As I thought up this list, I came up with many many many more examples in my head of ones that were wrong. Many of which are due to Hollywood movies. So while this list may feature a lot from Hollywood, it's not restricted to that. It's really just a list of things that cheese me.- The movie Armageddon. Man do they have it wrong. There is so much sound in that movie - in a movie that takes place in Space! Space. A Vacuum! No particles (unless you consider planets, asteroids, et. al as particles... big particles). Sound is the vibration of particles. Sound is not an electromagnetic force. It's a wave of particles colliding. In space, there are no particles to wave, to collide, nothing. And there is no sound. Thus the caption for Alien: "In Space No One Can Hear You Scream" In fact, that movie also has a lot of sound in it. To date, just about the only movie I've seen that honors the no-sound-in-space rule is 2001, by Kubrick. Only Kubrick could really pull silence off. And that's why 2001 is pretty inaccessible to many people. They need their sound.- I'm going to be specific here about gravity on earth. By this I mean on the Earth's surface, and a few hundred feet above it. Movies get this wrong all the time - they have objects falling at different speeds, the best example being Spiderman who leaps upwards into the air, then arches his body in perfect form, and begins his rapid descent towards Mary Jane, who has been falling this entire time. Impressively, Spiderman catches up to her, and saves the day. Not in this world. I don't care if he's wearing a sleak, streamlined suit. Neither does physics. Objects fall at the same speed. Spiderman show-boating his jump into the air, and embellishing the heroic deed would have really just seen Mary Jane fall to her death...- I'm going to ignore the movie Core. That was pornography of physics. A more recent movie that really got my goat (thankfully I have many goats to be got), was Journey to the Center of the Earth. Than Brandon Frasier flick. I never saw it. I only saw the trailer. And the trailer was enough to tell me that there would be no science in this movie. What did I see? I saw a waterfall at the supposed center of the Earth. A waterfall? Sorry, but if you could - for a moment - assume that the center of the Earth was a hollow sphere - and not molten rock, completely hollow, then you would float around. Why? Because Gravity completely cancels itself out at the center of the Earth. Vector diagrams people. Center of the earth has no gravity. Nor is there a concept of direction. How can water even fall? That would assume there's a "down" at the center. There's no down. There's only symmetry. There's no up. There's only symmetry. There's physics, not some miserable attempt at a film.- People seem to change gravity as they see fit. Objects falling at different speeds - that's 6, gravity at the center of the earth, that's 5. But there's also the general misuse of gravity in many films. Like when Peter Parker punches Eddie Brock, and Eddie Brock flies accross the room in almost a straight line, and then starts an arc'd descent. Your eyes tell you that something looked weird about that. And it's because, frankly, your eyes know more about physics than the average Hollywood director.But more specifically, water at high speeds - Apparently Hollywood spends little time in the massive olympic sized pools they have in their backyards. Or at least, they don't fall into their pools at the high speeds they have in their movies, where someone will fall a great height into a pool of water and survive. Or skin across the surface of the water, and survive. If you've ever done a bellyflop into a pool, you'll know how much it hurts. Now imagine doing that after falling from a cliff. Or a helicopter. Maybe you'll survive... but if you think you're about to get back up and go fight the Amazon rebels.... think again.- I'm not even going to get into it. But if you've seen it in a scifi movie, or read it in a scifi book, there's a 99% chance they got it wrong.- Whether you consider yourself an evolutionist, or a creationist, Evolution as a theory is constantly used incorrectly. Plus it's argued against incorrectly. One common argument is that Hitler used evolution to justify the Holocaust... therefor, what? We should stop teaching evolution? To my knowledge, oil has also been the justification for some wars. As has religion. As has land. As has diamonds. Should we stop all these? Another argument against evolution is that of the watchmaker. Unfortunately, the watchmaker analogy has it completely wrong, and is wrought with so many fallacies in it, it cannot be taken seriously. And this notion changes what people think evolution really is.I know I spent little time really explaining the theories that I'm arguing Hollywood and company often get wrong. But I'm not about to explain them. Those who care will look it up. Those who won't, will buy tickets to the next