In Interstellar, wouldn't Miller's planet be fried by blue shifted radiation? The 61,000x time dilation multiplier would make even cosmic background radiation photons into Extreme UV photons.
-
15I'd like to remind the close voters that "In-Universe Explanations — Even Based On Real Science — Are On-Topic". – SQB May 23 '22 at 07:48
-
7Now answered: https://physics.stackexchange.com/q/710111/123208 – PM 2Ring May 23 '22 at 09:53
-
6I think the problem with this question is that it clearly isn't being fried by radiation, so the in-universe question would be '*why isn't it?"* rather than *"It should be, amirite?"* – Valorum May 23 '22 at 10:41
-
hmm...we should be a lot more consistent in closing / allowing questions like this then @SQB? I feel like questions of this sort get closed all the time (and rightly so, imo) but do not get intervention to keep them open – NKCampbell May 23 '22 at 14:01
-
1@NKCampbell - The problem here is that a real-world science question has spawned a real-world science answer. – Valorum May 23 '22 at 15:51
-
1@SQB - I'm aware of the fact that an explanation based on real world science can be applicable in-universe, and therefore on-topic, but this clearly isn't one of those cases, as evidenced by the accepted answer. – LogicDictates May 23 '22 at 22:05
-
Here's a dumb way to answer this question (too dumb to post as an actual answer): consider the famous black hole image in the film. That image is scientifically accurate, except that it doesn't include red shifting and blue shifting, which in reality would make one side of the accretion disk vastly brighter and bluer than the other. Thus, we conclude that, somehow, the Doppler effect doesn't apply to light in the universe of Interstellar, and that's why the planet isn't fried by blue shifted radiation. – N. Virgo May 24 '22 at 02:12
-
2I’m voting to close this question because it has been cross-posted here; https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/710111/wouldnt-millers-planet-be-fried-by-blueshifted-radiation – Valorum May 24 '22 at 10:45
-
Cross-posting is somewhat frowned upon, but not a reason for voting to close AFAIK. Close votes are about whether it's on topic here, not about whether it's on topic or has been posted somewhere else. – N. Virgo May 24 '22 at 12:34
-
4@N.Virgo - It's not "somewhat frowned upon", it's explicitly stated to be against SE policy – Valorum May 24 '22 at 12:39
-
That still doesn't make it off topic here though. – N. Virgo May 24 '22 at 13:56
-
I posted it here under the belief that it might be considered off topic in physics, I then posted in on physics when I was informed that it might be considered off topic here. – blademan9999 May 24 '22 at 15:30
-
@N.Virgo - Yes, it does. Unless we've decided (somewhere on our own Meta) that general SE policy doesn't apply to us – Valorum May 24 '22 at 20:09
-
@blademan9999 - Asking how it works in-universe is fine. Asking why real-world physics don't operate correctly is off-topic because stripped of its context, you're not asking about the film, you're just asking whether a planet sped up 61,000 times would suffer from lethal radiation which is a physics question. – Valorum May 24 '22 at 20:11
-
The policy is "don't cross post", but our doesn't include any sanctions for doing so. There's a list of close reasons and "it's cross posted elsewhere" is not one of them. – N. Virgo May 24 '22 at 23:15
-
An extra complication in this case is that the science advisor for Interstellar was Kip Thorne, a leading authority on General Relativity and black holes, but it was decided to "relax" some of Kip's real-world physics results for story-telling reasons. So some of the stuff in the movie can be explained by real-world science, but some of it comes down to hand-waving, and there isn't a clear line where the handwavium is invoked. – PM 2Ring May 25 '22 at 10:37
-
@PM2Ring Apparently going to a planet with extreme time dilation was a non-negotiable demand of Nolan. Of course this introduces complications like the blue-shifted microwave background, and also that the planet must have been extremely young - even it had been formed at the time of the Big Bang it would only have experienced ~200,000 years. Hardly enough to have formed an oxygen atmosphere and oceans. – Clara Diaz Sanchez May 26 '22 at 06:37
-
@Clara Good point, although we can get around that by starting the planet at a lower time dilation & letting it migrate inwards. However, there's another big problem: the tidal force appears to be much larger than what's depicted in the movie. See https://physics.stackexchange.com/q/710527/123208 – PM 2Ring May 26 '22 at 07:50
2 Answers
The short answer is "Yes". A more qualified answer would be "Yes, except for the operation of other, unknown physical processes." A single hour passing on Miller's planet equates to seven years passing on Earth, implying a relativistic time dilation of about 60,000. As the poster notes, a naive calculation implies that such a huge time-dilation would blue-shift the cosmic background radiation to be lethal.
