Neil deGrasse Tyson reboots Carl Sagan's "Cosmos"

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Fritzo

Lifer
Jan 3, 2001
41,884
2,124
126
I wonder if they'll cover any of the recent multi-verse theories that some scientists have been hypothesizing and theorizing about in recent years.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nZiROWO6iVs

Michio Kaku reminds me as much as Carl Sagan as anyone else.




.....

I used to follow Kaku quite a bit, but he's gotten too fringy in the last few years because he found that's how he gets the most attention. When you start teaching hypothesizes as facts, you start to lose credibility.
 

TraumaRN

Diamond Member
Jun 5, 2005
6,893
63
91
In case you were wondering...

Sunday, March 9, 2014, at 9pm on FOX, the 13-part weekly TV series "Cosmos: A SpaceTime Odyssey" begins in the United States. Within seven days of this premiere, this first episode will have appeared in 181 countries, translated into 45 languages, via the National Geographic Network.

It's the continuation of Carl Sagan's landmark TV series from 1980, but brought into the 21st century. Cosmos is the story of how we came to find our place in the universe (not only where we are, but when we are) and why it matters to our civilization that we continue this searching for the truths of Nature.

The marketing plan for the series has been huge. In fact, it's the largest roll-out of a TV series of any kind in the history of television:

1) Cosmos is appearing not only on FOX, but this first episode will air simultaneously on ten of FOX's affiliate cable networks, including the National Geographic Channel, which FOX owns, and FOX Sports 1 & 2.

3) The series was promo'ed during the World Series this past October, and during the Super Bowl this past February.

4) Every major media outlet has written about the series - from the NYTImes, to USAToday, to TIME, to People, to GQ, to Parade, to The New Yorker. And the list goes on and on.

5) Major broadcast media also expressed huge interest.

So the expectations are high all around for the success of the Series. But more importantly, I think it serves as evidence that science has officially become mainstream.

Cosmos is appearing on FOX, which may at first seem like an unholy alliance. But I had became friends with Seth MacFarlane (best known as the writer and creator of the "Family Guy" animated series on FOX) at a 2008 kickoff meeting of the Science & Entertainment Exchange, which is a satellite branch in Los Angeles of the National Academy of Sciences. The office is conceived to explore any and all ways that science might encourage Hollywood to include science facts, themes, and characters in their portfolio of storytelling in television & film. Seth is a founding member of their Advisory Board. That's where I first learned of his deep interest in science, and more importantly, his deep interest in raising science literacy in the public. Upon learning that we were shopping Cosmos around to all the usual TV outlets for science documentaries, he suggested we bring the idea to FOX. They warmed to the Series, and, upon reviewing scenes and visualizations in progress, they steadily grew their marketing interest. Bringing us to today.

The series was written by the talented dyad of Ann Druyan and Steven Soter, who co-wrote the first two space shows of the newly rebuild Hayden Planetarium, after we opened the Rose Center for Earth and Space in 2000. They were also co-writers alongside Carl Sagan of the original series, so the new Cosmos carries the proper genetic legacy.

The Director is Brannon Braga, who has many film and TV credits, but is best known to his fan-base as a writer and director of the StarTrek Next Generation TV series.

The Director of Photography is Bill Pope, who is perhaps best known as the cinematographer of the Matrix trilogy and of Spiderman. So he's done interesting things with the camera. Combine this with a visual effect budget worthy of primetime network television and the story of the universe (and our place within it) comes alive as never before.

The musical composer for the series is Alan Silvestri, who scored all 13 episodes. He's done many films. But my two favorites among them are "Forrest Gump" and "Contact".

Another 700 people worked on this series in one way or another.

I serve as Host, Narrator, and Executive Editor.

I hope you get to see at least some of the series. It's conceived and designed to affect the viewer not only intellectually, but emotionally. And at its best, will reinvigorate the sense of wonder in us all.

As always, keep looking up.

-Neil deGrasse Tyson
 

BudAshes

Lifer
Jul 20, 2003
13,913
3,195
146
This is exciting. The same channel that brought us "Was the moon landing fake?" is now bringing back Cosmos.
 

blankslate

Diamond Member
Jun 16, 2008
8,595
474
126
I used to follow Kaku quite a bit, but he's gotten too fringy in the last few years because he found that's how he gets the most attention. When you start teaching hypothesizes as facts, you start to lose credibility.

