NASASpaceFlight.com Forum

General Discussion => Spaceflight Entertainment and Hobbies => Topic started by: Khadgars on 07/23/2013 10:33 PM

Title: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: Khadgars on 07/23/2013 10:33 PM
It may have already been stated on another thread, and if so feel free to delete this post.  But I thought we could create a specific thread for the new Cosmos series by Neil deGrasse Tyson and his continuing the legendary work of Carl Sagan.  Can't wait!




http://www.space.com/22058-cosmos-a-spacetimes-odyssey-with-neil-degrasse-tyson-revealed-video.html
Title: Re: Cosmos
Post by: Robotbeat on 07/23/2013 10:37 PM
www.youtube.com/watch?v=gMJxjYRXYkU

(Just post the regular, vanilla link, don't post all the embed code or it won't embed in this forum!)

Example:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gMJxjYRXYkU

EDIT: Just watched it. Looks awesome. I hope it keeps both the sciency passion of the original AND the exciting-ness needed to catch viewership. I'll be watching.
Title: Re: Cosmos
Post by: Khadgars on 07/23/2013 11:17 PM
Yeah finally figured that out lol, thanks.  Yeah looks pretty awesome, if anyone can continue the work of Carl Sagan, its Neil.
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: tigerade on 07/24/2013 12:08 AM
I am also excited for this series.  If this gets a new generation interested in science and space, I'm all for it.  :)
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: Khadgars on 07/25/2013 08:42 PM
Surprised more people are excited about this  ???
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: Ben the Space Brit on 07/25/2013 08:55 PM
Cosmos was... a once in a lifetime experience.  No matter how much effort is put into this remake, it can only be a dim reflection of the original for those of us lucky enough to enjoy it.  It broke so many moulds and set so many standards for factual programming that anything else is just a derivative.  Any attempt to redo it or 'extend' it just feels... wrong somehow.

Consequently, this remake thus has a very faint scent of blasphemy about it that leaves many people feeling equivocal.  We'll probably get over it eventually but... ah, somehow it couldn't be the same.
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: Khadgars on 07/25/2013 09:16 PM
Cosmos was... a once in a lifetime experience.  No matter how much effort is put into this remake, it can only be a dim reflection of the original for those of us lucky enough to enjoy it.  It broke so many moulds and set so many standards for factual programming that anything else is just a derivative.  Any attempt to redo it or 'extend' it just feels... wrong somehow.

Consequently, this remake thus has a very faint scent of blasphemy about it that leaves many people feeling equivocal.  We'll probably get over it eventually but... ah, somehow it couldn't be the same.

I feel ya, Cosmos is awesome and I still watch it every couple months, but its 34 years later and the children today definitely do not feel the same way.  I think Carl Sagan would be happy with one of the most brilliant astrophysicist in the world continuing his work and inspiring a new generation.  Just look at the comments on youtube, people are getting geeky excited about it, pretty rare for science.

For you Ben, one of my favorite videos for Carl Sagan

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U49i8HYMp2k&feature=youtu.be
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: clongton on 07/25/2013 11:46 PM
Cosmos was... a once in a lifetime experience.  No matter how much effort is put into this remake, it can only be a dim reflection of the original for those of us lucky enough to enjoy it.  It broke so many moulds and set so many standards for factual programming that anything else is just a derivative.  Any attempt to redo it or 'extend' it just feels... wrong somehow.

Consequently, this remake thus has a very faint scent of blasphemy about it that leaves many people feeling equivocal.  We'll probably get over it eventually but... ah, somehow it couldn't be the same.

I understand the feeling. I felt the same as the new Battlestar Galactica aired season 1. But it didn't take long before I was completely hooked!
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: R7 on 07/26/2013 08:23 AM
I understand the feeling. I felt the same as the new Battlestar Galactica aired season 1. But it didn't take long before I was completely hooked!

