New Cosmos: A Spacetime Odyssey 2014 TV Series

[collinsmark]

Just watched Season 1, episode 8. I loved it. So far I'm incredibly impressed. All the spirit of the original Cosmos, and I'm still learning good stuff. Just wonderful. I love it.

 

[Enigman]

It reminded me of:

 

[micromass]

Just watched Season 1, episode 8. I loved it. So far I'm incredibly impressed. All the spirit of the original Cosmos, and I'm still learning good stuff. Just wonderful. I love it.

Yeah, it's a really good series so far. I really enjoy the focus on the history of science. Many science enthousiasts already know most of the facts, but rarely know the history involved.

 

[Algr]

Lately the series is moving more into new material that I didn't already know. It's getting PERSONAL!

:)

 

[ZombieFeynman]

I think they are doing a really excellent job.

 

[Astronuc]

Just watched Season 1, episode 8. I loved it. So far I'm incredibly impressed. All the spirit of the original Cosmos, and I'm still learning good stuff. Just wonderful. I love it.

I have to catch up with the series. I watched episode 8, and I was interested to learn about the development of the stellar classification system, and the work done by the team of women at Harvard, and of Cecilia Payne's dissertation on stellar composition, which opposed the prevailing understanding of the time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annie_Jump_Cannon
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henrietta_Swan_Leavitt
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonia_Maury

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cecilia_Payne-Gaposchkin

https://www.amnh.org/learn-teach/curriculum-collections/cosmic-horizons-book/cecilia-payne-profile

https://www.amnh.org/explore/news-blogs/news-posts/what-is-a-cepheid-variable-star (this is an additional link)

https://www.amnh.org/learn-teach/curriculum-collections/cosmic-horizons-book

"Excerpts from Cosmic Horizons: Astronomy at the Cutting Edge, edited by Steven Soter and Neil deGrasse Tyson, a publication of the New Press. © 2000 American Museum of Natural History."

 

[D H]

I wasn't that thrilled with tonight's episode. The first half was overly speculative on the origin of life. At this time, the correct answer to "how did life begin" is "we don't know (but we have some guesses)." Tyson brought out one of the most speculative guesses of all, exogenesis/panspermia. Panspermia says life came to Earth from Mars, or maybe from a planet orbiting some other star. What about all of those other guesses? Tyson only mentioned a couple, in very brief passing. There are a number of others he didn't mention at all. For now, they are all guesses.

I've never liked it when popularizers of science tout their own special speculation as the answer to life, the universe, and everything without one mention that what they are touting is highly speculative. I was hoping that Tyson would rise above this, but apparently not.

 

[Evo]

That's terrible.

I wonder how much say he has over the script? If any? He's just the narrator.

 

[Sparer]

I LOVED the optics episode, it was awesome!

 

[D H]

I wonder how much say he has over the script? If any? He's just the narrator.

I suspect quite a bit. The preachy moments, and there have been a few, are consistent with his preachy moments elsewhere. Regarding tonight's episode, he is an astrophysicist, after all. Exogenesis / panspermia is consonant with his profession. Confirmation bias, perhaps. Panspermia says his science is indeed the answer to life, the universe, and everything.

 

[mheslep]

That's terrible.

I wonder how much say he has over the script? If any? He's just the narrator.

I'm hearing more and more of the tone of Ann Druyan (producer) on the episodes. Her bio says she was once into ancient astronauts, pre Sagan.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

I posted the comment on Twitter and Jonathan McDowell of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics wrote

I think speculative is fine, but they should make the boundary btwn science and spec clearer

 

[mheslep]

Last week came the announcement that 'the greatest genius who ever lived' was Newton, period. No IMO, no in this or that field, no dependence on influence, no qualifiers at all. Sorry Aristotle, Shakespeare, thanks for playing but our host NgT says you go home with the goat from door two.

 

[Evo]

I'm hearing more and more of the tone of Ann Druyan (producer) on the episodes. Her bio says she was once into ancient astronauts, pre Sagan.

I had heard this part was going to be a problem due to her wonky beliefs. Too bad.

 

[gfd43tg]

I watched the episode about faraday and that was the first episode I have seen. I thought it was good but I'm not into the cartoons, I would prefer actors.

 

[tfr000]

Well I've seen a few of the episodes. I don't dig the cartoons either - I feel like I'm watching "schoolhouse rock". It also seems to spend a lot of time making sure minor characters in science history get their recognition, rather than actually explaining the science they discovered. The music, compared to the original, isn't doing it for me. Summing up... I fell asleep during the last episode I watched. Not at all absorbing.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

Well I've seen a few of the episodes. I don't dig the cartoons either - I feel like I'm watching "schoolhouse rock".

The producer, Seth MacFarlane, is an animator so we shouldn't be surprised by animations :)

 

[lendav_rott]

How many episodes are there? The last one I saw is entitled "Immortals". I loved the episode about optics and then the one about Faraday's discoveries.

 

[Algr]

There are 13 episodes. Tomorow (June 8) is the last one.