Things you've always wondered about in sci-fi movies

Galactican

Sr Member
Can't argue that. The one I drove was a customer's car and there were no freeways nearby, so I did the best I could. Fastest I got it going was 63 mph on an empty surface street, and if I remember correctly it took nearly half a mile to get it there. So, neither fast nor quick, not particularly comfortable, and a pain-in-the-backside to get into and out of. Oh, yeah, that's the car I want for my daily driver!
View attachment 1565719
That was most likely the built-in safety guard on the standard model after they saw the movie. Every engine was tuned so that it would never ever come near the 88. That way DeLorean made sure that you would never travel through time by accident, which would have caused lots and lots of insurance cases. Well, there is a reason why the flux capacitors never got available on the regular model, too. ;)
 

Riceball

Master Member
Aren't Humvees "zero to sixty in five miles"?

The limits put on new cars for gas mileage and safety are helping to make cars more throwaway. The engine that shuts off during every stop, compartments designed to collapse on impact, lighter, less robust materials for the inner workings. Twnety years from now, prolly far lower percentage of twenty year-old cars on the road than today.
Cars collapse on impact because of crumple zones, it's a safety feature. Research and testing have shown that these crumple zones absorb more energy during impacts than the rigid body structures of old. Basically, you sacrifice the car for the safety of the people inside. It's not of much use to have a car that's nearly perfectly intact after an accident if the passengers are severely injured or killed. This is why you see race cars fly into a million pieces while the driver walks away without a scratch after a crash, different principle but the idea is the same, it's taking the energy of the crash and diverting it to somewhere else besides the people inside.
 

Galactican

Sr Member
There are photos out there of Delorians where the owner has done something to try and get more performance out of the engine, only to have the engine catch fire, and melt down! o_O
Well that happened to Doc's car, too. However, with his the flames and flashes appeared in front of the car and not within. I guess this sets a "Doc" apart from an ordinary tuner. ;)
 

The Goon

Well-Known Member
Meanwhile...

any other position gets preserved in the transporter. Especially if you are reaching out to save someone or in an at-the-ready combat pose
This brings a question to mind. Let's say you're "reaching out to save someone" just as the engineer operating the transporter energizes the damn thing while your outstretched arm is outside of the "beam". Does that body part get severed and remain behind, or does the transporter account for that because you've presumably been transported before, it has your biological records stored in it's memory, and it either expands the transport beam to include your outstretched arm or adds more "energy" to replicate your arm from available records even though your original hand and arm are laying somewhere on Omicron Persei 8?
Never wondered about the real capabilities of the Delorean. If Doc pimped out the rest of the car, why not also the engine? Or... is it shown with the original engine in the movies?
I could be wrong 'cause it's been a while since I've watched any of the movies, but I don't think they ever showed the DeLorean's engine. In-universe, Doc Brown knew the vehicle he chose needed to reach 88 MPH in order to trigger the time jump, so it's assumed he would either choose a vehicle that could reach that speed, or have one modified for that purpose. Somehow I doubt he'd do that work himself, but it wasn't in the movie so we'll never really know.
 

The Goon

Well-Known Member
Aren't Humvees "zero to sixty in five miles"?

The limits put on new cars for gas mileage and safety are helping to make cars more throwaway. The engine that shuts off during every stop...
Does anyone else remember being told that cars use more gas to start the engine than they use to keep the engine idling at traffic stops? What happened? And don't give me any of that "Engines are far more fuel efficient these days" crap, 'cause if that was the case they'd just keep running. Personally I'm convinced that all of the car manufacturers these days are full of that stuff you spread to keep your flowers, grass, and gardens growing.
 

Riceball

Master Member
This brings a question to mind. Let's say you're "reaching out to save someone" just as the engineer operating the transporter energizes the damn thing while your outstretched arm is outside of the "beam". Does that body part get severed and remain behind, or does the transporter account for that because you've presumably been transported before, it has your biological records stored in it's memory, and it either expands the transport beam to include your outstretched arm or adds more "energy" to replicate your arm from available records even though your original hand and arm are laying somewhere on Omicron Persei 8?
Which brings up another question. We all know that according to Trek lore/canon the transporter also filters out diseases, poison, and pathogens based on the data from the last time you were transported. What happens if you beamed down from your ship to a Starbase or Federation planet and got treated for something or got vaccinated, will the transported reverse all of that since they weren't present when you last used the transporter or can they be programmed to ignore helpful/deliberate changes?
 

Riceball

Master Member
Does anyone else remember being told that cars use more gas to start the engine than they use to keep the engine idling at traffic stops? What happened? And don't give me any of that "Engines are far more fuel efficient these days" crap, 'cause if that was the case they'd just keep running. Personally I'm convinced that all of the car manufacturers these days are full of that stuff you spread to keep your flowers, grass, and gardens growing.
This feature is normally found in higher performance engines (V6s and V8s) and from what I understand, it's about controlling emissions as much as fuel efficiency.
 