Amen. It was the new BSG, loosely same plot and familiar names but with visuals, atmosphere and plot twists modernized for 21st century appetite. Tyson is the natural choice for the new Cosmos. Only bad thing is the waiting until 2014  :P
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: nethegauner on 07/26/2013 02:00 PM
"Unser Kosmos" was the momentous television moment that I experienced in my early life. Never again did anything shown on the tube capture my attention the way that Sagan's show did. Cannot believe it has been thirty years (the program was not aired in Germany  before 1983). I was eight years old and stayed up late on Tuesdays -- Sagan had a 9:45 pm slot.
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: Zed_Noir on 07/26/2013 08:14 PM
Why is this series on FOX of all networks?

A network infamous for early cancellations of nearly all their recent scifi genre shows.
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: Orbiter on 08/10/2013 08:40 PM

I'll quote Neil deGrasse Tyson himself on it being on Fox:

Quote
The people who say with disdain and disgust: "It's appearing on Fox? Their viewers don't know any science!" And I simply reply, "If true, that makes Fox the best network of them all on which to air this series."
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: QuantumG on 08/10/2013 09:57 PM
I wrote off the "new Cosmos" because of the rumored climate change focus.. now that I see it's going to be on Fox, maybe it won't be so bad.. still Neil deGrasse Tyson though, so...
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: CriX on 08/11/2013 01:03 AM
I enjoy Tyson. My concern is that the show will most likely have to refrain from scientifically speaking on the origins of the universe and on the origins of life.  One pet peeve about these shows is their depiction of black holes as actual black spheres.... in reality they would almost certainly be shrouded in million degree hellishly bright vortex of many suns worth of matter.  Quite the opposite of blackness.
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: RigelFive on 08/11/2013 01:33 AM
Found someone on the web making Cosmos II tshirts... But not for sale just yet.  Looks good!
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: A_M_Swallow on 08/11/2013 09:54 AM
I enjoy Tyson. My concern is that the show will most likely have to refrain from scientifically speaking on the origins of the universe and on the origins of life.  One pet peeve about these shows is their depiction of black holes as actual black spheres.... in reality they would almost certainly be shrouded in million degree hellishly bright vortex of many suns worth of matter.  Quite the opposite of blackness.

So black holes have covers and warning lights.
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: Khadgars on 08/11/2013 05:17 PM
I enjoy Tyson. My concern is that the show will most likely have to refrain from scientifically speaking on the origins of the universe and on the origins of life.  One pet peeve about these shows is their depiction of black holes as actual black spheres.... in reality they would almost certainly be shrouded in million degree hellishly bright vortex of many suns worth of matter.  Quite the opposite of blackness.

Wouldn't that only apply to "feeding" or active blackholes?
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: RigelFive on 08/12/2013 07:22 AM
I enjoy Tyson. My concern is that the show will most likely have to refrain from scientifically speaking on the origins of the universe and on the origins of life.  One pet peeve about these shows is their depiction of black holes as actual black spheres.... in reality they would almost certainly be shrouded in million degree hellishly bright vortex of many suns worth of matter.  Quite the opposite of blackness.
It's ok, the black holes in COSMOS II will be covered in hype.  The energy of the hype is equivalent in strength to the conflagration of billion suns that hover a black hole in reality.  Sun glasses may be required to watch.

I'm looking forward to the show ( in a temporal sense, not in a Euclidean space kind of way).
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: p51 on 08/12/2013 07:29 PM
Just got finished reading Frank Borman's book, he was NOT kind to Sagan at all, and what I read really lowered my opinion of the man )Sagan, that is).
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: spaceStalker on 08/12/2013 07:53 PM
Just got finished reading Frank Borman's book, he was NOT kind to Sagan at all, and what I read really lowered my opinion of the man )Sagan, that is).

What did you read? In few lines. Thanks.
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: Orbiter on 08/12/2013 08:15 PM
Just got finished reading Frank Borman's book, he was NOT kind to Sagan at all, and what I read really lowered my opinion of the man )Sagan, that is).

What did you read? In few lines. Thanks.

Can't come up with the direct wording from the book but I believe Sagan brought Borman and his wife over to his house as guests and had students from his university ambush him with anti-Vietnam questions.
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: GalacticIntruder on 08/12/2013 08:33 PM
As for those whom may have reservations, you can watch the Comic Con panel. He addresses some of the reservations. Though uncharacteristically, Ann Druyan talks more than Dr Tyson. There is some Q&A.

