Quicksand Fans

Tons of those, especially in the movies

One that always seems overdone is explosive decompression. Step into space in a vacuum , and you turn inside out.
Not so much, actually. Since the pressure differential is only 1 bar. Sure, prolonged exposure will cause some bleeding, and if you crazy enough to hold your breath, well, that's BAD. How sad is it the only sci-fi movie to actually tell someone "Breathe out!" is a cartoon movie (Titan AE)

There has been at least one accident though that emulates the movies. Actually worse
For the specifics , google Byford Dolphin Accident. 9 bar press differential explosive decompression. The one image I have found , I can send if you like in message (ask me) but let me tell you, it makes the worst ST Transporter Accident scene look like a paper cut. Horrific is about the best you can say.

Probably the best movie scene would be the one from "Event Horizon"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3LEa0FN1bf8

Little exaggerated but close. The eye popping and blood boiling wouldn't happen for at least 2 minutes. I think the record for being revived is close to 3 minutes (RIP science monkey )

Yes, that's a lot closer to things, although, HOLLYWOODMUSTHAZDAGORE!!!
You're skin manages to keep your bp contained, so a 1-bar differential would as you say, take a few minutes. Physics is so hard for imbeciles to understand

9 -bar though. That can't be unseen. The injured guys were only injured because they weren't subjected to the decompression, and *only hit with flying parts and bits. Jesus

Forgot too, just now that Babylon 5 also did a bit on it that was accurate; no footage, no bs but a discussion where they were being interviewed and the Doc commented how he was never impressed with people jawing about "throwing someone out an airlock" since, he had had a friend fuck up and run into an airlock while playing on a transport, and cycling the lock. And all he could do was watch, as the poor bastard hung there, and like some cartoon, run in place in mid-space until he didn't. THAT would probably as horrible as just about any gorefest you could come up with

It always amuses me when there's an explosive decompression scene in an aircraft or spacecraft, and the suction lasts forever rather than just the few seconds it would take for the pressure to equalize.

The thing about a vacuum, or even thin atmosphere, is that gas comes out of solution and your blood boils at body temperature at pressure altitudes greater than 63,000 feet. So, although you wouldn't explode or freeze outright, you would most likely suffer a possibly fatal case of the bends.

DangerGirl wrote:It always amuses me when there's an explosive decompression scene in an aircraft or spacecraft, and the suction lasts forever rather than just the few seconds it would take for the pressure to equalize.

The thing about a vacuum, or even thin atmosphere, is that gas comes out of solution and your blood boils at body temperature at pressure altitudes greater than 63,000 feet. So, although you wouldn't explode or freeze outright, you would most likely suffer a possibly fatal case of the bends.

Astronaut Richard Crenna in Marooned. Always thought that was a great example of what to expect.

Might be more accurate to call something like what is discussed here as "fallacy" rather than "science fallacy." The term "science" refers to a particular way of trying to understand things, not to the thing that one attempts to understand. Those "things" we tend to call sciences are really just things (biology, chemistry, etc.) that most lend themselves to discovery through the methods of science.

A "science fallacy" would really describe some is-use or mis-understanding of the methods that are science. For example, science (the methods of science) tell us that we cannot prove a nagative. We cannot, for example, prove that space aliens did NOT build the statues on Easter Island, even thbough we CAN demonstrate (and have done so) the way the people there now say the statues were built CAN be done. Believing that a negative CAN be proved would be the science fallacy, but the result - believing the statues might have been built by space aliens would be the "fallacy."

And I'd suggest avoidance of the term "phallic fallacy."

Fred588 wrote:And I'd suggest avoidance of the term "phallic fallacy."

A common problem all by itself. Not talking about me of course. You know...other guys. Obviously.

The freezing thing is also a myth. Space is technically freezing but because vacuum there's no heat transfer. If you're in direct LOS of the sun you will get a wicked sunburn though.

Mynock wrote:The freezing thing is also a myth. Space is technically freezing but because vacuum there's no heat transfer. If you're in direct LOS of the sun you will get a wicked sunburn though.

You can still lose heat through the emission of infra-red radiation from your body, in places that aren't directly exposed to the sun, or places exposed to the sun, but too distant from the sun for it to counteract the radiational heat loss. Also, decompression/expansion is a cooling process.