Talk:Dekalog: One

Why did the ice crack?

A homeless man warms himself at a fire he has lit beside the lake. He keeps it burning all night. The film returns to the shot more than once. This suggests that Kieślowski does offer a reason why the ice was not as strong as it would normally be.

Should this be included in the description of the plot?

H. Peston (talk) 14:01, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

"Reason is defied with tragic results" makes no sense. Burning a fire at the edge of a frozen pond would not cause the ice to melt at the CENTER of the pond. Anyone with experience of freezing ponds will tell you that the ice nearest the shore is much thinner and more likely to melt. Heated air travels upward almost vertically in the absence of wind, so the only contribution to melting by the fire would be radiative - Which would melt the ice nearest the shore, if anything. The cause of death was excessive trust in simplistic models, exemplified by Pavel's conclusion about the chess prodigy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ~2026-10461-86 (talk) 06:27, 25 April 2026 (UTC)

The math (or physics) problem. Sloppy work or subtle attempt to foreshadow?

It appears that the problem is displayed incorrectly on the PC screen and that Pawel's answer is wrong (but is the result of using the formula displayed).
This does not appear to be only a problem in translation in the subtitles on the DVD.

The problem is (in the English subtitles):
Kermit the Frog flees from Miss Piggy on a sled at 62 kph.
Miss Piggy chases him on skis at 87 kph.
Kermit has a 3 minute head start.

The question appears to be: "How long will it take Miss Piggy to catch Kermit?"
The PC screen displays the following (without some text in Polish):

s1 = -V1 t
s = v2 (t + 180)
t = dt*v1 / v1 - v2

we see Pawel enter the values on the screen:
v1 = 87
v2 = 62
dt = 180

The answer comes out (omitting Polish text) 0.174h 626s and Pawel announces he has the answer "10 minutes 26 seconds".

Problem 1. The formula on screen should show s = V2 ( t + dt ) since dt =180 has not yet been entered.

Problem 2. The formula should be t = dt*v2 / v1 - v2 to reflect Kermit's head start at his speed v2 = 62, not v1. in addition, there probably should have been * for multiplication throughout the entire screen, not just on the "t =:. It would also be cleaner to write s and s1 as positive values, then solve for them (not shown on screen) being equal as shown below to arrive at the correct formula on the PC screen.

Derivation: v1*t = v2 (t + dt), v1*t = v2*t + v2*dt, v1*t - v2*t = v2*dt, (v1 - v2)*t = v2*dt, t = v2*dt / (v1 - v2).

Using the given values as shown in the movie on the PC screen above, the solution using the correct formula is 446.4s or 0.124h, 7 minutes 26 seconds rounded as in movie. Curiously, the movie solution 0.174h is the total time that Kermit travels including the head start.
That raises a question of mistranslation in the sub-titles, but the screen is still not right or consistent.

THE QUESTION. Is this merely sloppy work on the part of the production staff (artists who perhaps disdain such details and even science in general)?
(The incorrect formatting of the screen can only be sloppy work due to the pre-entered 180 in the value of "s".)

Or does it intentionally reflect the story's religious theme, against science in favor of faith along the "No Gods before me" idea as described in the Wikipedia Dekalog main article?

It it intended that Pawel and Krzysztof (his father) make one mistake in a calculation of no consequence foreshadowing a more crucial dependence on another calculation about the ice when there are serious consequences for being wrong? This puts their trust in science in the wrong twice.
Against that there seems to be no suggestion that faith would have prevented the ice breaking or improved the assessment of the ice. Also that Krzysztof checks out the ice personally, but apparently insufficiently, does not depend on the calculation, also warns about likely thin spots near the river (the breaking spot is not near the river).
Yet the ice breaks all the same so that tragedy will drive Krzysztof to the not yet completed church for the wax tears on the Madonna etc. A heavy handed device. But we were spared heavy handed proselytizing from either side in the dialog leading up to the climax. Jszigeti (talk) 19:51, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Did the homeless man die trying to save Pawel?

It appears that two bodies are pulled from the water and there is no one at the fire.
If so, should it be mentioned in the plot description? Jszigeti (talk) 19:51, 4 April 2019 (UTC)