Ask Adam Savage: Testing Fiction-Based Myths on MythBusters
Vložit
- čas přidán 26. 08. 2024
- Tested member Andrew Green asked Adam, "As urban legends are often based on some sort of truth or historical evidence, did you prefer these as science-based experiments or did you prefer to recreate the elaborate fictional scenarios from movies knowing that they were often only created for storytelling purposes rather than actual real science?" Here's Adam's answer, and thank you, Andrew, for your question and support! Join this channel to support Tested and get access to perks, like asking Adam a question:
/ @tested
Tested Ts, stickers, mugs and more: tested-store.com
Subscribe for more videos (and click the bell for notifications): www.youtube.com...
Twitter: / testedcom
Facebook: / testedcom
Instagram: / testedcom
Discord: / discord
Amazon Storefront: www.amazon.com/...
Savage Industries T-shirts: cottonbureau.c...
Tested is:
Adam Savage / donttrythis
Norman Chan / nchan
Joey Fameli www.joeyfameli.com
Gunther Kirsch guntherkirsch.com
Ryan Kiser / ryan.kiser
Jen Schachter www.jenschachte...
Kishore Hari / sciencequiche
Sean Charlesworth / cworthdynamics
Jeremy Williams / jerware
Kayte Sabicer / kaytesabicer
Bill Doran / chinbeard
Ariel Waldman / arielwaldman
Darrell Maloney / brokennerd
Kristen Lomasney / krystynlo
Intro bumper by Abe Dieckman
Thanks for watching!
#AdamSavage #MythBusters
Join this channel to support Tested and get access to perks, like asking Adam a question:
czcams.com/channels/iDJtJKMICpb9B1qf7qjEOA.htmljoin
More MythBusters-Related videos: czcams.com/play/PLJtitKU0CAehaZdgrPRzjyGFSEQ8URiQl.html
Removing videos because the comment are hammering on about Disney their slave labor and the fact they fires someone because of het opinions is really censoring tested is being censored by Disney. Is just said in one of those comments I watch Adam since 2003 but not saying anything about this situation has lost my respect the world is not a comic book or story its real life Adam by supporting Disney you support child slavery and censoring because of opinions even wors is you delete the video and make it for premium members in less than 20 hours. Shame on you now you lost alot more respect.
Adam, you are so awesome! You really held back on that one...
Could the boulder test have hypothetically been done by narrowing down the most likely candidates based on the most common rocks in the area that the Indiana Jones scene took place (perhaps also taking appearance into account)? Then, the weight could be estimated instead of getting a real boulder. Would a sphere of that weight be considered too dangerous for the show? Two parallel tracks could be used for the boulder and the person but there's always the risk of it going off course.
Busted! The Molasses Flood was in 1919, and it was not an urban legend. It killed a lot of people.
Molasses was not primarily used as a sweetener. People used Honey and products such as Beet Sugar and fresh fruits.
Molasses was primarily used as an oil for industrial purposes, up until a reliable synthetic oil was developed.
The Great Molasses Flood of 1919 was a military stockpile commisseioned out to a private individual/business. The failure of the tanks caused a major military investigation and some of the earliest sub contractor regulations we have on the books.
Hey folks, first of all I was absolutely delighted that Adam spent so long picking my question to pieces
I think essentially my question was “did Adam prefer the urban myths rather than the movie myths?” One being based on a ‘possible’ truth rather than the other being based on a fantastical fictional scenario (in the majority of cases)
I appreciate that both have physical elements that can be tested. Having heard my submission back it certainly reads that I claim one is fantastical and the other one is science. But I think Adam knew what he was answering and enjoyed picking the meat from the ‘statements’ I made about science.
I certainly enjoyed making Adam’s brain work in dissecting the ‘assumption’ of what is and isn’t science.
Certainly having one of my favourite people on the internet challenge the logic or reasoning in my question is most certainly a win in my eyes.
Adam’s answer was to challenge everything. He challenged the wording of my question. Job done!!
I think he knew as well. I also think he knew that he would not hurt your feelings when he used your question to highlight one of his major pet peeves, gatekeeping (4:10).
I totally understood your question and was so surprised when Adam interpreted it the way he did.
I got where you were coming from. Personally I hated the movie episodes. They were clearly paid promotions and the Mythbusters were forced to find something they could hook into.
And for the record I in no way think that the movie myth episodes were any less brilliant than the urban ones. I just wanted Adam’s take on the two.
