sovietscience

[sovietscience]

A Year Spent In The Dark, 2015

So, beloved reader, its been awhile since I last even thought about posting anything on here, but what better excuse to wipe off the dust on the consoles in the Rocket Lab than to give you a good old fashioned American origin unknown list?

A My 10 Favorite Movies Of 2015 list!

If you remember from years past (which I’m sure you do, loyal reader), I will only choose my list from movies that a) came out in 2015 and b) I actually saw in a movie theater (not on Netflix, or ondemand etc.). Also, Star Wars: The Force Awakens does not count, it’s a given, like taking the center square first in tic-tac-toe, a no brainer.

Alright, in a somewhat unsure descending order, My 10 Favorite Movies of 2015:

10. Amy

9. Spotlight

8. It Follows 

7. Ant-Man

6. Tomorrowland

5. Brooklyn

4. Kingsman: The Secret Service

3. What We Do In The Shadows

2. Ex Machina

1. Creed

Boom! Did you hear that? The earth just shattered at the news of my number one pick of the year!

It’s best we just pick up the pieces and begin again in this new year, waiting patiently for what movies 2016 will bring, and which 10 will be Soviet Science’s favorite...

Happy New Year Folks!

[sovietscience]

For whatever the reason, two unauthorized movies are made about your life. The first is an independently released documentary, primarily comprised of interviews with people who know you and bootleg footage from your actual life. Critics are describing the documentary as “brutally honest and relentlessly fair.” Meanwhile, Columbia Tri-Star has produced a big-budget biopic of your life, casting major Hollywood stars as you and all your acquaintances; though the movie is based on actual events, screenwriters have taken some liberties with the facts. Critics are split on the artistic merits of this fictionalized account, but audiences love it. Which film would you be most interested in seeing?

I love movies. I enjoy both big budget movies and documentaries. That being said, this is truly a dilemma for me. Would I rather have my ego stroked or find out what my closest family, friends, and coworkers think of me? On one hand it's highly appealing to have my life given the Braveheart treatment*. But on the other hand, I value accuracy. Especially when it comes to my life. Listen, I know I'm a jerk. I know I come off as weird. I know that I can be a blowhard. So I don't really fear what my loved ones have to say about me on camera during the "brutally honest and relentlessly fair" part. My only concern is that I haven't really lived a very interesting life, so the doc will no doubt be boring as hell. So, I'd opt for seeing the documentary. *You know, big successful movie that isn't 100% accurate to the man's true history

[sovietscience]

Your best friend is taking a nap on the floor of your living room. Suddenly, you are faced with a bizarre existential problem: This friend is going to die unless you kick them (as hard as you can) in the rib cage. If you don’t kick them while they slumber, they will never wake up. However, you can never explain this to your friend; if you later inform them that you did this to save their life, they will also die from that. So you have to kick a sleeping friend in the ribs, and you can’t tell them why. Since you cannot tell your friend the truth, what excuse will you fabricate to explain this (seemingly inexplicable) attack?

Easy. I'd say I was getting up to go to the kitchen and I tripped over them. It actually scares me how quickly I thought up this lie...

[sovietscience]

You have won a prize. The prize has two options, and you can choose either (but not both). The first option is a year in Europe with a monthly stipend of $2,000. The second option is ten minutes on the moon. Which option do you select?

Being as I have never travelled to Europe, I imagine spending a year there with free cash in my pocket would be a year well spent. I would have plenty of time to cover a lot of ground at my leisure and take in everything I want to see/do. It would be a Euro-dream come true. But it would never be better than ten minutes on the moon. Only twelve people have been on the moon and if given the opportunity I would be lucky number 13. I have always dreamed of being able to stand on the moon's surface. How mind blowing would it be to stand there and look back at the earth or off into the vastness of space?! Europe will always be there to travel to on my own dime, chances to travel to the moon are once in a lifetime. Besides, I have it on good authority that the French are rude.

[sovietscience]

You are sitting in an empty bar (in a town you’ve never before visited), drinking Bacardi with a soft-spoken acquaintance you barely know. After an hour, a third individual walks into the tavern and sits by himself, and you ask your acquaintance who the new man is. “Be careful of that guy,” you are told. “He is a man with a past.” A few minutes later, a fourth person enters the bar; he also sits alone. You ask your acquaintance who this new individual is. “Be careful of that guy, too,” he says. “He is a man with no past.” Which of these two people do you trust less?

Obviously, the Man With No Past I trust the least. Why you ask? Because a man with a past you can predict. If he's got a history as a killer, you know not to get a ride with him! If the rumor is he sleeps with anything that's got a pulse, then you know not to leave your girlfriend alone with him. If he has a history of using too much salt in his cooking, you know to avoid his casserole at the church pot luck! The Man With No Past? For all you know* he could be a deep cover Russian spy and before you know it your inviting him over to your apartment where you carelessly left state secrets and nuclear launch codes from work laying on your coffee table! So in my opinion, it's much safer to give more trust to the killer salt wielding sex addict. At least you can trust him to be him. *And it's been well established you don't know shit.