As for my personal opinion, I loved Cosmos, but was never enamored with Carl Sagan, the person. I like most of his books, but not really him.  I am looking forward to the Dr Tyson updated version, and I do like Dr Tyson, the person.

But no one holds a candle to Richard Feynman.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6S7AUa2Fm0 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6S7AUa2Fm0)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2XyfUaaTKyA (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2XyfUaaTKyA)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XeajDk_56Po (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XeajDk_56Po)
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: Star One on 08/13/2013 01:38 PM
Wasn't Stephen Hawking's Universe of a few years ago something of an abridged updating of Cosmos?
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: Nomadd on 08/13/2013 02:09 PM
Just got finished reading Frank Borman's book, he was NOT kind to Sagan at all, and what I read really lowered my opinion of the man )Sagan, that is).
Been in discussions with both about Eastern Airlines and nuclear test bans. One was polite, passionate and articulate regarding his beliefs. One was less that credible and just a jerk. I wasn't too happy about Sagan drifting into social issues and getting surrounded by certain types, but there's very little chance Borman is going to affect my opinion of anybody.
 I hope Tyson can pull it off.
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: martinlematre on 08/14/2013 06:00 PM
While I do like NDT, I think the fact Fox & Macfarlane have a role in it will kind of sabotage the quality and integrity of it as a serious science program.

I'm all for bringing more popularity to science though, so I think it'll be great.
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: RigelFive on 08/15/2013 02:01 AM
Wasn't Stephen Hawking's Universe of a few years ago something of an abridged updating of Cosmos?
Tyson started an argument in 2010  after Hawking mentioned something about aliens.  Cosmos II should turn this argument into a fair/clean fight.
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: jebbo on 08/15/2013 08:47 AM
I wonder how well this new "Cosmos" will play here in the UK as a lot of the ground has been covered very well and recently by Brian Cox, Jim Al-Khalili, etc . . . at the moment we seem to have a pretty decent science strand going and a good set of presenters.
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: DMeader on 08/15/2013 10:34 PM
I wonder how well this new "Cosmos" will play here in the UK as a lot of the ground has been covered very well and recently by Brian Cox, Jim Al-Khalili, etc . . . at the moment we seem to have a pretty decent science strand going and a good set of presenters.

Why does it have to be a competition? Each has his own contribution to make. After all, I really enjoy watching Brian Cox over here on this side of the pond.
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: deaville on 08/25/2013 06:01 AM
Yep - I enjoyed the original Cosmos series. In fact used parts of it when trying to educate my pupils.

Another series by Carl that may be lost in the mists of time are the Christmas Lectures he gave at the Royal Institution at the time of the Viking missions to Mars. They can be found on the RI website. One has to register, but it is free. Well worth watching.
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: Negative Return on 02/19/2014 02:19 AM
Got the chance to watch the first episode today. I wasn't disappointed, but I wasn't excited. Guess you could say I was relieved more than anything else -- that they didn't make a joke of it or embarrass themselves.

There were some good moments, but Tyson lacks the earnestness of Sagan. And a large chunk of the episode was a cartoon about the small minds of the Middle Ages. Seemed dark and out of place.

That said, I don't know if anything could get me as excited as the original. I watched it as a very young kid and credit it with helping jumpstart my interest in science and space.

I hope the follow-up episodes get better.


Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: Elmar Moelzer on 02/19/2014 02:29 PM
Cosmos inspired me ever since I watched it as a kid. Carl Sagan's great way of describing things combined with his voice, intonation and the breathtaking (for the time) visuals and music made Cosmos a classic that will be hard to match.
Carl Sagan set a very high benchmark and that is unfortunate for Neil, because no matter how great of a job he does, he will always have to face the comparison to him.
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: Robotbeat on 02/19/2014 04:24 PM
Got the chance to watch the first episode today. I wasn't disappointed, but I wasn't excited. Guess you could say I was relieved more than anything else -- that they didn't make a joke of it or embarrass themselves.