I think my badly placed ‘actual real science’ tipped this into a heated topic rather than a fun one. 😬
I instantly understood what you meant with the question but the more I think about it the more problematic it is to think of what a proper answer to it could be. A lot of urban myths can be complete nonsense and a lot of movie scenarios can be based (in varying degrees) on reality. JATO Rocket Car was a fantastical fictional scenario but it was also an urban legend. The only true difference between the two categories is whether somebody is claiming the event is something that has happened or is simply asking if it is something that could happen.
You could just as easily swap those two categories around and the questions still work. "Did the historical molasses spill happen?" vs "Could a molasses spill I saw in a movie happen?" would both result in essentially the same mythbusters episode.
We all learned a valuable lesson today. Especially Andrew.
I think we just observed how myths and urban legends propagate in the form of fan mail. SCIENCE!
Poor Andrew, I interpreted his wording as saying the *movie* scenarios weren't created for science, not that the *mythbusters* recreations weren't for science!
@@feeling-dizzie
Yes, totally my interpretation as well.
Andrew was testing Adam's Patience.
@@insane0042 Adam busted Andrew's question fair and square. 🤣
I remember my “wait a minute” moment watching mythbusters when I was a kid back in the early 2000s, that made me a Engineer today
Good for you, I ended up as an unrecognised evil genius. :(
Mine was the plane on a treadmill one Ijust remeber thinking those people are idiots the wheels on an airplane have nothing to do with how the plane takes off as long as they can still spin it realisticaky doesnt matter if they are spinning twice as fast as the plane moves
What was it?
Me too 😅
@@skld3 It's okay Skid3, one day you'll build that "-inator" that will devastate the whole tri-state area!
Archimedes's Mirror, both attempts, was a great college try, but hopeless from the beginning. The moment when Jamie stood directly at the focal point and announced that he was not burning to a crisp was comedy gold, and scientific silver.
It was literally a great college try since they got people from a college to help try it.
"the only difference between science and screwing around is writing it down"
Beat me to it
Yep!
The reason you write it down is so somebody else at some other time can repeat the same experiment and show you can get the same results if you are correct.
My science teachers said and repeatedly drilled this fact in the most boring ways. Adam saying it in my early 20s changed the way I thought about the world.
I think Andrew just used the wrong nomenclature - when he said "based in science" I think he meant the rules of physics are bent less in urban legends than they are in movies. Had nothing to do with testing methodology. At least that's how I take his question
I think based on his wording he was saying the **movies** weren't based in science. Adam took that to mean the mythbusters tests weren't based in science
That’s what I thought too. Urban myths are based on some real thing that supposedly happened. Movies are made up things that they tested
Yep, Adam just totally mis-understood the question and assumed the worst.
@David - I think that's what was meant, but the point is that it's a false assumption to make. At the very least, recognizing that it's an assumption and not fact is an important aspect of asking questions. That's why Adam focuses so much on whether something is testable or not; that's the most important part of science-based myth testing, not the source of the myth.
It's certainly an interesting question though on its own: _are_ urban myths more often based in some historical reality? I somehow doubt it, but it would be very fascinating to devise a methodology to study it. My guess is that urban myths are just as often folk fiction as movie myths are Hollywood fiction. I might be wrong. Either way, I don't think it's a safe assumption to make simply on one's own sense of it.
There is no such thing as just science. There is something called the scientific method though. The pursuit of science is the quest for the truth. No one has a monopoly on whatever that is though. In fact I am pretty sure if someone could give us the ultimate answer it would be beyond our comprehension. That revelation would do us about as much good as an ape getting a cell phone contract. Enjoy the 5G network oh hairy one.
Don’t know if anyone mentioned it yet but: the molasses story Adam mentions did actually happen, it has a historical event, there are pictures (and also it was both the speed of the molasses gushing out of its container and the debris is picked up that actually killed people) the “urban legend” if you can call it that related to this incident is the street it happened on smelling of molasses all these years later when it’s hot out (which, is also something that can be tested with “real actual science”)
That was "The A Team" steering the falling tank by firing it. Not F&F!!?? or did i miss something is the F&F movies?
thank you. i cant believe i had to go this far down to find this comment
To be fair, the F&F franchise had cars dropped from planes several times and launched a tank out of the front of another vehicle, so it's a pretty easy mistake to make.
haha thanks for not having to comment it myself, I'll accept the miss tho, greater crimes have been made
I thought the same thing, but definitely an easy mistake to make as Hollywood is over the top extremely often
@@hejduken all i could see was Liam Neeson yelling "FIRE!" and was like wait.... Liam wasnt in F&F lmao!