[sovietscience]

”Dreams in Cosmos”

Aleksey Litvishkov is a digital artist from Saint Petersburg, Russia.

Like us on Facebook! Posted by Andrew.

[sovietscience]

Someone builds and optical portal that allows you to see a vision of your own life in the future (it’s essentially a crystal ball that shows a randomly selected image of what your life will be like in twenty years). You can only see into this portal for thirty seconds. When you finally peer into the crystal, you see yourself in a living room, two decades older than you are today. You are watching a Canadian football game, and you are extremely happy. You are wearing a CFL jersey. Your chair is surrounded by books and magazines that promote the Canadian Football League, and there are CFL pennants covering your walls. You are alone in the room, but you are gleefully muttering about historical moments in Canadian football history. It becomes clear that—for some unknown reason—you have become obsessed with Canadian football. And this future is static and absolute; no matter what you do, this future will happen. The optical portal is never wrong. This destiny cannot be changed. The next day, you are flipping through television channels and randomly come across a pre-season CFL game between the Toronto Argonauts and the Saskatchewan Roughriders. Knowing your inevitable future, do you now watch it?

Yes, I have to admit after seeing this future I would be curious to see what I was so excited about in the future. For the record, I have zero knowledge or interest in the CFL, so I have to imagine if I am that into it in the future then why wait to find out why. Also, I'm 75% sure by going ahead and watching the game that first time will pique my interest in the CFL (which I didn't have before) thus making it a self fulfilling prophecy.

[sovietscience]

You have a brain tumor. Though there is no discomfort at the moment, this tumor would unquestionably kill you in six months. However, your life can (and will) be saved by an operation; the only downside is that there will be a brutal incision to your frontal lobe. After the surgery, you will be significantly less intelligent. You will still be a fully functioning adult, but you will be less logical, you will have a terrible memory, and you will have little ability to understand complex concepts or difficult ideas. The surgery is in two weeks. How do you spend the next fourteen days?

Being the "Voice Of My Generation", I would of course write the Great American Novel that only the singular genius of me could write. But more likely, since I am not the voice of my generation nor am I a genius, I would probably waste a lot of time not thinking about it until the night before the surgery the lie awake all night stressing over my diminished intelligence. I might also write a letter (yes, a letter) to everyone in my life I hold dear telling them my favorite memory of them in case I lose those memories. Also, I might record a secret video to myself telling me some things in my past I might not want to forget.

[sovietscience]

For reasons that cannot be explained, cats can suddenly read at a twelfth-grade level. They can't talk and they can't write, but they can read silently and understand the text. Many cats love this new skill, because they now have something to do all day while they lay around the house; however, a few cats become depressed, because reading forces them to realize the limitations of their existence (not to mention the utter frustration of being unable to express themselves). This being the case, do you think the average cat would enjoy Garfield, or would cats find this cartoon to be an insulting caricature?

Cats would find it absolutely insulting. I'm sure cats find everything insulting. Cats seem like the prima donnas of the animal kingdom. I've only met one cat in my life time that I liked and (I think) liked me. On an unrelated note, I'm a dog person.

[sovietscience]

Every person you have ever slept with is invited to a banquet where you are the guest of honor. No one will be in attendance except you, the collection of your former lovers, and the catering service. After the meal, you are asked to give a fifteen-minute speech to the assembly. What do you talk about?

First of all it wouldn't be much of a banquet. Secondly I seriously doubt I could fill fifteen minutes. I would thank them and talk a little about my good (non sexual) memories of them.

[sovietscience]

You meet a wizard in downtown Chicago. The wizard tells you he can make you more attractive if you pay him money. When you ask how this process works, the wizard points to a random person on the street. You look at this random stranger. The wizard says, "I will now make them a dollar more attractive." He waves his magic wand. Ostensibly, this person does not change at all; as far as you can tell, nothing is different. But--somehow--this person is suddenly a little more appealing. The tangible difference is invisible to the naked eye, but you can't deny that this person is vaguely sexier. This wizard has a weird rule, though--you can only pay him once. You can't keep giving him money until you're satisfied. You can only pay him one lump sum up front. How much cash do you give the wizard?

That is a tough question to answer. Really, it's asking how attractive do I think I am currently. I think most people think they could be more attractive, though it's hard to gauge how truly attractive/unattractive you really are because you're too close to yourself. Basically being you makes you un-objective. Maybe it's smart to ask a random person on the street to tell you how much to give the wizard? That way you might get an honest accurate answer? Of course stopping someone randomly might make the uncomfortable judging your attractiveness. They might tell you to spend less money than you should so to not hurt your feelings... Hmm... $500 sounds like it might work.