JPH

Sr Member
Cars collapse on impact because of crumple zones, it's a safety feature. Research and testing have shown that these crumple zones absorb more energy during impacts than the rigid body structures of old. Basically, you sacrifice the car for the safety of the people inside. It's not of much use to have a car that's nearly perfectly intact after an accident if the passengers are severely injured or killed. This is why you see race cars fly into a million pieces while the driver walks away without a scratch after a crash, different principle but the idea is the same, it's taking the energy of the crash and diverting it to somewhere else besides the people inside.
Oh yah, I totally get the idea. An inelastic vs elastic collision, coefficients of restitution, vehicle takes the hit for you, etc..

but I can't help but think the manufacturers snort, shake their heads and act upset when they *KNOW* it increases the probability of you having to buy a NEW car as well.

I remember hearing "the frame is bent," being an excuse to scrap a car. I don't hear that anymore
 

JPH

Sr Member
This brings a question to mind. Let's say you're "reaching out to save someone" just as the engineer operating the transporter energizes the damn thing while your outstretched arm is outside of the "beam". Does that body part get severed and remain behind, or does the transporter account for that because you've presumably been transported before, it has your biological records stored in it's memory, and it either expands the transport beam to include your outstretched arm or adds more "energy" to replicate your arm from available records even though your original hand and arm are laying somewhere on Omicron Persei 8?

I could be wrong 'cause it's been a while since I've watched any of the movies, but I don't think they ever showed the DeLorean's engine. In-universe, Doc Brown knew the vehicle he chose needed to reach 88 MPH in order to trigger the time jump, so it's assumed he would either choose a vehicle that could reach that speed, or have one modified for that purpose. Somehow I doubt he'd do that work himself, but it wasn't in the movie so we'll never really know.

What about the NOSE the outstretched hand was picking? How it knose where to stop replicating?

The amount of energy to replicate an arm is just GINORMOUS, and then why not just transport people removing disease, cancers, heart blockage, replace lost limbs...the SKY IS THE LIMIT!!!
 

The Goon

Well-Known Member
Which brings up another question. We all know that according to Trek lore/canon the transporter also filters out diseases, poison, and pathogens based on the data from the last time you were transported. What happens if you beamed down from your ship to a Starbase or Federation planet and got treated for something or got vaccinated, will the transported reverse all of that since they weren't present when you last used the transporter or can they be programmed to ignore helpful/deliberate changes?
Computers of the future won't be anything like these slowly-lumbering-through-every-task junkpiles we use today. No, in the future medical information for each and every living being throughout the entire universe will be automatically updated so that even transporters will know more about our biology than we do. Now that I think about it, if I'm reincarnated into that future I'm going to miss driving. And cars. Unless Star Wars got it more "right" and we'll have landspeeders. Oh, wait, that was in the distant past. And we don't have landspeeders now, so, apparently, they weren't all they were cracked up to be. What was I saying? :unsure:
 

bwayne64

Sr Member
Speaking of transporters, what about the idea that your actual molecules are not transported. But that you are mapped at the molecular level and you are basically cloned at the destination. Your original body is disintegrated. So for a split second there are two of you ? Or does it have to disintegrate you, to map you. And I know Star Trek is mostly agnostic and/or atheistic. But what about your soul, how do they map that ? Not to start a religious debate. But Star Trek does talk about the Katra of Spock. So it's in there in a way. Anyhoo, can your wife collect on your life insurance, when ever you transport, ; )
 
Last edited:

Cephus

Sr Member
Speaking of transporters, what about the idea that your actual molecules are not transported. But that you are mapped at the molecular level and you are basically cloned at the destination. Your original body is disintegrated. So for a split second there are two of you ? Or does it have to disintegrate you, to map you. And I know Star Trek is mostly agnostic and/or atheistic. But what about your soul, how do they map that ? Not to start a religious debate. But Star Trek does talk about the Katra of Spock. So it's in there in a way. Anyhoo, can your wife collect on your life insurance, when ever you transport, ; )

Of course not. You are constantly replacing your atoms regardless. Who you are today is not who you were a few years ago. You're a completely new person all the time. Therefore, the whole question about transporters is meaningless. It's not what you're made of that counts. It's who you are inside.
 

bwayne64

Sr Member
Of course not. You are constantly replacing your atoms regardless. Who you are today is not who you were a few years ago. You're a completely new person all the time. Therefore, the whole question about transporters is meaningless. It's not what you're made of that counts. It's who you are inside.
The difference is one takes place over years, the other one seconds, ; )
 

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. Your new thread title is very short, and likely is unhelpful.
  2. Your reply is very short and likely does not add anything to the thread.
  3. Your reply is very long and likely does not add anything to the thread.
  4. It is very likely that it does not need any further discussion and thus bumping it serves no purpose.
  5. Your message is mostly quotes or spoilers.
  6. Your reply has occurred very quickly after a previous reply and likely does not add anything to the thread.
  7. This thread is locked.
Top