Adam, I am very, very glad that you tackled Pyramid Power. It was, in fact, very much a pivotal moment in my development as a human being. It was a 'wait a minute' moment for me (so much of Mythbusters was that.)
But busting Pyramid Power, specifically, opened my eyes to the idea that 'magical' things could be tested and evidence demanded of them. That some of the things I took for granted as unequivocal and absolute and untestable, could in fact be tested, and doubted, and demanded proof of its validity.
The Pyramid Power episode freed me from a future of misery, and agony, and fear, and self-loathing. The Pyramid Power episode helped my mind escape from a place that had trapped me in a spiral of thinking that my existence could not be reconciled with a set of supposed truths that made me feel sick, disgusting, guilty, and revolting. The Pyramid Power episode, frankly, is one of a number of things I can point to through my history and say 'This saved my life', and mean it with absolute sincerity.
Thank you, despite your regrets, for testing it.
Thank you for setting me free.
I love that the Mythbuster's crew was so excited about the idea of recreating the boulder getaway scene that it took several days of working on it to realize there just wasn't a story. lol
But Jaime's objection was based on a misconception. It doesn't matter what the ball was made of. The speed of a ball rolling down a ramp is independent of its mass. (As long as its heavy enough that air resistance becomes negligible.)
Maybe a quick test of the myth that heavy balls roll faster than light balls was in order.
@@donsample1002 That's all true, but the point Adam is making is that the question "Could Indy outrun _this_ boulder?" in untestable because there are too many unknowns (with regards to that particular boulder as well as the temple), and the question "Could Indy outrun _a_ boulder?" is trivial, because you can equally well devise a path for the boulder that either disadvantages Indy or the boulder through the use of the vines and shape of the corridor, as well as the mass of the boulder (which could affect its ability to roll through an uneven environment).
tl;dr - There isn't a specific claim to test that isn't either too vaguely specified, or too trivial to test.
@@donsample1002 It matters if it's not *perfectly* round; bumps and stuff that you'd find on a realistic ancient rock would slow it down some on each rotation. So would bumps on the track. That's where the materials aspect comes in. (But yeah, Adam didn't mention any of the things that would actually matter, like slope or reasons why materials matter.)
Also note that acceleration depends on the exact angle of support, like how much faster the full circumference of the ball is going than the point where it contacts the ramp.
(Because of angular momentum. For similar reasons why a hollow cylinder is slower than a solid cylinder web.physics.ucsb.edu/~lecturedemonstrations/Composer/Pages/28.27.html or a sphere vs. cylinder isaacphysics.org/questions/rolling_objects )
(Ah, I see Joseph already mentioned vines, same idea as bumps. And good point that any changes in direction might involve the boulder hitting something and losing some kinetic energy and angular momentum.)
@@donsample1002 No, falling or frictionless sliding is independent of mass. But rolling depends on the moment of inertia because some of the energy is converted to angular momentum. The moment of inertia is the mass and how that mass is distributed in the object.
If I recall the molasses flood was in January of that year, so the aforementioned dead people were truly “slower than molasses in January”
EDIT: January 15, 1919 was indeed the date 🤦♂️
Why the face palm?
i shot molassas out of my air cannon a few januarys ago in honor of that day lol...
2:00 I think that's the 2010 "A-Team" movie, not "Fast and Furious".
Thank you! I was about to comment that same thing, lol. As nutty as the FF series has become, the only thing they've dropped from the sky were cars.
Exactly! A non-existing tank carried in a plane that is not configured to carry a tank and the tank firing in mid-air! Sounds like Hollywood!
This was like the one thing I really wanted the Mythbusters to have actually tested. Maybe with a smaller scale thing tho
This, A-Team not F&F.
@@kmacow czcams.com/video/oZIzreiseMk/video.html
2:00 your thinking of the A-Team movie good sir.
I'm imagining a disheartened Adam, in full Indy-regalia taking his hat into hand and being so disappointed that he wasn't going to get to run from 'The Boulder.'
Edit: Because it looks like my reply was eaten, Discovery Nederland has the intro (complete with their boulder run) on their channel: "Adam als Indiana Jones."
The Boulder is disappointed he doesn't get to chase the leather-clad man.
*insert sad emoji face icon here*
Oh, they still did it (presumably because they had a "boulder" by that point). It was just that it became a small thing through M5 for the cold open, not a full Myth.
@@sanityormadness That certainly doesn't surprise me, but I really don't remember that at all. I guess maybe because it was the open?
