So I saw Interstellar last weekend
And I'm not going to go critique all the science in the movie because
I'm not qualified to do that, and
People who do that are movie-killers.
However, I need to rant about one tiny part because I think they missed a HUGE opportunity to both teach the audience about physics and also really drive home one of the themes of the movie.
That theme being humanity's understanding of gravity. (Movie spoilers below.)
So, in this futuristic world, we've discovered some supernatural "beings" (us) who can control gravity in ways we didn't know we could. This phenomenon plays a huge role through the entire movie, and is the answer to humanity's survival at the end.
Gravity is a big deal in this movie!
So what drives me NUTS is that when Cooper and the team first dock with the space station, Cooper says "Let's turn on the artificial gravity" and the thing starts spinning.
Missed opportunity!!!!!!!!
I know we like to call it artificial gravity, but why did they call it artificial gravity?! If we were talking about gravity in any other context but this movie about gravity then that could suffice as a very basic explanation for what was happening. But we are literally trying to set the stage as a species that does not have a firm grasp on this concept--it was the perfect opportunity to illustrate to the audience that these people were WAY over their heads trying to relate to these mysterious multi-dimensional beings.
And, I will concede that there's a ton of science in this movie that they assume you understand without explanation (and lots of made-up science)--and most people have seen at least one other sci-fi movie with a rotating space station and "gravity" so I'm not really arguing that they should have elaborately explained what was happening. Just, that they shouldn't have so readily used the word gravity as though that's not what the whole movie's about. (I'm not angry, I swear.)
Those of you who don't know how the spinning-space-station-phenomenon works, it has to do with what's called centripetal force.
Let's say you have one of those little toy cars that you pull backwards to wind up, and then you let it go and it starts driving forward. Let's say you wanted to make that car drive in a circle, by tapping it with your finger to turn it. Which direction do you push the car?
The answer, of course, is towards the center. You are always pushing your car towards the center of the circle.
In that experiment, you were the car's centripetal force. Centripetal force comes from whatever "pulls" (or "pushes") an object toward the center, directing its circular motion (so things like ropes, walls, floors, your finger, etc.). Gravity can also be a centripetal force. Objects in orbit are held there by gravity pulling them toward the center. But in the case of the spinning space station, gravity is NOT the centripetal force. The walls of the ship (your "floor") are.
Now, the reason why this phenomenon lets you walk on a space station (or plasters you to the wall in those Gravitron amusement park rides, or makes you lean against the side of your car as you go around a sharp turn) is because of Newton's Third Law.
For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.
So, we have this force pulling us in, we also have a force pushing us out. The opposite of centripetal force is often referred to as centrifugal force, but what this phenomenon really is, is inertia. As the space station spins, we feel "pushed" to the outside of the circle, which now becomes the "floor" in our artificial gravity environment.
We can pretty simply calculate how fast we would need to spin to feel like there's Earth gravity, too, using only the radius of the ship. (Earth's acceleration due to gravity: 9.81 m/s2 = [angular velocity]^2 x radius)
The downside of having the force dependent solely on the radius of the ship, though, is that you can't easily have multiple floors, or "upstairs" and "downstairs." To go "up" and "down" would either increase or decrease the radius of your rotation--in turn, increasing or decreasing your "force of gravity." Everything either needs to be on one level, or you would need multiple rings, rotating at different speeds, which would make moving between them a bit convoluted. It is hardly an analog to actual gravity--unless you had a space station with a radius so large that the changes between floors would be negligible.
And all that is to say that there is no gravitational force involved in this process whatsoever. So, for a movie about manipulating gravity, I think we should have been a bit more clear that there was no manipulation of gravity involved in the making of that space station.
Even though they said "artificial" I still think the point was likely lost on most viewers. And, I don't know, even a line as simple as "Let's turn on our shoddy attempt at creating gravity, eh?" would have been much more descriptive than "artificial gravity" to both further the movie's point and clear up some misconceptions about about what was really going on.