I recently read that it was Interstellar’s 10th anniversary and figured watching the movie qualified me to write about astrophysics. Please be patient with me, this is my attempt at being a stem girlie.
Here goes nothing…
Ah, time. That elusive force we can never quite grasp. It’s what separates us from the dinosaurs, the deadline for tax returns, and past mistakes. New Year New Me! hahhahaha🤡hahahahaha
Two masterpieces—A Brief History of Time by Stephen Hawking and the cinematic thrill ride Interstellar—both tackle time and space. But how exactly do they compare? Let’s look at these two epic tales of black holes, theoretical physics, and headaches.
Plot: Who Needs Characters When You Have The Black Hole?
Hawking’s A Brief History of Time can be summarized as “the universe in a nutshell,” but not the kind you can crack a cold one open with the boys. No, it’s more like smoking crack and deluding yourself into thinking you can calculate quantum mechanics.
The book offers a whirlwind tour of the cosmos, from the Big Bang to black holes, with Hawking as our soft-spoken guide through the fog of relativity. Characters? Nah. The closest thing we get to a protagonist is gravity, and boy, does it have a way of pulling you in.
On the other hand, Interstellar is all about characters (and a giant, gaping black hole). The movie is a high-octane, emotional rollercoaster where Matthew McConaughey travels through space to save humanity. While Hawking would explain a black hole as the point where space and time curve infinitely, Interstellar prefers to dramatize it with stunning visuals, a mysterious bookshelf, and heart-wrenching goodbyes.
Time Travel: Science vs. The Power of Love
In A Brief History of Time, time travel is approached with cautious optimism. Hawking lays out the possibilities of bending spacetime, casually throwing around terms like “wormholes” and “closed timelike curves,” which sound like rejected Six Flags roller coasters. But he also warns us: time travel is a tricky business, and you might accidentally step on a butterfly and erase your entire existence.
In Interstellar, time travel isn’t just theoretical—it’s the whole point of the plot. Thanks to the magic of gravity and a plot twist involving a fifth dimension, McConaughey ages more slowly than everyone else. And who saves the day? Not equations or quantum theory, but the power of love. Where A Brief History of Time stays firmly grounded in scientific skepticism, Interstellar asks, “What if love could transcend time and space?” It’s a bold question. Just don’t try citing it in your next physics paper.
Conclusion: Do We Even Know What Time Is?
In conclusion, comparing A Brief History of Time and Interstellar is like comparing a textbook to an action movie. Hawking’s work will give you the tools to ponder the mysteries of the universe—if you can get past the brain cramps—and possibly send you spiraling into an existential crisis about the nature of reality. On the other hand, Interstellar will make you cry, cheer, and feel smart for briefly understanding what a tesseract is, even though it’s just a fancy four-dimensional Rubik’s Cube.
Both are valuable in their own right. One will make you feel like a genius if you can even comprehend half of it, while the other will make you feel like you could save the universe—if only you had a spaceship and a really, really good reason to leave Earth behind. So, whether you prefer the dense science of Stephen Hawking or the tear-jerking space adventure of Interstellar, one thing is certain: time may be relative, but entertainment is universal.
Welcome to Astrophysics for Dummies: Time, Space, and Headaches—because understanding the universe isn’t supposed to be easy, but man do you sound smart if you do.