@@NightshadeDt Found it: czcams.com/video/XQOKzQhPGyY/video.html
There was also a brief BTS bit later in the show about turning the sphere into the boulder, presumably because it was filmed before - as Adam said - they realised there was nothing to test: czcams.com/video/A3o4Fa1HDY4/video.html
Blow Your Own Sail is one of those life-changing episodes.
Poor Andrew got burned, that was… Savage
Iswydt
I would challenge calling the Boston Molasses Flood of 1919 a myth, because it's a photographically documented historical happening. That said, I'd certainly be curious what you would want to do regarding it!
The Boston molasses flood of 1919 was certainly real. The Boston molasses flood of 18..98...I think was a myth. Teehee.
Curious that Adam describes the molasses flood as an urban legend. I definitely thought that was real history, with no doubts to its actually happening.
The History Guy did a story on this. czcams.com/video/adPuti-SL5o/video.html
The molasses flood is historic.
That molasses flood was absolutely incredible. There are some amazing images of the aftermath. I believe that, in Boston, there is a monument or some sort of commemorative plaque to that tragedy. It was the way the tank had been made and inspected - or not inspected.
Clothing used to be heavy. People drowned in water when they fell in. Imagine how a deep enough moving molasses wave would hold you down. Not to mention gasping in molasses over water.
Yep - and at least water can be expelled from your lungs once you breathe it in. No amount of CPR is going to clear molasses from your lungs.
@@DrakeAurum What a way to go.
Hope they at least enjoyed molasses previously.
It was a real tragedy, there were numerous complaints prior to the tank failure that it was not strong enough. They had never filled the tank to full capacity prior to the flood, and there were many people saying the walls were too thin.
One of the most fun things about doing science is to be surprised by your results or to discover something that defies intuition.
I love when Adam confronts mythconceptions. Dude, you're too cool.
I actually appreciated the unbiased discipline exercised with "pyramid power", even though the outcome seemed "obvious to everyone" and "common knowledge". You did it the justice of a committed evaluation with the integrity and follow though of every other myth. and in the end that was its true entertainment value, unbiased discipline with integrity and commitment.
Hell, "actual real science" isn't an inherent aspect to study itself. Science isn't a single, _magical_ test that ends inquiry but a systematic process of examination. Irritates me to no end how moronically elitist people can be about that, typically deeming only pure, perfect experimentation as the only valid methodology. By that definition, almost all of the sciences we have don't qualify as science for all the things that can't be directly tested through classical dependent v independent variables while controlling all possible confounds.
Agreed. People often confuse the scientific method with mathematical proofs. In maths you can prove x = y. In science you can theorise (of course, a scientific theory is stronger then a colloquial theory) but you cannot 100% prove x = y. New information may come about that makes x = z. That is the fundamental difference between maths and science.
The Great Molasses Flood of 1919 was not a myth and was well documented, studied and detailed reports written on. Why would you want to replicate that?
On several occasions they replicated things that were well-documented. For example, Bullets Fired Up. They even made the documentation part of the story on that one.
Because it would have made better television than, for instance, the Great Atlantic Sponge Migration.
@@redneckgaijin Whoa, to hell with molasses, I wanna hear more about these sponges!
@@TheRich1981 The definitive study was done by Drs. Stanz and Spengler. The sponges, I'm told, migrated about a foot and a half.
@@redneckgaijin Sounds pretty spooky, hope they were qualified to deal with that sort of thing. I'm sure they knew who to call if not.
Adam Savage, you and mythbusters changed my life! As a kid, it stoked my love of science, as an adolescent it was the only thing that could calm me down amidst brutal panic attacks, and as an adult I still rewatch episodes to this day. Thank you for being amazing!
Andrew will be absolutely stoked with this response !
The molasses disaster occurred in 1919. The tank was 90 feet in diameter and 50 feet tall. It held more than 2M gallons. 21 killed, 150 injured. Some of the people were killed by the shock wave of the air being driven in front of the molasses wave, some were crushed by the wave itself, and some got stuck as the molasses thickened due to the cold temperature and suffocated. Some people claim to still be able to smell the molasses on hot days a hundred years later.
Great Molasses Flood was 1919 January 15. That molasses was not for human consumption. It was use to make munitions for WWI. But the war ended in 1918, so they scaled back production, but the still had molasses coming in that was previously ordered. That coupled with, unusually warm weather, and a poorly built storage tank lead to the disaster.
That really doesn't make sense because when wars end canceling orders is par for the course. The government certainly cancels their orders with contractors.
@@1pcfred in that time it would take months for a shipment of molasses to get from the Caribbean to Boston. The war just ended on November 11, 1918. So those deliveries were already inbound, and paid for.