There were some good moments, but Tyson lacks the earnestness of Sagan. And a large chunk of the episode was a cartoon about the small minds of the Middle Ages. Seemed dark and out of place.

That said, I don't know if anything could get me as excited as the original. I watched it as a very young kid and credit it with helping jumpstart my interest in science and space.

I hope the follow-up episodes get better.
How did you get to watch it? I'm impatient... :)


Also, I don't own a TV. http://xkcd.com/1299/ Will it be available online?
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: Negative Return on 02/20/2014 01:55 AM
Well I work for sister company to FOX.  I don't usually jump at these previews, but I, too, was eager for this one.

Most FOX shows are available online but I don't know for sure one way or another about this one.  Can't imagine it won't be, though.
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: tigerade on 03/09/2014 01:38 PM
Cosmos premiers tonight!  Time to get excited!
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: Star One on 03/09/2014 06:24 PM

Cosmos premiers tonight!  Time to get excited!

So it's premiering in the UK one week later then as it starts on the 16th over here.
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: Khadgars on 03/09/2014 06:39 PM
Looking forward to this.  Original Cosmos with Carl Sagan has been playing all weekend.  Its interesting Cosmos aired one year before I was born.  NDT Cosmos is literally everything that we've learned since the original, very exciting.
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: Star One on 03/09/2014 06:45 PM
Apparently the president has recorded a special intro for the first episode.
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: Robotbeat on 03/09/2014 07:47 PM
Is this going to be online? If so, when?

I know I just asked this question, but just want to reiterate it. I'm excited (though keeping realistic expectations... Sagan can't be replicated... yet! ;) ).
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: Scotty on 03/09/2014 08:07 PM
Fox, 9 pm Eastern Time, Sunday evenings.
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: Bubbinski on 03/09/2014 11:17 PM
I'll be watching tonight.  Hoping it's as good as the original, I remember seeing some of it as a kid and reading the book as a freshman in college.  Been watching the original series on NGC and it stands the test of time as a great show.

As far as the introduction, I think Sandra Bullock (Gravity) would be a better choice as she's popular and not politically polarizing as far as I know.
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: Dalhousie on 03/09/2014 11:56 PM
There were some good moments, but Tyson lacks the earnestness of Sagan. And a large chunk of the episode was a cartoon about the small minds of the Middle Ages. Seemed dark and out of place.


Much the same could be said about the original series too. Sagan's understanding of the history of science was a caricature.  from what little I have seen and read of Tyson he is no different.  So I would expect more of the same unfortunately.
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: Rocket Science on 03/10/2014 12:09 AM
The intro by the President was unexpected plus! 8)
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: Bubbinski on 03/10/2014 02:09 AM
Just saw Cosmos and enjoyed it.  Especially the cosmic calendar and flybys of the planets, as well as animation of past and future Earth.  Hope future episodes are even better.
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: Blackstar on 03/10/2014 02:42 AM
I'm hoping it does well. I get annoyed at people who take potshots at Tyson. Name another prime-time science show on a major network. Just one. They don't exist. Even the basic cable channels have all started to engage in pseudoscience (bigfoot, swamp monsters, ancient aliens, mermaids--MERMAIDS?!!).

So we need this.
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: Khadgars on 03/10/2014 02:51 AM
I'm hoping it does well. I get annoyed at people who take potshots at Tyson. Name another prime-time science show on a major network. Just one. They don't exist. Even the basic cable channels have all started to engage in pseudoscience (bigfoot, swamp monsters, ancient aliens, mermaids--MERMAIDS?!!).

So we need this.

Couldn't agree with you more Blackstar.  There has been this huge wave over the last 10 years of pseudoscience which makes this series that more important. 

Starts in 10 mins for me!
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: Jarnis on 03/10/2014 04:58 AM
Is this going to be online? If so, when?

I know I just asked this question, but just want to reiterate it. I'm excited (though keeping realistic expectations... Sagan can't be replicated... yet! ;) ).

Dunno about legit sources, but it is "available"...

I would imagine that Fox and/or NatGeo would offer it to be viewable on their sites to US viewers?

Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: MATTBLAK on 03/10/2014 05:05 AM
Since it is on Fox - I can't help thinking about poor old 'Firefly'; are Fox going to can 'Cosmos' before it's finished airing if it's ratings slip even one percentage point?! ;) :(
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: Dalhousie on 03/10/2014 05:48 AM
I'm hoping it does well. I get annoyed at people who take potshots at Tyson. Name another prime-time science show on a major network. Just one. They don't exist.

Maybe in the US.  But the US is not the world.  Here we have regular prime time science programs.

I agree that this is important, which is why there is no excuse for sloppy history in such a program. Some of Sagan's errors in the original were risible.
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: Star One on 03/10/2014 11:16 AM

The intro by the President was unexpected plus! 8)

Not really being as online numerous websites carried the story before it was shown.
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: mheney on 03/10/2014 02:44 PM
I watched it with my 13 year old daughter, which improved it, I think.  I especially liked it when she hit "pause" during the stellar evolution bit to ask me "after the stars form, how do they get out of the nebula?"  (Looking back, I should have said "by TARDIS" - but I missed my chance ...)
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: Hog on 03/10/2014 05:51 PM
Good introduction, Dr. Tyson has always been an inspiration being to me.  I think he would do great things if he were in the "Admiral chair" at NASA and if he could work independently with at least 1 cent of every Federal tax dollar.(so double what NASA gets now)

He has a great "radio" voice.  I loved the analogy of the Earth and it's history and how that history is only 1 second of the entire history of the Universe.
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: baldusi on 03/12/2014 12:21 PM
I watched it yesterday (we get slight delay for CC translation). I liked it. For my taste it gave too much time to Bruno. The really religious were put off by it (even though it was all true). A gentler introduction would have got them hooked. Personally, I don't think that promoting one thing works by attacking the alternatives.
And I didn't got the goose bumps of the original. But the worst part was that he just said "hundreds of billions", and not "billions upon billions" of stars  :(. But there were some pretty powerful part. The small bio of Carl Sagan, and specially the anecdote about him inviting the host when he was just 17years old, did make quite an impression on me.
But in general it was a nice series. It's just that I have tho whole "The Universe", which, while it had some silly programs (like the sex in space thing, it is the History Channel, after all), most of it had  an amazingly high production value and science explanations. I guess that for the USA, if they get it on an air channel, it might mean it might have more influence.
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: R7 on 03/12/2014 03:17 PM
For my taste it gave too much time to Bruno. The really religious were put off by it (even though it was all true). A gentler introduction would have got them hooked. Personally, I don't think that promoting one thing works by attacking the alternatives.

I agree. After five minutes of Bruno cartoon was wondering "why do they keep going on about this?". Checked that the Bruno section totaled about nine minutes. One could also argue that Bruno's fate (unfortunate and wrong) was less about cosmological but more about theological, pantheistic views but that's supposed to be OT for the series and even more OT here so I'll just  :-X
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: Melt Run on 03/14/2014 10:08 PM
I'm hoping it does well. I get annoyed at people who take potshots at Tyson. Name another prime-time science show on a major network. Just one. They don't exist. Even the basic cable channels have all started to engage in pseudoscience (bigfoot, swamp monsters, ancient aliens, mermaids--MERMAIDS?!!).

So we need this.
Point well taken but:
Michio Kaku
Brian Cox

Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: Elmar Moelzer on 03/16/2014 02:35 AM
Brian Greene, just to add. But I do like Tyson. He is no Carl Sagan, but he does a great job! The last 5 minutes of the first episode were really sweet, btw.
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: bubbagret on 03/16/2014 02:54 AM
The producers completely missed the point and purpose of the original Cosmos. It doesn't remotely feel like or even attempt to be of a similar quality to, the first series. I believe comes off as more of a children's show... something shiny and sparkly to gain a child's attention, with an underlying message to believe what you are told rather than to challenge the viewer to think and question as the original series did.

Sagan utilized the opportunity to inform the audience with what was known at the time and asked them to speculate with questions in a way that seemed to engage the audience and challenge them to think about what was postulated, even the way he utilized the camera in an unspoken way as if to ask "what do you think?" made the series interesting.

