16

In Star Wars: The Last Jedi

It's a major plot point that the Resistance must find some way to escape the First Order before their ships run out of fuel.

In space, there is very little resistance to motion, so once something starts moving, it tends to stay moving. This is why real life spacecraft barely need to burn fuel once in orbit of something. When

the rebel ships are being chased by the First Order, they appear to stay the same distance from the ships after initially moving out of effective range.

The only way this makes sense with both distance and fuel burning is if they are accelerating at the same rate. At some point I believe someone says the Resistance ships are faster (I am assuming this refers to acceleration, because neither fleet should have a terminal velocity other than the speed of light), so I suppose they were only accelerating as fast as the First Order to save fuel, and had determined they were not sufficiently fast to totally outrun the First Order.

However, I find it hard to believe that two fleets could accelerate, near the maximum capacity of one of them, for at least 18 hours and not go into hyperspace. These are ships that can traverse systems in minutes if they choose, and I find it equally hard to believe that the First Order would only use a fraction of their available power in pursuing the rebels. How then were the rebels able to run out of fuel without changing their velocity significantly?

Jack
  • 4,036
  • 2
  • 19
  • 39
cat40
  • 808
  • 1
  • 10
  • 15
  • 9
    Star Wars physics? – jeffronicus Dec 20 '17 at 02:54
  • It is clear from the visuals that the ships weren't accelerating at their maximum rate of acceleration, they were moving at their maximum speed. It would be easy enough to technobabble an "explanation" for that - and I can give you an example if you like - but I doubt anyone with the authority to do so as canon has bothered. It's probably more sensible to simply assume that the Star Wars universe has rather different physics than ours does. – Harry Johnston Dec 20 '17 at 04:19
  • 2
    ... one possible explanation, for example, would be that when traveling through real space the ships use something along the lines of the intertialess drive from E. E. 'Doc' Smith's Lensman series. (Come to think of it, that would also explain how the Falcon could get to Bespin with a faulty hyperdrive before the crew died of old age.) – Harry Johnston Dec 20 '17 at 04:25
  • 3
    Running shields to protect the Rebel ships from bombardment probably uses fuel, whether the ships were stationary, or using their engines to travel. – mrflash818 Dec 20 '17 at 04:34
  • Because in the Star Wars universe spaceships travel in a three-dimensional sea. If they stop accelerating, they come to a stop – Valorum Dec 20 '17 at 08:57
  • Aah, you seem to be forgetting the laws of physics a long time ago in a galaxy far far away. First, recall that the bomb bays opened and bombs dropped at all, nevermind that their behavior looked like acceleration and not propulsion. Consider Leia's magical ability to not implode the second she is exposed to the vacuum of space, nevermind not instantly freeze solid. Or that anything explodes with fire that burns. The answer - their galaxy is awesome and ours sucks. clear as day to me. – Kai Qing Dec 20 '17 at 17:38
  • Air resistance. Well, we have sounds in space so there must be air. – DVK-on-Ahch-To Dec 20 '17 at 17:42
  • Star Wars spacecraft appear to use their thrusters all the time like an airplane, and not at all like an actual spacecraft. So I think they ran out of fuel because Star Wars physics. – Kai Dec 20 '17 at 18:33
  • @KaiQing "not implode the second she is exposed to the vacuum of space, nevermind not instantly freeze solid" to be fair, if you're exposed to the vacuum of space in the real universe, those things wouldn't happen either. –  Dec 25 '17 at 13:45
  • @Amy - oh har har. Feel free to post the exact science of how long a human can survive being instantly exposed to the horrors of outer space with absolutely no equipment designed to protect them from those conditions and then floating there for at least as long as that painfully stupid scene lasted. What I said is much closer than simply being pushed unconscious with zero other physical damage. – Kai Qing Dec 26 '17 at 18:09
  • 1
    @KaiQing I wasn't making a joke. If you are exposed to the vacuum of space, bubbles will form in your blood, causing your body to swell in size, and your lungs will bleed, but you'll have about 10 seconds before you lose consciousness and about a minute before you die. You won't freeze instantly, nor will you implode. Leia's survival was actually plausible, assuming she could stay conscious long enough to Force pull herself to safety. –  Dec 26 '17 at 19:20
  • @KaiQing https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/survival-in-space-unprotected-possible/ –  Dec 26 '17 at 19:31
  • @Amy - Ok, great news except it conveniently glosses over what happens if those same conditions exist when it's -350 degrees outside and you've been jettisoned after a hole in the side of your ship blew you out. Maybe vessel/space pressure is no big deal and all those astronauts and divers are just wasting their time when they depressurize. I'm no scientist but I don't think I would have put something this stupid in a movie the whole world would see without at least asking someone who does know what would happen. There's no way the writers of this movie thought any of this through. – Kai Qing Dec 27 '17 at 16:48
  • 1
    @KaiQing My only point is she won't freeze instantly or implode. Not that she will be unharmed. Sorry, but the idea that she would freeze instantly (or at all) or implode is just absurd. That isn't what happens in the real world. Space is an insulator, meaning her body would heat up until she died. Not freeze. –  Dec 27 '17 at 22:34
  • @Amy - Then you get a win over the use of the word "instantly" and perhaps implosion or explosion is not likely, but I will not concede to the notion that you wouldn't freeze extremely quickly in a relative "instant" if you are exposed to the end of the spectrum where temperatures reach negative hundreds of degrees and you have zero protection. I may not be right about the exacts of science, but I am damn right about the idiocy of believing this scene wasn't a total joke on the laws of physics and storytelling alike. Still, I do like the movie. I forgive it far more than the prequels. – Kai Qing Dec 27 '17 at 23:11
  • @Amy - and thanks for pointing out the article. I appreciate participation of all sorts. – Kai Qing Dec 27 '17 at 23:12
  • 1
    You would eventually freeze, yes. But the freezing process would not begin until after death. You would actually overheat at first. Matter has three ways of transferring heat energy: radiation, conduction (through solids), and convection (through liquids/gasses). In space, the only means of losing heat is radiation, and our bodies aren't lit up like a beacon. The moment we die, we would slowly begin to freeze, but not before. In fact, liquid on our tongues and eyes would boil off. –  Dec 27 '17 at 23:20
  • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pm6df_SExVw –  Dec 27 '17 at 23:24
  • Yeah I saw a video once about ISS jettisoning urine. It boiled then rapidly went through the conversion to gas, then solid. That was in proximity to earth and the ISS is ideally positioned. I would be interested in an experiment to compare the process of a human facsimile going through the same process somewhere in the range of Saturn's distance vs Earth, in shadows or direct. Course that will never happen. Thanks for the video. It's very interesting. – Kai Qing Dec 28 '17 at 02:53