[sovietscience]

You are watching a movie in a crowded theater. Though the plot is mediocre, you find yourself dazzled by the special effects. But with twenty minutes left in the film, you are struck with an undeniable feeling of doom: You are suddenly certain your mother has just died. There is no logical reason for this to be true, but you are certain of it. You are overtaken with the irrational metaphysical sense that--somewhere--your mom has just perished. But this is only an intuitive, amorphous feeling; there is no evidence for this, and your mother has not been ill. Would you immediately exit the theater, or would you finish watching the movie?

Of course I'd leave the theater and immediately call my mom! I love movies (you beloved reader surely can attest to this from previous posts), but I love my family much more. It isn't even a hard choice!

[sovietscience]

This is the opening line of Jay McInerney's Bright Lights, Big City: "You are not the kind of guy who would be in a place like this at this time of the morning." Think about that line in the context of the novel (assuming you've read it). Now go to your CD collection and find Heart's Little Queen album (assuming you own it). Listen to the opening riff to "Barracuda." Which of these two introductions is a higher form of art?

I don’t own either.

BUT I have heard the opening riff to Heart’s “Barracuda”.

So Barracuda wins by default.

And you Dear Reader lose because this is a four line posting.

[sovietscience]

A novel titled Interior Mirror is released to mammoth commerical success (despite middling reviews). However, a curious social trend emerges: Though no one can prove a direct scientific link, it appears that almost 30 percent of the people who read this book immediately become homosexual. Many of these newfound homosexuals credit the book for helping them reach this conclusion about their orientation, despite the fact that Interior Mirror is ostensibly a crime novel with no homoerotic content (and was written by a straight man). Would this phenomenon increase (or decrease) the likliehood of you reading this book?

It would increase it. I would probably be curious to see what about the book turned 30 percent of its readers gay. This of course is predicated on how long it holds my interest. I have a hard time finishing “bestseller thrillers” sometimes. I wonder how much of it you have to read to flip the switch (so to speak)?

I doubt a book will make me become homosexual, but if it does so be it, I guess I’ll be gay.

[sovietscience]

You meet the perfect person. Romantically, this person is ideal: You find them physically attractive, intellectually stimulating, consistently funny, and deeply compassionate. However, they have one quirk: This individual is obsessed with Jim Henson's gothic puppet fantasy The Dark Crystal. Beyond watching it on DVD at least once a month, he/she peppers casual conversation with Dark Crystal references, uses Dark Crystal analogies to explain everyday events, and occasionally likes to talk intensely about the film's "deeper philosophy." Would this be enough to stop you from marrying this individual?

I like Jim Henson (one of the best museum exhibits I've been to was a display of Jim Henson's works and private mementos). I like puppets. I like movies. I do not like The Dark Crystal. The thought of The Dark Crystal being an invisible third in my otherwise blissful relationship with this perfect woman leaves a sour taste in my mouth. That being said, I can overlook it (with the occasional option to roll my eyes every now and then). I know I have many many dumb things I talk about and work into conversation too often also, and I would hope this special person would abide my stupid hang ups too. So yeah, I would still consider marrying this dork.

[sovietscience]

Defying all expectation, a group of Scottish marine biologists capture a live Loch Ness Monster. In an almost unbelievable coincidence, a bear hunter in the Pacific Northwest shoots a Sasquatch in the thigh, thereby allowing zoologists to take the furry monster into captivity. These events happen on the same afternoon. That evening, the president announces he may have thyroid cancer and will undergo a biopsy later that week. You are the front page editor of The New York Times: What do you play as the biggest story?

On one hand you have a mythic Scottish creature that captures the imagination of many a monster hunter and Unsolved Mysteries viewer.

On the other hand you have a notorious American ape creature that inspired a monster truck and beef jerky commercials. 

On the other other hand you have the most important man in the world POSSIBLY having cancer.

Sorry Prez, but you got pushed to page 3 cause the only real dilemma I have is which impossible creature do I personally favor a wee bit more! 

Since I just used the word “wee” in a sentence, I’m going to go with Nessie as the big story.

My decision is nothing against Big Foot or the President, it’s just that the monster of Loch Ness has always piqued my interest and frightened me a little more.

[sovietscience]

At long last, someone invents "the dream VCR." This machine allows you to tape an entire evening's worth of your own dreams, which you can then watch at your leisure. However, the inventor of the dream VCR will only allow you to use this device of you agree to a strange caveat: When you watch your dreams, you must do so with your family and your closest friends in the same room. They get to watch your dreams along with you. And if you don't agree to this, you can't use the dream VCR. Would you still do this?

Maybe if I were Martin Luther King Jr I would, but since I'm not the Reverend Doctor, I'm going to have to pass. While I don't usually have dreams that could be embarrassing or offensive I have to account for the dreams I don't remember having. And those outliers are what's really scary.