I understand the criticism and the point is taken I only hope that is his excitement over the hypothesis and layman interviewers not asking the exacting question often enough when does the hypothesis become more of a theory.

I do find the idea fascinating myself as it was the idea that ST:TNG played upon in the episode "Parallels".

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/lisa-mission-gravitational-waves/
The project in the above link was supposed to provide real evidence for or indicate a lack of evidence of the hypothesis unfortunately budget cutbacks meant that it did not launch and perhaps will have to be scaled back to ever launch at all.

However, a lack of expected particles found in addition to the Higgs-Boson seem to indicate problems with a single universe.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/a...ations-lend-support-to-multiverse-hypothesis/
The spectacular discovery of the Higgs boson in July 2012 confirmed a nearly 50-year-old theory of how elementary particles acquire mass, which enables them to form big structures such as galaxies and humans. “The fact that it was seen more or less where we expected to find it is a triumph for experiment, it’s a triumph for theory, and it’s an indication that physics works,” Arkani-Hamed told the crowd.


However, in order for the Higgs boson to make sense with the mass (or equivalent energy) it was determined to have, the LHC needed to find a swarm of other particles, too. None turned up.
With the discovery of only one particle, the LHC experiments deepened a profound problem in physics that had been brewing for decades. Modern equations seem to capture reality with breathtaking accuracy, correctly predicting the values of many constants of nature and the existence of particles like the Higgs. Yet a few constants — including the mass of the Higgs boson — are exponentially different from what these trusted laws indicate they should be, in ways that would rule out any chance of life, unless the universe is shaped by inexplicable fine-tunings and cancellations.


In peril is the notion of “naturalness,” Albert Einstein’s dream that the laws of nature are sublimely beautiful, inevitable and self-contained. Without it, physicists face the harsh prospect that those laws are just an arbitrary, messy outcome of random fluctuations in the fabric of space and time.


The LHC will resume smashing protons in 2015 in a last-ditch search for answers. But in papers, talks and interviews, Arkani-Hamed and many other top physicists are already confronting the possibility that the universe might be unnatural. (There is wide disagreement, however, about what it would take to prove it.)


The upgraded LHC will explore ever-higher energy scales in its next run, but even if new particles are found, they will almost definitely be too heavy to influence the Higgs mass in quite the right way. The Higgs will still seem at least 10 or 100 times too light. Physicists disagree about whether this is acceptable in a natural, stand-alone universe. “Fine-tuned a little — maybe it just happens,” said Lisa Randall, a professor at Harvard University. But in Arkani-Hamed’s opinion, being “a little bit tuned is like being a little bit pregnant. It just doesn’t exist.”


If no new particles appear and the Higgs remains astronomically fine-tuned, then the multiverse hypothesis will stride into the limelight. “It doesn’t mean it’s right,” said Bousso, a longtime supporter of the multiverse picture, “but it does mean it’s the only game in town.”
Hopefully a version of the satellite observatory launches and evidence one way or another can be found from two avenues.



.....
 
Last edited:

SKORPI0

Lifer
Jan 18, 2000
18,406
2,309
136
Not at home right now, but with my Xfinity TV subscription I'm watching the live stream at National Geographic. :awe:

Cosmos.jpg

http://xfinitytv.comcast.net/live/network/natgeo
 
Last edited:

phucheneh

Diamond Member
Jun 30, 2012
7,306
5
0
I'm only like five minutes in and already feeling doubtful.

But I also really don't like NDT (or 'NGT' or however he likes his serial killer name abbreviated). Shoulda just given it to Brian Cox. His childlike enthusiasm fuels these things much better than a big cloud of smug.
 
Mar 16, 2005
13,864
108
106
first 20 minutes is kinda boring, sad to say.

it feels like he's talking to us, assuming we have an 8th grade education.
 

gorcorps

aka Brandon
Jul 18, 2004
30,737
448
126
first 20 minutes is kinda boring, sad to say.

it feels like he's talking to us, assuming we have an 8th grade education.

