearly those "verbal-seeming thoughts" are not SO fuzzy as to be "un-verbalizable" - in fact, they're apparently already in a form that is so easy to convert to a real spoken verbal stream, that we do it all the time, in "real-time", with no perceptible latency. Those "verbal-seeming thoughts" are, to at least ONE system in the brain (speech-production), very accessible and decode-able. All we need do is duplicate the underlying functionality of that system. And instead of translating that info to real speech (in our brain's case by making the mouth/tongue/lung etc muscles move in a certain way), just translate that info into some other form of "speech-ready" output.

      If it were as difficult and vague as fuzzy as you think it is, then our brains themselves would not be able to produce real spoken speech so easily.

      We don't need to "read every neuron in the brain" to do it. If that were the case, then the speech-production system in our brain would ALSO be required to do so, and it seems highly improbable that it does so. In any case, it's all just machinery - so even if it is very complex, it's still duplicate-able by technology.

      The "conscious" part of our brain appears to already work with a thought structure that is closely tied to verbal structures (this "verbal-seeming" is not just "seeming", it can only "seem" that way if it *is* that way - these thoughts are not only in my language, but are well-structured according to the very precise grammatical rules of my language! Of course there is no doubt some "layer" of processing beneath that, some or other more "raw" mode of intelligent neural processing, that we are not consciously aware of - but as far as telepathy goes, is that interesting anyway? I only want to know the "results", i.e. the 'verbal-seeming' stream, the bit where the girl walking past thinks "that guy is cute" or is thinking "i hate my life" or whatever.

      Of course there are those thought processes that go on all the time that we are not even aware of ourselves (e.g. other programmers may recognize the scenario of answers to their programming problems just "popping into their head" at unexpected/strange times - this is an example of the brain working on a problem "in the background" without our conscious realisation of it happening. If we learn, technologically, how to 'interface' with and understand our brain's neurological processes, there is no reason why we can't be privy to all of it's various processes, even though it is extremely complex. Because even though it is extremely complex, there is already proof that it is technologically possible - that proof is us ourselves, and the fact that we can transfer the product of our intellectual puzzle-solving endeavours (math, physics, programming, whatever) to external form (written, spoken, typed etc) - the 'answers'/'products' of our thought processes do not remain trapped within us and unable to get out.

      Difficult, yes, impossible, no. The fact that we don't know how doesn't mean it is impossible.

      "knowing what you're thinking is likely impossible"

      But you know exactly what I'm thinking right now, because I'm typing it out, word for word exactly as each word appears in my mind ...

    4. Re:What is the signal of thought? by benwaggoner · · Score: 1

      The best you could hope for, and it's a distant hope, is that when we're subvocalizing, the neural activity that controls the throat is active, but suppressed by some other system. And then there is some way to measure that activity.

      When someone is speaking, measuring nerve impulses could happen, but by definition those nerves would be suppressed when subvocalizing.

      To flip it around, let's look at the visual system, about which we know much more. We can kind of track how some very basic bit-map like activity happens in the back of the brain. But the closer it becomes something like "seeing" the more complicated and unknown everything gets. There aren't neurons for symbols - consciousness seems to be an emergent property of the system. Even if you knew the complete state of the system, you likely wouldn't know what it "meant."

      So, pretty much, the more interesting the thing you would want to learn by this mechanism, the less likely it's going to be.

      I could imagine that some combination of fortunate neuroanatomy and future science could make reading sub-vocalization possible, maybe.

      As for your example, I have no real idea what you're thinking. I know what you type, and I can make a mental model of why I think you're doing it. But I'm probably wrong. For example, I really don't have any idea why you decided this conversation is worth having, just like you don't know why I'm spending time with it either. In fact, NEITHER of us really has any idea of our OWN motivations. We make guesses, but I think they're largely post-facto, and unprovable hypotheses.

  135. Seinfeld's (?) observation by JimmytheGeek · · Score: 1

    On the 1950's t.v. show, a bad guy in a bad suit would empty a revolver at Superman, who would puff out his chest and let the bullets ricochet off his body. Then the bad guy would hurl his empty gun at Superman, who would then duck.

    Why duck? (Why not a chicken?)

  136. get a life by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who cares? get outside, get a life, and get laid!