2 Answers2

28

The captain of The Finalizer (General Hux's flagship) says:

They're faster and lighter, sir. They can't lose us, but they can keep out of range where our cannons are ineffective against their shields.

I think the important part is "They can't lose us", which implies that "faster" doesn't mean the Resistance fleet doesn't actually have a higher top speed. Instead, it probably means that they're able to maneuver faster. So if the First Order started gaining too much, they could turn sharply and re-establish the distance before The Finalizer could react.

These maneuvers that keep them out of range would consume fuel - in addition to the fuel needed to power the shields.

(I realize this isn't exactly supported visually in the movie - it definitely looks like they're travelling in a straight line the whole time. But if they are, it seems like the First Order would have caught up to them - or at least they'd be able to send a ship ahead of the Resistance Fleet and ambush them. The only way they wouldn't be able to do that is if the Resistance Fleet was not actually moving in a straight line.)

LevenTrek
  • 7,299
  • 2
  • 27
  • 62
  • 3
    This seems like a well-reasoned answer. – Edlothiad Dec 20 '17 at 08:09
  • Thank you... I didn't realize how they could run for 18 hours without loosing the bad guys.. Your explanation is helpful, it's also explain why someone has to stay (sacrifice) on the rebel flagship at the end, instead of 'putting a brick on the accelerator' (don't tell me it was not possible). – dna Dec 20 '17 at 08:12
  • 2
    I thought "they can't lose us" referred to how the First Order was tracking the Resistance fleet. If the Resistance tried any fancy maneuvers to get the Order off their tail, they would be ineffective because the Order would still know where the Resistance ships went. – David Z Dec 20 '17 at 08:26
6

In real world physics, thanks to relativistic mass increase, the faster you go, the more energy to accelerate, so I don't necessarily see why they would hit lightspeed.

However Star Wars physics seems to have many differences from real world physics anyway. In particular space battles in star wars seem like they are largely inspired by a combination of WW2 era air and naval combat, so there seems to be a fair bit of handwaving/physics different to make this work.

Presumably maintaining the shields on the rebel vessels required fuel to power them as well.

Jack
  • 4,036
  • 2
  • 19
  • 39
  • 1
    In real world physics, you never actually reach light speed, but you do approach it asymptotically - much like how an object falling in an atmosphere asymptotically approaches its terminal speed, though for a different reason. – David Z Dec 20 '17 at 08:24