<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title><![CDATA[Basically, if the robot was so close enough to Abigail Callaghan&#x27;s ship to stick in its rocket-powered fist and propel i]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto"><em>Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — Marvel/DC</em></p>
<hr />
<p dir="auto"><strong>ADyingFox</strong> — <em>10 years ago(June 14, 2015 08:08 AM)</em></p>
<p dir="auto">Basically, if the robot was so close enough to Abigail Callaghan's ship to stick in its rocket-powered fist and propel it back into the Stargate-esque rift/wormhole, then it could have just as easily grabbed onto any part of the ship/Hiro with its good left hand and then blast all three characters back home. It's a simple matter of engaging a basic physical law regarding inertia and conserved momentum, just saying<br />
But then again Doesn't the exerted force required to propel a physical body forward always generate an equal amount of force in the opposite direction. You hold onto a static object in space, without the influence of gravity, and then utilize a self-contained propellant to physically move the aforementioned object forward through space. Is that actually possible when the backward force of the propellant is providing an approximately equal amount in the opposite direction, essentially cancelling out forward force, because Baymax is holding on to it?<br />
Newton's Second Law of Motion: The relationship between an object's mass m, its acceleration a, and the applied force F is F = ma. Acceleration and force are vectors; in this law the direction of the force vector is the same as the direction of the acceleration vector.<br />
Newton's Third Law of Motion: For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.<br />
I'm reasonably sure the efficacy of a rocket-powered fist moving any object and its generated forward momentum in space, if you were still holding on to it, would depend on its mass, as well as the attenuation of the directional opposite momentum by the mass and structure of the rocket-fisted bearer. I recall Mythbusters Season 10, Episode 6, 'Blow Your Own Sail' did a trial involving similar elements related to fixing both a source of motion (a fan) facing into a sail onto the base of a remote-controlled car and seeing if such a vehicle could move itself forward. It failed up until the sail was altered to be larger than the area of thrust provided, allowing for a reflective net forward thrust vector.<br />
See the pertinent link below:<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1QJz-BVXCI4" rel="nofollow ugc">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1QJz-BVXCI4</a>.<br />
However, I was never a physics major at uni and am unsure as to the the degree of extrapolation that can be applied out in the vacuum of space; after all, you can't generate associated wind thrust in a void.<br />
Edit: While I was  perusing other posts, I noted someone suggested that Baymax could have potentially saved all three scene-associated characters if it had just leaned its back against the craft and fired the rocket-fist backwards away from the rift/wormhole This also sounds plausible but I would appreciate more definitive answers if they're out there <img src="https://filmglance.com/discuss/assets/plugins/nodebb-plugin-emoji/emoji/android/1f642.png?v=8570fb93240" class="not-responsive emoji emoji-android emoji--slightly_smiling_face" style="height:23px;width:auto;vertical-align:middle" title=":)" alt="🙂" /></p>
]]></description><link>https://filmglance.com/discuss/topic/70076/basically-if-the-robot-was-so-close-enough-to-abigail-callaghan-s-ship-to-stick-in-its-rocket-powered-fist-and-propel-i</link><generator>RSS for Node</generator><lastBuildDate>Tue, 12 May 2026 19:42:25 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://filmglance.com/discuss/topic/70076.rss" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><pubDate>Tue, 14 Apr 2026 04:45:57 GMT</pubDate><ttl>60</ttl><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to Basically, if the robot was so close enough to Abigail Callaghan&#x27;s ship to stick in its rocket-powered fist and propel i on Tue, 14 Apr 2026 04:46:01 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto"><strong>Bob_Brooker</strong> — <em>9 years ago(September 08, 2016 02:14 PM)</em></p>
<p dir="auto">There was another point brought up on a different board. It was easier for Baymax to correctly aim for the port opening if facing it than facing away from it. Also his extra mass and drag elements would have prevented the flight path from being straight. His own safety was unimportant to him, so even if saving himself causes a slight decrease in the odds of the two living people surviving, he wouldn't take it.</p>
<hr />
<p dir="auto">Last movie watched:<br />
Big Hero 6<br />
(8/10)</p>
]]></description><link>https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/721623</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/721623</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[fgadmin]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 14 Apr 2026 04:46:01 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to Basically, if the robot was so close enough to Abigail Callaghan&#x27;s ship to stick in its rocket-powered fist and propel i on Tue, 14 Apr 2026 04:46:01 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto"><strong>shoobe01</strong> — <em>9 years ago(September 04, 2016 01:12 PM)</em></p>
<p dir="auto">Yes, it would have been somewhat slower due to the extra mass being moved, but I have no concept how much Baymax weighs (or the pod for that matter). Not a lot more than a person, as he doesn't crush furniture or wooden staircases so slower, but there seemed to be plenty of time. Would 10% slower have been a problem? I don't think so.<br />