@@barryfields2964 It did not take that long even in the days of wooden masted ships. Because of the currents going south to north is pretty fast in the Atlantic on the US side. You're going with the flow. The average speed sailing is 100-140 miles a day. It is only a 1,300 mile trip. So at most you can make it in under 2 weeks.
@@1pcfred I’m talking ship travel I’m talking about contracts theses ships were contacted to deliver that amount of molasses at that point in time
@@barryfields2964 I'm talking about telling them to take that molasses and shove it. I ain't working here no more! Johnny Paycheck style. Everyone realizes at the outset that war economies are high risk ventures. It ain't quite business as usual. Orders are placed in good faith but one must still understand that things do in fact change.
The question is actually something I've thought of I think, just not worded so. Like, in my mind, I tended to think of the myths as divided into sort of categories: stories like coins off skyscrapers killing people, turn of phrases like bulls in a china shop, logical extrapolations like how water heaters are pressurized containers so its bad if they fail, or things seen in movies or videos like curving bullets. The last one seems fantastical outright, so was it any more absurd to test than the other three, which seem more applicable to something people could actually experience or use the turn of phrase. Like, the "science" part isn't the question, it's more like, I always wondered if they ever differentiated between...something like applicability versus absurdity.
I love you adam!
youve changed my young life for the better started watching myth-busters when i was 9, now almost 20 years later, ive learned so much from yall, and applied them to my own life in many ways.
though they might have had less practical or usable implications, the fiction based stories often had very interesting an unique premises that made you think about something. and even if thats just simple physics, at the end of the day as a young kid watching people dodge star wars "blaster bolts" because they're slower then paintballs really gets your brain ticking on how physics works and interacts.
Really liked the "fan on a boat" one because it's used as an example in science textbooks for simple physics, but when tried in the real world (without the caveats and simplifications that those academic problems impose) the intuitive answer often wins out.
6:43 Because seeing Adam, dressed as Henry Jones Jr., running from a giant stone...priceless.
they did use the boulder in the special's cold open
Note: The molasses processing plant was for alcohol production. ;)
8 minutes of a 9 minute video on light heartily word play and then 1 minute answer
got to love mr savage :)
One myth I always felt they got a bit 'wrong'... though they used great science to work on it... was the 'hang time' of a football supposedly inflated with helium rather than air. The actual 'theory' was that the ball would stay in the air a bit longer, and thus, allow the kicking team more time to get down the field and stop the receiving team. They ended up focusing on the DISTANCE of the ball flight, rather than the time, and to me, that was an error.
I am from Boston. The molasses accident was a major industrial incident. A good read on the subject is Steve Puleo’s book Dark Tide.
Your comment about not caring what the result was, is in my mind, the keystone of good science. When you test some hypothesis, the results are what the results are. Entirely too many times you get into situations where the scientists doing the testing see only what they were looking for. And it's hard to be completely analytical, but being agnostic to the actual conclusion and not the conclusion you want should be the goal.
If nothing else, the fact that Harrison Ford actually did outrun the plaster ball boulder for real already sort of proves it, much like the "Luke and Leia swinging across the Death Star chasm" story. The actors did it, it wasn't an effect, so it's automatically confirmed under those specific parameters.
Yeah I always felt like the intention of urban myths was that they were surprising but true and that movie myths were never trying to present themselves as actually real.
So...
The molasses explosion was real & very dangerous because it was very powerful.
Also trying to breath with molasses in your lungs is very hard nye on impossible.
It’s worth researching. 😊
Let's take a moment to appreciate how much Andrew was picked apart today. I could sense when it happened, all Andrews could
😩 I will certainly use the word science more carefully from now on!! That will teach me to post late at night after a beer.
@@andrewgreenroom Beer - Simultaneously both the cause and downfall of much great science throughout history. ;)
Well, he was... until he wasn't. After Adam finished faffing on, lightheartedly, about the phrasing of the letter, he gave an example of the Raiders ball. The upshot of which was *entirely* to the point of the letter, a complete fiction that was not testable as there were no specifications to replicate. He answered the question, without realizing he answered it.
The way Adam is lit makes his glasses are half full
A bit of a correction. Molasses was not used prior to cane sugar in America.
Molasses is a by-product of sugar refining, a sugar-laden source is needed, typically (always?) cane or beet.
Before the turn of the 20th century, cane sugar was the primary sugar sweetener in the US.* Beet sugar then became a competitor there.
*The slave trade was largely fuelled by sugar, even in the US.