It's on a major network, so dumbed down to the lowest common denominator isn't a surprise. It's a shame, but not a surprise
 

TraumaRN

Diamond Member
Jun 5, 2005
6,893
63
91
It's on a major network, so dumbed down to the lowest common denominator isn't a surprise. It's a shame, but not a surprise

Just like to point out this kind of science is literally unknown to many many Americans. Moreover this is about communicating science and knowledge to the masses so it makes sense to keep some aspects simple, especially on the introductory episode.
 
Last edited:

dennilfloss

Past Lifer 1957-2014 In Memoriam
Oct 21, 1999
30,549
12
0
dennilfloss.blogspot.com
The asteroid belt is not that dense! This is like when they encounter a nebula in Star Trek and can barely see whereas in real life nebulae are way ephemeral and just look dense at a vast distance.
 

phucheneh

Diamond Member
Jun 30, 2012
7,306
5
0
I am a goddamn militant nontheist and the apparent usage of the majority of this first episode as condemnation of the Catholic church is still making me angry. This is not supposed to be the point, you fucking assclowns.
 

phucheneh

Diamond Member
Jun 30, 2012
7,306
5
0
Alright fuck it, I'm calling it.

Seth Mcfarlane and Lando Calrissian have ruined science.
 

Ichinisan

Lifer
Oct 9, 2002
28,298
1,234
136
It was perfect for people who haven't watched this kind of stuff before. This was just the introductory episode; meant to capture the attention of the simple-minded.

Can't wait to see the rest of them.
 

Jeff7

Lifer
Jan 4, 2001
41,599
19
81
The asteroid belt is not that dense! This is like when they encounter a nebula in Star Trek and can barely see whereas in real life nebulae are way ephemeral and just look dense at a vast distance.
Yes, I love the old "hide in a nebula!" thing. :D

If you had a sealed box-of-nebula here on Earth, it would be darn close to being classified as a vacuum. Our atmosphere would be a better place to hide.



But, Wrath of Khan just wouldn't have been as interesting.

"'Hide' in a nebula that's effectively transparent? Does anyone have any useful ideas, or are we all about to die?"
 
Last edited:

Retro Rob

Diamond Member
Apr 22, 2012
8,150
108
106
Just like to point out this kind of science is literally unknown to many many Americans. Moreover this is about communicating science and knowledge to the masses so it makes sense to keep some aspects simple, especially on the introductory episode.

Indeed, and I also think that with the first episode, it is designed to spark interest in rest of the series.

You have to be able to reach anyone with this, or you'd lose your audience pretty quickly.

Bravo for keeping it easy to understand.
 

Duddy

Diamond Member
Jul 22, 2002
4,675
9
81
Just like to point out this kind of science is literally unknown to many many Americans. Moreover this is about communicating science and knowledge to the masses so it makes sense to keep some aspects simple, especially on the introductory episode.

I'm losing my mind about this. Go on Twitter and see that #mindfuck was trending. There are MILLIONS of people who have never grasped these ideas, simply because they were just text in their high school science books.

NDT himself said he structured the information he was giving to a point that is universal to as many ages and intellects as possible. People who already know all these things should be excited that the message of science is being spread across the planet tonight.
 

Duddy

Diamond Member
Jul 22, 2002
4,675
9
81
The asteroid belt is not that dense! This is like when they encounter a nebula in Star Trek and can barely see whereas in real life nebulae are way ephemeral and just look dense at a vast distance.

The true density of the asteroid belt does not make for good visuals.
 

Jeff7

Lifer
Jan 4, 2001
41,599
19
81
I'm losing my mind about this. Go on Twitter and see that #mindfuck was trending. There are MILLIONS of people who have never grasped these ideas, simply because they were just text in their high school science books.

NDT himself said he structured the information he was giving to a point that is universal to as many ages and intellects as possible. People who already know all these things should be excited that the message of science is being spread across the planet tonight.
Hell, there are plenty of people who don't know the difference between millions, billions, or trillions, or even what they mean in the first place.



"That's some kind of big number, right?"
 
Last edited: