New Cosmos: A Spacetime Odyssey 2014 TV Series

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the new Cosmos TV series titled "A Spacetime Odyssey," which is a reboot of the original Cosmos series. Participants share their thoughts, reactions, and questions regarding the show's content, presentation, and its place in popular science media. The scope includes viewer expectations, comparisons to the original series, and the overall impact of the series on public understanding of science.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express excitement about the new series, highlighting the anticipated quality of CGI and educational content.
  • Others reflect on their personal experiences with the original Cosmos series and how it shaped their understanding of science.
  • A few participants criticize the new series for prioritizing entertainment over scientific accuracy, questioning the depth of explanations provided.
  • There are mixed feelings about the trailer, with some finding it bizarre and others expressing confusion about the series' focus.
  • Some participants note that the series appears to be aimed at a broad audience, potentially sacrificing depth for accessibility.
  • Concerns are raised about the inclusion of political figures in the series and its potential impact on audience reception.
  • Several participants mention the historical context of scientific concepts as a key aspect of the series, similar to the original Cosmos.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally do not reach a consensus on the quality and effectiveness of the new series. While some express enjoyment and appreciation for its visuals and educational intent, others voice disappointment regarding its scientific rigor and depth. The discussion remains unresolved with competing views on the show's merits.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note that the series may not delve deeply into complex scientific topics, suggesting a focus on basic science and broad themes. There are also references to varying expectations based on prior experiences with the original series.

Who May Find This Useful

Viewers interested in popular science programming, fans of the original Cosmos series, and those curious about the intersection of science and entertainment may find this discussion relevant.

  • #31
Not sure how well this link works for everybody, but it worked for me.

http://www.fox.com/watch/183733315515

(There's commercials to sit through, but it's worth it.)

I loved it! :!) :thumbs:

[Edit: I see Evo already posted the link a few posts ago. I got so excited, I didn't notice. Nevermind.]
 
Last edited:
Astronomy news on Phys.org
  • #32
The video you are attempting to watch is only available to viewers within the US, US territories, and military bases.
 
  • #33
collinsmark said:
Not sure how well this link works for everybody, but it worked for me.

http://www.fox.com/watch/183733315515

Works for me, thanks!
 
  • #34
For those of you having issues watching via Fox's website, try Hulu's site. Not sure if it will remove the international restrictions, but I figured it's worth a try. Here is the link to the first episode of the series:

http://www.hulu.com/watch/604551
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #35
Dembadon said:
For those of you having issues watching via Fox's website, try Hulu's site. Not sure if it will remove the international restrictions, but I figured it's worth a try. Here is the link to the first episode of the series:

http://www.hulu.com/watch/604551

Blocked, says only accessible from the US. I'd be surprised if there's any legal ways to view this outside the US without jumping through hoops.

<ducks under swinging ban hammer>There's always US proxy servers!</ducks under swinging ban hammer>
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #36
It's available in 180 countries.

Fox Networks Group today announced its first ever cross-network global premiere event — for Seth MacFarlane‘s passion project, Cosmos: A Spacetime Odyssey, on Sunday, March 9, 9-10 PM ET/PT. In addition to premiering on the 10 U.S. networks simulcasting the premiere episode — Fox Broadcasting Company, National Geographic Channel, FX, FXX, FXM, FOX Sports 1, FOX Sports 2, Nat Geo Wild, Nat Geo Mundo and FOX Life — and on the Fox International Channels and National Geographic Channels International, as previously announced, Cosmos will premiere on all 90 National Geographic Channels in 180 countries, as well as 120 Fox-branded channels in 125 countries, making this the largest global launch ever for a television series. Rolling out immediately after the U.S. premiere, international markets will begin airing the premiere episode day and date on both Fox-branded and National Geographic Channels, concluding within one week of the domestic premiere event. The additional 12 episodes will air exclusively on National Geographic Channels outside the U.S.
So you'll need access to either one of Fox or Nat Geo's international stations.

http://www.deadline.com/2014/02/fox...cetime-odyssey-in-181-countries-220-channels/
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
  • #37
Anyone know what the deal is with the cosmo calendar of events in the final 2/3 of the show? Neil says something like the birth of the Earth was on March 15th, life walked out of the sea on June 19th and the first flower bloomed on June 20th etc etc. What is all that about?
 
  • #38
Greg Bernhardt said:
Anyone know what the deal is with the calendar of events in the final 2/3 of the show? Neil says something like the birth of the Earth was on March 15th, life walked out of the sea on June 19th and the first flower bloomed on June 20th etc etc. What is all that about?

He assumed that the time from the start of the universe to now is one full year. So the big bang happened at january first, and now is december 31th midnight.
 
  • #39
micromass said:
He assumed that the time from the start of the universe to now is one full year. So the big bang happened at january first, and now is december 31th midnight.

Got it, thanks! :)
 
  • #40
Seth MacFarlane says Cosmos is "Entertainment with a goal". A lot of people will instantly have a problem with that. However, for the general public it's exactly what they need to be inspired and have their minds opened. I trust the talent behind the show and the first episode was quite good. Science needs this general audience exposure.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ua5xqQpZp8Q
 
  • #41
TV already has the like of Kaku and Morgan Freeman on the science channel to name the planets with a nice light show to interest the young or those otherwise completely ignorant of science On prime-time TV I understand the networks would not forgo that audience in pursuit of narrower demographic.

But here, in this particular case, we have Tyson who has the rare gift of being a superb communicator *of* science, is also in fact a quality scientist, like his predecessor Sagan. So I was expecting, or hoping, for more depth beyond the light show.
 