  137. it was explained by GnarlyNome · · Score: 1

    Mrs Kent used Clarks X-ray vision to cut the thread after she unraveled the blankets the infant was wrapped in

    --
    Diplomacy is the art of saying "Nice doggie" until you can find a rock. Will Rogers
  138. Larry Niven Wrote by GnarlyNome · · Score: 1

    A very Funny essay titled
    "Man of Steel Woman of Kleenex"
    Puberty was rough for him

    --
    Diplomacy is the art of saying "Nice doggie" until you can find a rock. Will Rogers
  139. Re: YHWH by A55M0NKEY · · Score: 1
    YHWH = YeeHawh

    And, as in the movie Warlock, to undo creation, pronounce it back to front! The sound that will unravel the universe is: "Hee Haw!"

    --

    Eat at Joe's.

  140. The other problem I seem to find about Kryptonite by Orion+Blastar · · Score: 1

    is just how much of it exists in the Universe and how come there is such an abundant supply of it when pieces were spread all over the universe and it was just one planet? Also how come so much of it ended up going towards Earth? I recall one story had a lot of it in the solar system asteroid belt and Superman had to use a lead lined ship to get past it. Apparenlty he needed blue Krytonite to use on Bizzaro or as a cure for red Krytonite or some other storyline.

    --
    Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
  141. Spinning Earth backwards by Orion+Blastar · · Score: 1

    What I saw was him flying around Earth until the Earth stopped spinning and then started to spin backwards. Then he flew the other way and stopped it again and started it spinning the right way. From this I assumed that he caused the Earth to spin backwards.

    I admit it could be an effect of time travel relative to Superman and he had to change directions to get back in synch with the time stream and match vibrations or whatever with the Earth.

    He should have contacted Dr. Who and bummed a ride on his TARDIS, it would have been safer. :)

    --
    Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
  142. Re:Comic Book Physics by Orion+Blastar · · Score: 1

    Clark Kent is also an illegal alien having not been born on Earth, and obviously any papers saying so must have been forged or are false. So Clark Kent aka Superman is breaking Civil Law by claiming to be a US Citizen. To deal with this, use your own statement above from above: Kal-El was a test tube baby and sent to Earth in the ship inside of a pod. I believe that the official DC Comics line (from an issue of Wizard magazine long ago) is that Superman was still GESTATING while inside the pod (it would take quite a while for the pod to get to earth right?), and that he was officially "birthed" when the pod opened on American soil. So they can still say he's an all-american superhero (blah, blah, blah). If I recall he was found as an infant, not a newborn, so he was born in space, not US soil. On a couple of your other points, Superman's strength and all his other powers are supposed to be due to his cells absorbing our sun's yellow solar radiation, and not I believe due to any sort of gravity effect. Did you read the article I quoted? The professor said that Superman's strength came from Krypton having heavy gravity and that Krypton must have had nuetron star matter in its core. This of course goes against the DC explination that yellow solar radiation gives Superman his powers. Of course I'd side with DC as Superman loses his powers when exposed to red solar radiation.

    --
    Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
  143. Re:Comic Book Physics by TheLoneDanger · · Score: 1

    If I recall he was found as an infant, not a newborn, so he was born in space, not US soil.

    The idea is that he wasn't conscious before the pod opened. He had never been outside of the gestation pod. They simply stuck his gestation pod into the escape pod (or mini-ship or whatever) and so even though he was pretty big by the time he got out (it is quite a distance from Krypton to Earth after all), he wasn't officially "birthed" until the pod opened on US soil. As I said, that's the DC comics line. It was said in response to a letter in Wizard saying that Clark Kent couldn't run for President because he wasn't born in the US. DC said he was.

    Did you read the article I quoted?

    Yes I did (it was pretty short), I believe the professor is wrong. The DC comics line has been that it's Superman guzzling yellow solar radiation. Even muscles trained in high gravity wouldn't allow someone to have nearly as much strength (or any of his other powers) as Supes has. Plus there used to be other forms of Kryptonite, some of which would strip him only of his powers, which reduced him to normal human strength, which wouldn't be possible if any of his extra strength was due to high grav.

    --

    "But I trust in the people's capacity for reflection, rage and rebellion." -Oscar Olivera
  144. Re: Kosciusko, MS, USA by Abreu · · Score: 1

    Its just that "Mississippi" didnt fit, because of the sig character limit. ...And if I had put "Kosciusko USA" I would have gotten even more replies to my sig than I already have.

    --
    No sig for the moment.