What's Going On With The Science In Interstellar?

The science in Interstellar is a mixed bag: black holes are very real, but a planet orbiting a black hole would look very different and shuttles don't fly on fumes. The whole movie is like that: the astrophysics is either totally spot-on, or absolutely not, and even makes the science consultant cringe.

Have you seen Interstellar? What are your thoughts on the science? Does the emphasis on astrophysical accuracy make the inaccuracies stand out even more? Or does it create spare plausibility, helping carry the story through its more outrageous asks?

Advertisement

10 November Update: On Physics Today, editor Charles Day is discussing the science of the extinction scenario. Meanwhile, you know Neil DeGrasse Tyson can't help but add his comments on the science of the movie in a series of tweets:

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement

DISCUSSION

jonezbeechy
JonezBeechy

I took the whole thing as being more metaphysical. Yeah, I guess some of the science was fudged, but my mind hasn't been blown by something so visually powerful in a long time. I can't wait to see it again tomorrow in IMAX.