Cass Stephen - Hollyweird science: from quantum quirks to the multiverse
Here you can read online Cass Stephen - Hollyweird science: from quantum quirks to the multiverse full text of the book (entire story) in english for free. Download pdf and epub, get meaning, cover and reviews about this ebook. City: Cham;Los Angeles;Calif, year: 2015, publisher: Springer International Publishing, genre: Art. Description of the work, (preface) as well as reviews are available. Best literature library LitArk.com created for fans of good reading and offers a wide selection of genres:
Romance novel
Science fiction
Adventure
Detective
Science
History
Home and family
Prose
Art
Politics
Computer
Non-fiction
Religion
Business
Children
Humor
Choose a favorite category and find really read worthwhile books. Enjoy immersion in the world of imagination, feel the emotions of the characters or learn something new for yourself, make an fascinating discovery.
- Book:Hollyweird science: from quantum quirks to the multiverse
- Author:
- Publisher:Springer International Publishing
- Genre:
- Year:2015
- City:Cham;Los Angeles;Calif
- Rating:5 / 5
- Favourites:Add to favourites
- Your mark:
Hollyweird science: from quantum quirks to the multiverse: summary, description and annotation
We offer to read an annotation, description, summary or preface (depends on what the author of the book "Hollyweird science: from quantum quirks to the multiverse" wrote himself). If you haven't found the necessary information about the book — write in the comments, we will try to find it.
1. Introduction -- 2. The path to Nerdvana -- 3. Hollywood scientists : reel and imaginary -- 4. Matter matters -- 5. Pure energy -- 6. Radiation : an all-time glow -- 7. A quantum of weirdness -- 8. My god, its full of stars : the universe -- 9. Shortcuts through time and space -- 10. Moving in stereo : parallel universes -- 11. Braver new worlds -- 12. Afterword.;Lighthearted, quirky, and upbeat, this book explores the portrayal of science and technology on both the big and little screen -- and how Hollywood is actually doing a better job of getting it right than ever before. Grounded in the real-word, and often cutting-edge, science and technology that inspires fictional science, the authors survey Hollywood depictions of topics such as quantum mechanics, parallel universes, and alien worlds. Including material from interviews with over two dozen writers, producers, and directors of acclaimed science-themed productions -- as well as scientists, science fiction authors, and science advisors -- Hollyweird Science examines screen science fiction from the sometimes-conflicting vantage points of storytellers, researchers, and viewers. Including a foreword by Eureka co-creator and executive producer Jaime Paglia, and an afterword by astronomer and science fiction author Michael Brotherton, Ph. D., this book is accessible to all readers from the layperson to the armchair expert to the professional scientist, and will delight all of them equally.
Cass Stephen: author's other books
Who wrote Hollyweird science: from quantum quirks to the multiverse? Find out the surname, the name of the author of the book and a list of all author's works by series.
Kevin R. Grazier
Deepack Chopra
Dodson
John Gribbin
Brian Cox
Hollyweird science: from quantum quirks to the multiverse — read online for free the complete book (whole text) full work
Below is the text of the book, divided by pages. System saving the place of the last page read, allows you to conveniently read the book "Hollyweird science: from quantum quirks to the multiverse" online for free, without having to search again every time where you left off. Put a bookmark, and you can go to the page where you finished reading at any time.
Light
Font size:
↓
↑
Reset
Interval:
↓
↑
Bookmark:
Make
Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015
Kevin R. Grazier and Stephen Cass Hollyweird Science Science and Fiction 10.1007/978-3-319-15072-7_11. Introduction
Kevin R. Grazier 1
(1)
Sylmar, California, USA
(2)
Boston, Massachusetts, USA
Kevin R. Grazier (Corresponding author)
Email:
Stephen Cass
Email:
Man is unique not because he does science, and he is unique not because he does art, but because science and art equally are expressions of his marvelous plasticity of mind.
Jacob Bronowski, Scientist/Science Historian
Science arose from poetry when times change the two can meet again on a higher level as friends.
Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, Writer/Statesman
Science delivers Wow! moments like nothing else on screen. For viewers, science not only grounds a story in the natural world, it adds a special thrill that comes from the possible, the plausible, the believable, and the what if? While magic can be spectacular, no matter how hard we wish, there are no magic swords, magic wands, or cloaks of invisibility. On the other hand, a crashed spacecraft looming out of the mists of an alien planet, a patient snatched from the jaws of death by a risky medical breakthrough, or a smug murderer betrayed by a few molecules left at a crime scenewhy not? Screen magic does exist, and science can be one of its key spell casters.
Screenplays that rely heavily upon science must, therefore, be written with care, or the result may not be an Oh, wow! moment, but rather its arch nemesis, the Oh, please! moment. An Oh, please moment happens when events unfold on screen that are so at odds with how the real world works, or how the viewer perceives the world works, that they exceed the limits of artistic license. The viewers willing suspension of disbelief is, itself, suspended. When an Oh, please moment occurs, viewers are forcibly expelled from the screenwriters creative vision and emotionally cast adrift. No longer immersed in the narrative on screen, viewers become painfully aware that they are watching a cast of actors stomping around on sets where the paint is barely dry, and the craft services table just out of shot.