One can of course perform the analysis more thoroughly. Miller's planet is orbiting a rotating black hole named Gargantua, and so gravitational lensing would produce an effect where the blue-shifted CMB radiation would appear to come from a small region in the planet's sky. Using relativistic ray-tracing software, physicists Opatrný, Richterek, and Bakala found that for the case of Miller's planet the region is "comparable to the angular size of the planet Neptune as seen from Earth". Despite its small size this spot would irradiate the planet with prodigious energy, leading to a surface temperature of about 890 Celsius. So the water waves the astronauts see, and indeed the presence of liquid water, cannot occur.
For those who want to see the calculations in detail, Life Under a Black Sun is published in the American Journal of Physics, or is freely available at the arXiv preprint server.
As far as I can tell, the additional physical processes needed to make Miller's planet cool and habitable are not explained, or even hand-waved, in the film.
- 65,162
- 6
- 291
- 318
-
2Except that it's fine and clearly there isn't a radiation risk on the planet since they're actively considering it as a home for humanity. – Valorum May 23 '22 at 10:34
-
2@Valorum Thing is OP seems to be asking about real world situation, so it's off-topic. – Mithoron May 23 '22 at 18:55
-
1The Science of Interstellar mentions that Miller's planet is nearly tidally locked to Gargantua (with some small rocking back and forth to explain the ocean waves). In the case of a tidally locked planet, I wonder if the bright spot in the sky would always illuminate the same side (presumably the side facing 'forward' relative to the planet's direction of motion compared to cosmic background radiation rest frame), so that there'd be a "darker side" that was only illuminated by the accretion disc (which is rotating at high speed too, perhaps fast enough that it isn't so badly blue-shifted). – Hypnosifl May 24 '22 at 02:19
According to The Science of Interstellar, the makers certainly gave some thought to the potential for radiation damage to the planets close in to Gargantua. It would appear that Gargantua itself has been 'tuned' by the writers to emit very little radiation.
A typical accretion disk and its jet emit radiation—X-rays, gamma rays, radio waves, and light—radiation so intense that it would fry any human nearby. To avoid frying, Christopher Nolan and Paul Franklin gave Gargantua an exceedingly anemic disk.
Now, “anemic” doesn’t mean anemic by human standards; just by the standards of typical quasars. Instead of being a hundred million degrees like a typical quasar’s disk, Gargantua’s disk is only a few thousand degrees, like the Sun’s surface, so it emits lots of light but little to no X-rays or gamma rays. With gas so cool, the atoms’ thermal motions are too slow to puff the disk up much. The disk is thin and nearly confined to Gargantua’s equatorial plane, with only a little puffing.
It's also possible that the presence of the black hole is (somehow) causing the background radiation in its vicinity to be very much lower.
She nodded. “Murphy’s Law—whatever can happen will happen. Accident is the first building block of evolution—but if you’re orbiting a black hole not enough can happen. It sucks in asteroids and comets, random events that would otherwise reach you. We need to go further afield.”
- 689,072
- 162
- 4,636
- 4,873
-
1And yes, I'm aware that that's not how these things work, but this is a film where "love" is considered to be one of the fundamental forces, so let's not quibble about cosmic microwaves. – Valorum May 23 '22 at 10:54
-
1It's fine that the accretion disk is faint, but what about the CMBR? That is not so easily escaped. – Clara Diaz Sanchez May 23 '22 at 11:05
-
1@ClaraDiazSanchez - The black hole is somehow fixing that, I expect. Note that it's not a real black hole, but instead the creation of superpowered humans from a million years into the future. What's sweeping away some microwaves and photons if you can make a black hole from spare parts? – Valorum May 23 '22 at 11:20
-
2The problem is the "somehow". Unless it is stated somewhere what the process is, I don't think we can do better than saying "unknown forces" - whether it's the Power of Love, or magical engineering. – Clara Diaz Sanchez May 23 '22 at 11:37
-
1The problem is that relative blueshift/redshift would cause Miller's planet to be vastly hotter then the other planets. – blademan9999 May 23 '22 at 16:36