I'd give Andrew the benefit of the doubt and say he meant "historical based myths" and "actual possible history". Maybe he just wanted to jazz up the letter and threw the word science in there to make it sound more Mythbustery.
I think you're correct. :)
Alas, sometimes picking the wrong word changes the meaning, especially when it implies a specific assumption that might be crucial. It's a worthy conversation to have, especially in a world that likes to eschew reality-based discussion and public policy! Sure, in the grand scheme of things this question itself is limited in scope and carries no weight outside of asking for a personal perspective, but that also makes it a great moment to discuss the topic because it can be much harder to broach the subject when more important decisions are resting on it and people's self-identities are involved.
Reinforcing the fundamentals of what it means for an inquiry to be science-based is a useful thing to do, at least so long as it continues to be so wildly misunderstood and misused.
I've read that in the aftermath of the 'Molasses incident', the clean up was extremely hard. First off, it happened in the winter, and all the molasses froze, and second of all, when it melted, it was extremely sticky......
Yeah but it was a sweet gig to get in on I'll bet.
I love how the pyramid myth gave unexpected results with the cut fruit and how the test was repeated to show why the original experiment was flawed
1:57 The tank firing its cannon to "fly" or push its fall toward a lake was one of the scenes in the A-Team movie.
It's one of those things that I know makes no logic sense but would love to see the math on. How much force would firing the main gun on a tank impart onto the tank in comparison to gravity.
This has needed to be said. For SO LONG.
I always felt that mythbusters was more about applying the scientific method to random questions. It doesn't matter if the question is very wild as long as you can apply the scientific method to it and get a result based on detailed testing.
I truly won't be happy in life until i see a blooper video, specifically with slow-mo lol
Adam's Flaming Laser Sword: If it is not testable by experiment, it is not worthy of television.
I'm happy to pretend that you have that moving Swiss Army Knife in your window on Christmas, like one of those creepy Santa's behind a window in a toy store.
One way the Raiders boulder scene could've been examined, since you were using a hollow amalgam, would've been to add an increasing range of weights inside to gauge which weight of boulder would be slow enough to evade, and weather weight was a determining factor at all. A lot of other variables would have to be thrown in as well, like how smooth the surface it was travelling on, the pitch it was travelling down, air pressure inside the cave, lots of stuff could make a difference on the timing. I think, unless you were gonna write a thesis length document on it, the best you'd probably come up with would be a rough generalization though.
As a "testable proposition" regarding Indiana Jones being chased by a boulder: If the movie says "Indy totally outran that thing", the audience-focused question is, "Can a human in good physical condition outrun a rolling boulder (or rather, a falling rock)?" To clarify how this is applicable to the real world, not only in a specialized trap in a fictional ancient temple: Are there any conditions where a boulder rolls toward someone in the real world? There are, in areas where falling rocks happen, often where roads have been carved into a mountainside. So let's say a rock falls from above a tunnel that passes through a mountainside and starts rolling down the road toward you, an event possible (and which has probably actually happened) in the real world. The road is bounded on at least one side by the hillside, and possibly on one side by a steep fall or another face of hillside/mountain. Can you outrun that boulder on the mountain road until you reach a safe place, a *similar* event to Indy being chased by a fictional boulder trap in a mostly-enclosed environment with one path to safety?
You have an approxiate distance Indy ran (shot by shot in the scene), the approximate velocity of Indy and the boulder, and the damage the fictional boulder could do (damage is a result of force, knowing force and velocity gives you approximate mass). You also have real-world information for what shape falling boulders tend to be, the paths they take, how heavy they are, and how fast they tend to go. In the human-scale testing: Physical safety would require, perhaps, two parallel tracks arranged to keep the dangerous object from hurting someone, if you couldn't replicate the speed of the boulder and angle of the path with something relatively safe like that giant hamster ball. Then run a human on one path and the stone on the other and compare.
Bonus safety quesion: "If you see a falling rock coming toward you, should you run straight away like Indy, or dodge to the side, or take some other action?" Indiana had no choice which way to go, because the exit could become closed off due to the size of the boulder. Some places where rocks fall have at least some option for which way to go.. but you probably won't have time for more than a reflexive response when it comes at you. My guess is, it's safer to dodge away from the path (perpendicular, aka, to the side) if you can. But if you can't, you probably don't have time to outrun it, much like you can't outrun a cannon ball that's rolling across a battlefield; and dropping to the ground or trying to jump over it aren't good options either, because either way you'll probably get badly hurt.
are you sure that perpendicular is superior to a 45 degree angle?
