What do you think of The Universe series?

  • Thread starter Thread starter kikko
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Series Universe
AI Thread Summary
The Universe series is criticized for being overly simplified, with too many interviews and insufficient animation, leading to disappointment among viewers. Some participants feel they gained more knowledge from introductory astronomy classes than from the series. There's a consensus that many science documentaries, including those featuring Michio Kaku, mix factual information with inaccuracies and speculative claims, prioritizing entertainment over truth. The general expectation is that these programs should provide more substantial scientific content rather than just appealing to a mass audience. Overall, viewers express a desire for documentaries that maintain scientific integrity while engaging the public.
kikko
Messages
47
Reaction score
0
I've seen a bit and thought it was overly simplified, and disappointed with there being so many interviews and little animation. I think I learned just as much through my intro astronomy class in college. I'm wondering if Hawking's Into the Universe is much better. I actually don't know much about informative space documentaries besides Cosmos and The Planets.
 
Last edited:
Astronomy news on Phys.org
kikko said:
I've seen a bit and thought it was overly simplified, and disappointed with there being so many interviews and little animation. I think I learned just as much through my intro astronomy class in college. I'm wondering if Hawking's Into the Universe is much better.

NONE of the TV programs contain totally factual information as far as I've seen. They all mix in real physics with a large amount of just nonsense and outright false statements. There have been several threads on this forum bemoaning that fact.

They are mass media popularizations, so we really should not expect otherwise. They are NOT in business to tell the truth but to sell ads.
 
The worst are the ones w/ Micchio Kaku. I appreciate him being one of the best theoretical physicists but all he does is preach about how cool the future will be. The worst part of it is all of the technology he talks about is so beyond hypothetical, that it isn't even known if what he is suggesting is possible to do in the first place. But he gets away from it by always saying "In the distant future, we will be able to do "X" ".

I get the audience he is going for is probably the scientific illiterate, but when the all-elusive science television series are put on broadcast, I just expect more.
 
Is a homemade radio telescope realistic? There seems to be a confluence of multiple technologies that makes the situation better than when I was a wee lad: software-defined radio (SDR), the easy availability of satellite dishes, surveillance drives, and fast CPUs. Let's take a step back - it is trivial to see the sun in radio. An old analog TV, a set of "rabbit ears" antenna, and you're good to go. Point the antenna at the sun (i.e. the ears are perpendicular to it) and there is...
This thread is dedicated to the beauty and awesomeness of our Universe. If you feel like it, please share video clips and photos (or nice animations) of space and objects in space in this thread. Your posts, clips and photos may by all means include scientific information; that does not make it less beautiful to me (n.b. the posts must of course comply with the PF guidelines, i.e. regarding science, only mainstream science is allowed, fringe/pseudoscience is not allowed). n.b. I start this...
Back
Top