  • #42
Greg Bernhardt said:
... Science needs this general audience exposure.
Right, but what science was exposed? Sun plus eight planets, plus Pluto, plus the Oort cloud, makes a solar system; so many SS make a galaxy, so many galaxies a cluster, so many clusters make, etc.

I did like the history. When the narration intro to the astronomical history started I expected the cliche ... Copernicus, Galileo, not Bruno who, given what's know today, had the more interesting vision to my mind. I expect that choice (by Tyson, Druyan?) was making a point.
 
  • #43
Hi mheslep,

I'm not seeing how this:
mheslep said:
...I was expecting, or hoping, for more depth...
follows from this:
mheslep said:
... On prime-time TV I understand the networks would not forgo that audience in pursuit of narrower demographic.

If you knew the major networks would prefer accessibility to depth, were you hoping Fox would be the exception?
 
  • #44
mheslep said:
Right, but what science was exposed? Sun plus eight planets, plus Pluto, plus the Oort cloud, makes a solar system; so many SS make a galaxy, so many galaxies a cluster, so many clusters make, etc.

Too much and you lose people. You start talking technical and the general public changes the channel to The Simpsons. The show is meant to capture attention and inspire.
 
  • #45
Greg Bernhardt said:
Seth MacFarlane says Cosmos is "Entertainment with a goal". A lot of people will instantly have a problem with that. However, for the general public it's exactly what they need to be inspired and have their minds opened. I trust the talent behind the show and the first episode was quite good. Science needs this general audience exposure.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ua5xqQpZp8Q

Nurturing the world's interest at large is beneficial to science. People at large have influence in the budget that is given to NASA,NSF, and other organizations.

I just wish that some other physics would get some airtime. The public at large seems to display these two equalities

Physics = Space
Science Funding = NASA funding
 
  • #46
jesse73 said:
I just wish that some other physics would get some airtime. The public at large seems to display these two equalities

Physics = Space
Science Funding = NASA funding

Try pitching a documentary on hydrodynamics to Fox. This is about as good as it gets for major network. It still only got a 2.9 rating with 8.5 million viewers. My guess is that even this broad and flashy series will be seen by the networks as a moderate failure.
 
  • #47
Greg Bernhardt said:
Try pitching a documentary on hydrodynamics to Fox. This is about as good as it gets for major network. It still only got a 2.9 rating with 8.5 million viewers. My guess is that even this broad and flashy series will be seen by the networks as a moderate failure.

It depends on demographics but beautiful images arent restricted to space.

http://vimeo.com/87342468

There is also an interested public because you do see these type of videos get popular. The reason it is not on TV has less to presentation/content and more to do with it not being an existing formula.

Cosmos wouldn't be on TV if it wasnt an established formula because of Carl Sagan.
 
  • #48
mheslep said:
Right, but what science was exposed? Sun plus eight planets, plus Pluto, plus the Oort cloud, makes a solar system; so many SS make a galaxy, so many galaxies a cluster, so many clusters make, etc.

He also mentioned the biggie bangie (and hinted at the multiverse hypothese(s)). But I do agree, it was a little thin. Yet it felt like an introduction to the cosmos. Hopefully it will go a little bit deeper in the upcoming episodes. But I am picky - however it turns out, there will likely be something I will criticise. :biggrin:
 
Last edited:
  • #49
  • #50
lisab said:
1 In 4 Americans Thinks The Sun Goes Around The Earth, Survey Says
Excellent point :thumbs:. It makes you think about the importance of the spreading of basic science, actually. (again, with "basic" I mean, not too deep and detailed - but it surely isn't easy to "hit the right note", I suppose.
 
Last edited:
  • #52
Dembadon said:
Hi mheslep,

I'm not seeing how this:

follows from this:If you knew the major networks would prefer accessibility to depth, were you hoping Fox would be the exception?
I was hoping that Tyson could be, yes, on whatever forum.

I've seen him speak to crowds in person before and choose analogies in answer to questions about science that were common and available to everyone, yet clear and correct to a deep level. That's not easy to do. Feynman had the gift, here on Aunt Minnie ...

Another example: history. Most of what's available on air is dry or shallow, but occasionally a talent like Ken Burns comes along. He takes a still B&W photo and a little music and he brings an entire long past era to life like nothing seen before, where every original bit of research offered on air by the scholars only makes the topic more personal, real.
 
Last edited:
  • #53
Greg Bernhardt said:
Too much and you lose people. You start talking technical and the general public changes the channel to The Simpsons. The show is meant to capture attention and inspire.
Depends on how its told. Would this clip lose people because it is too technical? I say no, and he has no space ship.:wink:
 
  • #54
DennisN said:
He also mentioned the biggie bangie (and hinted at the multiverse hypothese(s)). ...
Yep, thanks, I'd forgotten.
 
  • #56
1 In 4 Americans Thinks

1 in how many NPR news reporters can does grammar?
 
  • #57
AlephZero said:
1 in how many NPR news reporters can does grammar?

The subject of "thinks" is "one," so the s is warranted.
 
  • #58
AlephZero said:
1 in how many NPR news reporters can does grammar?
can does? :D is that proper English?
 
  • #59
lendav_rott said:
can does? :D is that proper English?

Its a proper joke.
:smile:

P.S. I don't envy the one American who is inside the other four...
 
  • #60
Enigman said:
It's a proper joke.


While we're on about grammar.

:biggrin::wink:
 

Similar threads

MHB Cosmos: A Space-Time Odyssey premiere's Sunday, March 9
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Graduate Some black holes may actually be Quark Stars
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
6K
  • Sticky
Kerbal Space Program Tutorial Series - Open Access to 1.7
  • · Replies 48 ·
2
Replies
48
Views
68K