An astrophysicist explains the science behind the Netflix hit series created by book series, A Song of Ice and Fire, the hit HBO show that ran from 2011 to 2019 consists of eight seasons. Created by David Benioff and D.B. Weiss, the series garnered critical acclaim and achieved several notable records, including the series finale being HBO's most-watched episode ever, drawing 19.3 million viewers across all platforms.

Aside from the successful HBO series, Benioff has been involved in both blockbusters and critically acclaimed projects. He served as a writer for The Kite Runner and co-wrote X-Men Origins: Wolverine. He crossed paths with Weiss while working on an episode of It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia, where they co-wrote season 9, episode 8, "Flowers for Charlie." Following Game of Thrones' success, the creators came together for another ambitious project.

An Astrophysicist Comments On 3 Body Problem's Scientific Accuracy

The Netflix Series Is Far From Realistic

Based on the internationally celebrated science-fiction trilogy by Chinese author Cixin Liu, Netflix's 3 Body Problem was created by Benioff, Weiss, and True Blood's writer and executive producer, Alexander Woo. Since its release, the ambitious adaptation has received praise for its spectacular visuals and intimate stories. While the series stays faithful to the storyline, it has made several changes, including moving the main location to London and Oxford, and gender swapping some of the characters.

In an Insider video, astrophysicist Paul M. Sutter discusses the accuracy of the show. Despite being a science-heavy series, Sutter explains that the term "syzygy," also known as the three-body problem, where three suns align in the sky in the series, is used correctly. However, scenarios where people float in the air are far from being realistic, which earned the series only a 3 out of 10 rating for accuracy. Check out his comments below:

Did he say, "syzygy?" Good for him. I'd cry if I saw a syzygy. Syzygy is one of my favorite words in all of astronomy, and it's simply when more than two objects line up in a straight line. That's it. Anytime, you have more than two objects in the same system, you have a three-body or four-body problem, and on and on. In this case, for the show, they have three suns that are all orbiting around each other in a very complicated way.

And predicting how those stars are going to orbit is very challenging. A real three-body problem that we encounter all the time in the solar system is trying to predict the orbits of near-earth astroid. We have to calculate its trajectory through the solar system with all the gravitational influence of the sun, of the earth, of Jupiter, which gets really complicated really quickly, which is why we're always revising and updating our predictions of orbital trajectories of asteroids.

Syzygies do create slightly stronger gravitational pulls but this is a very extreme example that would not be realistic.

How 3 Body Problem Compares To Other Sci-Fi Projects

Sutter Liked Some Other Major Work

Looking at the video as a whole, Sutter was not just being overly harsh on sci-fi films and television in general. There were other projects that gave the expert positive impressions, including Christopher Nolan's Interstellar and Ridley Scott's The Martian. Sutter gave the former title a 9 out of 10 for accuracy and the latter a perfect 10, praising their depiction of black holes and of orbital physics, respectively.

3 Body Problem seasons 2 and 3 have also been confirmed, demonstrating the sci-fi show's success.

As such, Sutter's analysis of 3 Body Problem holds significant weight. He took issue with specific elements such as the extremity of the "gravitational influence" and its effect, which greatly impacts the likelihood of one of the show's most important plotlines. Because movies that came before it have better science than 3 Body Problem, it weakens the series' impact. This is a particularly bad look for Weiss and Benioff, who have gotten other flack before for their interpretation of later seasons of Game of Thrones.

Our Take On 3 Body Problem

It Makes Sense That It Receives A Low Accuracy Score

Despite being a science-heavy show, the divisive 3 Body Problem is far from being scientifically accurate, and it has a great reason. One of the best things about the show is its imagination and ability to bring nearly impossible scenarios to the small screen. The scene where everyone floats into the air is not even one of the extreme ones. The show also depicts highly dehydrated people coming to life and aliens trying to convey an idea through virtual reality games.

The show's scientific inaccuracies have not seemed to hold it back significantly. The series managed to get a Certified Fresh 79% Tomatometer on Rotten Tomatoes, and a 77% Popcornmeter from audiences. Screen Rant's Felipe Rangel was one of 3 Body Problem's champions, giving the show a 9 out of 10 and writing "With a strong ensemble cast, the sci-fi epic manages to give each of its core characters their time to shine, with some players specifically becoming standouts." 3 Body Problem seasons 2 and 3 have also been confirmed, demonstrating the sci-fi show's success.

The jaw-dropping moments have the Game of Thrones creators and the visual effects teams to thank. Without them, the show would lose so much of its spark. There are many changes that Netflix's 3 Body Problem made that allow ideas in the source material to shine in the television format. It seems that the show does a great job balancing the unrealistic aspects with scientific concepts. While it may not be the most scientifically accurate show, 3 Body Problem still connected with viewers.

Source: Insider/YouTube