@@SavageGreywolf Unclear. We'll have to test.
And for the record I in no way think that the movie myth episodes were any less brilliant than the urban ones. I just wanted Adam’s take on the two.
I think my badly placed ‘actual real science’ tipped this into a heated topic rather than a fun one. 😬
I thought it was a great answer! It's a very useful discussion, and pretty fun to listen to his perspective on it. I'm glad you asked it. I'm only sad that a lot of the comments seem to have missed the point.
Here’s a question: you guys tested the polygraph and concluded that it was accurate in its ability to tell if someone was lying long after the scientific consensus was that it wasn’t able to tell if a person was being truthful. Why weren’t you more critical of it?
A college sculpture teacher I had in the early '00s used to use the phrase, "Grey matter activated!"
Wow. I never looked at it like that. But its 100% true that the science of the myth itself means nothing and the science is in the testing of said myth.
I only learned what molasses actually is when I read about the Boston molasses flood, before that I had only seen the word used in the phrase "slow as molasses", so I thought it was some kind of slug/snail. So when I read about a flood of molasses I thought "huh? that makes no sense" and looked it up.
i literally just did that because i didnt know what it translated to lol
The speed of molasses is dependent on its viscosity and its viscosity depends on its temperature. Which is to say molasses is only slow when it happens to be cold. The whole phrase is as slow as molasses uphill in January. Now it was January when the accident occurred but they happened to be heating that particular molasses up at the time. Folks unfortunately were downhill too.
I'm not sure why you couldn't test the boulder myth.
1. Use stills from the movie to measure the angle down which the boulder accelerates and measure the acceleration to get a first estimate of the mass.
2. Get different geologists to identify possible candidate materials and their density.
3. Use stills from the movie to measure the boulder to combine with #2 to get a mass.
4. Now you have a reasonable mass estimate.
Now you can figure out likely velocities and see if Indy could have run from the boulder.
I think I know how to test the molasses thing... So you get a gigantic tank, which will be the most expensive part. Then you fill it up with water and then you add a gelling agent until it has the same properties as molasses. So you'll need a pump, a lake the water doesn't need to be clean really, and then add something like alginate or agar or something to gel it up to be similar to molasses. Should cost a lot less, but it's still going to need a pretty huge budget.
But you do not know what the consistency of the molasses was during the accident. By all accounts it happened because the molasses was being heated up. Which means it would have been thin. If it was really like molasses would normally be in January the stuff wouldn't have gone anywhere, now would it?
I could have calculated a reasonable weight and density for the Raiders of the Lost Ark stone, because most stone has the same approximate density. It can't be something very light like pumice, because it would collapse into powder. It can't be something very dense like hematite, because that would be a metal, and because hematite does not form into huge boulders. The maximum speed of that giant stone boulder would have to be determined by air resistance, after gravity and friction are considered.
I'm pretty sure that the velocity of a ball rolling down a ramp is independent of its mass, so it wouldn't have mattered what the ball was made of.
I'm thinking of the Star Wars episodes, the Zombie-Killing episode, and Crimes and Mythdemeanors. Remember when Jamie tried to climb up an air duct with magnets, and it sounded like Norse demigod trying to break in?
There is also the sugar beet in Canada for our commercial refined sugar products
The Boston molasses flood was no urban legend. It really happened on January 15, 1919 and killed 21 people.
History nerd here. 🙋
Andrew knows that he's amongst friends here, including Adam himself! 😀👍
I’ve scrolled for a bit and haven’t seen it mentioned, but it was actually far more than two people killed in the Great Molasses Flood of 1919; 21 people died.
A happy day for a maker is must for his mood ! 👍👍
Your joy is contagious
Adam kinda looks like Colonel Sanders at these lower angles lol.
I think he meant, Mythbusters first busted if myths/ urban legends could actually be try’s. Movie Mythbusters weren’t to see if a legend was true.
Wait... Why is the molasses flood an urban legend?
I've seen photos of newspapers clips from the event and presumably there are police and insurance records as well?
Something worse about that Molasses Disaster.. Molasses moves A LOT easier when its hot. That's why the storage bins broke.. They exploded from heat expansion.
Molten Molasses..
2.3 million gallons of molasses spilled. One million gallons is a 52 foot square cube. The wave rushed down the street at 35 mph, and 21 people were killed.
ADAM: "I'm in a good mood today."
ME: "And that's different from every other day, how?"
(I know, I know. I don't know Adam personally and don't interact with him every minute of every day. It's just funny coming from a guy (in a video) whose public personna (in videos) is literally "kid in a candy store.")