Unless I am recalling wrong. Not watching as I type this.</p>
]]></description><link>https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/721622</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/721622</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[fgadmin]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 14 Apr 2026 04:46:01 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to Basically, if the robot was so close enough to Abigail Callaghan&#x27;s ship to stick in its rocket-powered fist and propel i on Tue, 14 Apr 2026 04:46:00 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto"><strong>Bob_Brooker</strong> — <em>9 years ago(September 04, 2016 01:06 PM)</em></p>
<p dir="auto">But wouldn't the pod's drifting towards the opening be much slower and hence less effective if Baymax and not his fist had traveled along?</p>
<hr />
<p dir="auto">Last movie watched:<br />
Big Hero 6<br />
(8/10)</p>
]]></description><link>https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/721621</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/721621</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[fgadmin]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 14 Apr 2026 04:46:00 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to Basically, if the robot was so close enough to Abigail Callaghan&#x27;s ship to stick in its rocket-powered fist and propel i on Tue, 14 Apr 2026 04:46:00 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto"><strong>shoobe01</strong> — <em>10 years ago(December 27, 2015 06:51 PM)</em></p>
<p dir="auto">Extending this, if you don't get how rockets (or jets) work:<br />
The fuel for rockets is called the "reaction mass." You throw it away, in smallish quantities at a time, for a while, at very high speeds. Pushing off the launch pad, rocket tube, or end of your arm is not really important in the overall thrust imparted, and is often set up to have as little effect as possible for other reasons.<br />
F=mv^2  that doesn't show up right, but v-squared. Ejecting the reaction mass faster has more effect than adding mass.<br />
While we're here, turbojets take in air, combust with fuel, and shoot the mix out the back, very fast. Thrust.<br />
High bypass turbofans (all jet planes are now turbofans) have larger fans (the "turbines" at the front of your airliner engines are "fan" blades) to bring along even more air, which bypasses the combustion, but is still accelerated by the turbomachinery, so more thrust for lower cost.<br />
So yes, 99% (ish) of the reaction thrust from the fist was the rocket thrust. Baymax was thrown back by being against the fist while launching, but could have just held onto the pod, and after a few moments when his arm became free of it, the rocket would have propelled them just fine.</p>
]]></description><link>https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/721620</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/721620</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[fgadmin]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 14 Apr 2026 04:46:00 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to Basically, if the robot was so close enough to Abigail Callaghan&#x27;s ship to stick in its rocket-powered fist and propel i on Tue, 14 Apr 2026 04:45:59 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto"><strong>purple_dave</strong> — <em>10 years ago(December 05, 2015 07:38 AM)</em></p>
<p dir="auto">Newton's laws of motion don't apply to Beymax, as the fist is not being propelled by his arm.  It is being propelled by rocket thrusters built into the fist.  A jet taking off from a runway does not propel the runway backwards.<br />
But yes, in a smart world, all he would have had to do is shuck the leg armor (dead weight, needed to be replaced anyways), grab onto the pod, launch the fist, and come along for the ride.  And it would have neatly avoided the plot issue where Beymax without the Tadashi chip shouldn't have been able to pass as the sympathetic normal Beymax.</p>
]]></description><link>https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/721619</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/721619</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[fgadmin]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 14 Apr 2026 04:45:59 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to Basically, if the robot was so close enough to Abigail Callaghan&#x27;s ship to stick in its rocket-powered fist and propel i on Tue, 14 Apr 2026 04:45:58 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto"><strong>legendlength</strong> — <em>10 years ago(June 22, 2015 12:34 AM)</em></p>
<p dir="auto">I think it would depend on the physics of the wormhole which is not as scientific as it sounds IMO.</p>
]]></description><link>https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/721618</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/721618</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[fgadmin]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 14 Apr 2026 04:45:58 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to Basically, if the robot was so close enough to Abigail Callaghan&#x27;s ship to stick in its rocket-powered fist and propel i on Tue, 14 Apr 2026 04:45:58 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto"><strong>Angelpi92</strong> — <em>10 years ago(June 14, 2015 02:58 PM)</em></p>
<p dir="auto">i don't know how to science<br />
Here comes the smolder<br />
Proud Disnerd<br />
Resident Tangled expert<br />
BH6 Nerd (Tadashi is bae)</p>
]]></description><link>https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/721617</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/721617</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[fgadmin]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 14 Apr 2026 04:45:58 GMT</pubDate></item></channel></rss>