In recent years the accuracy of the science portrayed in productions for both big and small screens has come under increasingly close scrutiny. There are no shortage of scientists, authors, science writers, bloggers, popular culture reporters, and even Monday Morning Quarterbacks, who have written about scientific accuracy (or, typically, its lack) in Hollywood productions. Sometimes the quarterbacking starts even before the final reel, as happened when astronomer Neil deGrasse Tyson criticized 2013s Gravity (Fig. .
The National Academy of Sciences has even gotten into the science accuracy fray. Chartered by Congress in 1863 under an Act signed by Abraham Lincoln, the National Academy of Sciences mission is to provide scientific advice to the nation. Located on the campus of UCLA, the National Academys Science & Entertainment Exchange provides scientific consultation to the entertainment industry professionals with highly-trained scientists and engineers. The goal of the exchange is to use the vehicle of popular entertainment media to deliver sometimes subtle, but nevertheless powerful, messages about science.
Fig. 1.1
Mission specialist Dr. Ryan Stone ( Sandra Bullock ) installs instrumentation to the Hubble Space Telescope in Gravity ( 2013 ). (Copyright Warner Brothers Pictures. Image credit: MovieStillsDB.com)
Still the issue of scientific accuracy in Hollywood productions is a very complex one, and not every scientific inaccuracy is an Oh, please! moment. Not only is the definition of what constitutes an Oh please! highly subjective, fictional shows and movies are not intended to be documentaries. Simply hiring a science consultant on the production is no guarantee of perfect scientific accuracy: one of the operational principles of the Science and Entertainment Exchange is that, in a conflict between story and science, story wins every time. The Exchange even counsels new science consultants that, We are not the science police.
In fact, a wonderful irony is that while many have lamented the inaccuracies of the science in Hollywood science fiction, it is a genre defined, in part, by the inclusion of at least one key science inaccuracyoften many more in the case of TV and film science fiction. Nearly all science fiction stories rely upon at least one discovery or invention that doesnt exist in the annals of todays knowledge. If this isnt the case, then the story at hand isnt science fiction, its just a science-themed thriller, drama, comedy, et cetera.
So when scientists complain about how they and their fields of study have been portrayed by Hollywood, such complaints should be tempered with an understanding of story goals and constraints, as well as several different classes of common psychological biases that all people tend to share. Most scientists are not storytellers. Accomplished storytellers understand how to take a viewer into a fictional world and provide both plot and characters that viewers care enough about to watch for an hour or twomuch longer in the case of serialized stories.
Conversely, good storytellers also know what will cause viewers to lose interest. It is often the case that screenwriters are being neither thoughtless nor stupid when they take shortcuts around fundamental truths depicting aspects of real world sciencefor example, the reality that scientific advances occur on the back of vast amounts of mind-numbingly detailed and tedious labor. Just as dramatic crime series rarely include scenes of detectives carefully filling out the mounds of paperwork essential to a successful prosecution, or arguing with their IT department over a broken printer, so, too, the practice of science must be compressed and condensedespecially on television where the writer for an hour-long drama has, in actuality, a mere 42 minutes to tell a complete storyone with a beginning, a middle, and an endand which includes five act breaks for commercials. Just as the drama of human relationships is often heightened and accelerated, so too are scientific phenomena or the rate of technological processes often exaggerated. (If you can accept that, say, two ex-lovers can resolve major emotional conflicts over the space of a few hours or days while being shot at by international terrorists, then give a break to the screenwriter who has a doctor administer a drug that works in 20 minutes of screen time, rather than in 20 hours.)
In this book, we will examine the science that appears in Hollywood productions from both the scientists and the storytellers points of view (we will also make the occasional foray into UK productions like Doctor Who , The Hitch-Hikers Guide to the Galaxy , the under-appreciated Space:1999 , and the vastly under-appreciated Blakes 7 ). One of us (KRG) has spent a career as a professional scientist and science consultant; the other (SAC) has spent a career observing scientists and engineers, and reporting on their advances to non-specialists.
It has been said that, It takes a library to write a book. In addition to our research, weve also spent nearly 24 hours interviewing numerous writers, producers, directors, and top science advisorsthe people who create the shows you love. Weve also interviewed psychologists and pop media experts. One of the most enjoyable aspects of creating this book has been when our research has revealed that the biases weve brought into the project were erroneous, and weve been led into other fascinating, and often counterintuitive, directions. One delightful surprise that weve encountered is that observations we make as consumers of TV and film today, observations we think are unique to the high-tech VFX-laden productions of the twenty first century, often can be found in critiques of film from the early twentieth century. Sometimes everything new is old.
Light
Font size:
↓
↑
Reset
Interval:
↓
↑
Bookmark:
Make
Similar books «Hollyweird science: from quantum quirks to the multiverse»
Look at similar books to Hollyweird science: from quantum quirks to the multiverse. We have selected literature similar in name and meaning in the hope of providing readers with more options to find new, interesting, not yet read works.
Kevin R. Grazier
Deepack Chopra
Dodson
John Gribbin
Brian Cox
Reviews about «Hollyweird science: from quantum quirks to the multiverse»
Discussion, reviews of the book Hollyweird science: from quantum quirks to the multiverse and just readers' own opinions. Leave your comments, write what you think about the work, its meaning or the main characters. Specify what exactly you liked and what you didn't like, and why you think so.