If anything, the movie myths showed that a lot of things that people consider ludicrous, are actually feasible.
Not sure if you'll see this, but I remember reading/hearing about a myth that was so dangerous and so easy to replicate that the Federal Bureau of Homeland Secure Intelligence Agency (I cant remember which were involved) were brought in and all records, tapes, and sources for the myth were erased and/or destroyed. I was wondering how often you get asked about what the myth was or stuff like that?
Still happy the Swiss Army Knife is rotating the correct way lol
Indy running from the ball is testable because you can see the speed of the ball and the angle and calculate the weight from there
Molasses is a byproduct of cane sugar refining, so the statement of "before cane sugar" is false.
Not entirely true. Molasses was made as its own product from sorghum. Sorghum can be grown in non-tropical climates.
I have a correction. True Molasses is made from cane sugar. However sorghum was used to make a very similar product called sorghum molasses. Mind you, they both taste and smell awful...
Your channel and enthusiasm are therapeutic
Sometimes the truth is the most fantastical of stories, it isn’t constrained by having to be believable.
Yeah if you want to hear some unbelievable stuff you only have to check out the news these days. I am having a hard time right now believing a potato is the most popular politician of all time. I think something is fishy there.
They did a terrific Indiana Jones "Giant Rolling Rock" recreation at the old Disney/MGM Studios. I remember seeing their "Indiana Jones Stunt Show Spectacular" years ago and they did that stunt (and many more) live in front of an audience! There's tons of videos of it on CZcams!
I can see the molasses flood being an inspiration for the 1950s blob movie
I think the movie myths were very important- so many people see those scenes. Many must casually assume the physics are real, just because they saw it. Even when it’s total fantasy! With the amount of fantasy we see on screens, it’s very important to make sure people can tell myth from reality. If you did something while, say, driving, based on seeing it in a movie, many people could die!
I’m 3 years too late but that molasses explosion (WALK!! WALK FOR YOUR LIVES!!) happened in about 1919 and that molasses was not part of the sweets industry. Molasses played a role in WWI munitions. I’m not sure what role but the massive vats were leftover from that war effort. Also, it didn’t spill one of three vats exploded and ruptured the others
As the story is told outside the old Boston Gardens on hot days you can still smell it. I’ve been there on hot days and swore I could but also wasn’t sure if it wasn’t that my mind wanted to smell it
I misread the title as "Friction-based" myths...
...Still enjoyed it.
About the boulder: I would think you wouldn't want to do it simply because it could all be determined with basic physics. You can take a guess as to the type of stone given the scenes' location. and eyeball the size and therefore its weight. You can also eyeball the height from which it started and the length of the ramp. Simple Newtonian physics will give you the acceleration curve. If it tops 15mph, anything short of a professional athlete would have a tough time beating it. If it went above 27mph, even Usain Bolt would get flattened.
Is that geeky enough?
Hi Adam, I hope you're doing well. Since you were just talking about Raiders, I wanted to ask you about something from the clip you tested with the temple dart run, VS the movie clip. In the film clip, when Indie is running away, and the darts are shooting at him, it looks like they're being shot from both sides of room. My friend, and I slowed the whole scene down, and we both see darts coming from both sides. When you, and Jamie tested it, only one side fired darts. My question is, if both sides fired darts at different times, would Indie have been hit? I just rewatched that episode, and it's always bugged me that only one side fired darts. Thank you for reading this.
I wonder why it amuses me so much that Pyramid Power is Adam's goto for 'worst episode we ever did'
My wait a minute moment on this show was when Jamie melted steel bars with salsa and parts from a $20 FM/AM radio. Salsa escape was the name of the myth, kind of blew my mind in Jamie's creativity.
I'd say it was more smart than creative. Although I suppose there must have been some creativity involved in the apparatus setup? Now the prisoner that initially came up with the idea he was a creative individual.
Tank falling out from a plane was featured in A-team, not Fast and Furious. A did they have falling tanks in Fast and Furious as well?
I've heard someone say that a lot of beverages in the US (at least in the North) use corn sugar instead of sugar cane.
How would the weight of the stone ball matter, beyond overcoming any friction of the ramp? Objects accelerate down an inclined plane at the same rate, regardless of weight.
Wasn't that "steering a tank dropped from a plane by gunshot" from the A-Team Movie?
The flying tank was in the A-Team movie not Fast and Furious
Wasn’t the scene Adam’s referring to, about steering a tank that’s falling from a plane, from the A-Team movie? I don’t think it was a Fast & Furious movie scene.