Tyson, which I used to hold in high regard, and maybe thru no fault of his own, came across to me as somewhat condescending and even a bit arrogant at times. Even the tone of his presentation and the childish inflections that he projected with his voice seemed to take away from the message that should have been presented in this show, as it was in the original; science is not meant to prove an idea or thought to be factual, science should be utilized to increase collective knowledge and to disprove improper theories. Science is logic.

"Science is best defined as a careful, disciplined, logical search for knowledge about any and all aspects of the universe, obtained by examination of the best available evidence and always subject to correction and improvement upon discovery of better evidence. What's left is magic. And it doesn't work."
— James Randi

Once science is used to drive or enforce an idea, it is no longer science. It has become a cult, a religion. The virtual antithesis of science.
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: NovaSilisko on 03/16/2014 04:10 AM
The more I think about it, the more the Bruno segment bothers me. It feels more and more wholly unnecessary for the introduction to the episode, and went on for far longer than it should have. And, as has been said, at the very end, Tyson more or less detonates the entire point of showing it by saying "it was just a lucky guess"...

I don't really get it. I liked the rest of the opening episode (though it, of course, does not hold a candle to the original), but am somewhat worried.





Once science is used to drive or enforce an idea, it is no longer science. It has become a cult, a religion. The virtual antithesis of science.

That (somewhat loosely) reminds me of something that's been irking me in recent times. I routinely see things posted on various locations around the internet about some cool visual sparkly thing happening, like, for instance, the gummy bears dropped into perchlorate (I believe that was the substance). But, more often than not, they never explain (or provide a source that explains) what actually is happening, why it's happening, etc. And mostly, people just reply with something along the lines of "SCIENCE!!", or "cool", or whatever.

It feels wrong to me. It doesn't feel like what science actually is, it feels like run-of-the-mill attention grabbing that happens to have a scientific principle used to produce its results. But, the large amount of people talking about how cool and sparkly it is often don't care, or want to care, about the principles behind it, the learning process of it, and so on. I'm not very good at explaining it, but hopefully my point comes across... sorry for the rant, it's just something that's been bugging me lately!
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: clongton on 03/16/2014 12:40 PM
What's left is magic. And it doesn't work.
— James Randi

Pure science wouldn't say this. Far too many things that we take for granted today were yesterday's magic. Things like flight, electricity, wireless communications, televisions, alpha and beta brain waves, radiation sickness, etc, etc, etc. Magic, as opposed to slight-of-hand, is simply an event, capability or occurrence that can't be explained by the known laws of science, that appear to operate outside those laws, or in opposition to those laws. There is far more about how the universe works that we do not understand than we do understand. So-called magic eventually turns out to be such new understanding. To say magic doesn't work is to assume that we already know all there is to know. Usually magic turns into real science as our understanding increases. Just because we don't understand how something works, or can't explain it within the framework of known science does not invalidate it when it clearly works. To discount it is not science - it is ignorance. The first and most important tenet of real science is to acknowledge how much we do not understand, not to flaunt how little we do.
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: R7 on 03/16/2014 01:11 PM
Point well taken but:
Michio Kaku
Brian Cox

Michael J. Mosley to the list. Kaku is great but I cringed when he said on some show that the biggest problem in chemical rocketry is the "expensive fuel". Boron additives, Syntin, metallic hydrogen?  ::)
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/16/2014 05:00 PM
Turned up on Sky 1 in the UK. 7pm start...so it overlaps with the live ISS orbit on Channel 4!

Record one ;)
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: hopalong on 03/16/2014 05:17 PM
It is on the National Geographic Channel - the wife has already put it on series link on the Sky+ box  :D
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: bubbagret on 03/16/2014 05:49 PM
What's left is magic. And it doesn't work.
— James Randi

Pure science wouldn't say this. Far too many things that we take for granted today were yesterday's magic. Things like flight, electricity, wireless communications, televisions, alpha and beta brain waves, radiation sickness, etc, etc, etc. Magic, as opposed to slight-of-hand, is simply an event, capability or occurrence that can't be explained by the known laws of science, that appear to operate outside those laws, or in opposition to those laws. There is far more about how the universe works that we do not understand than we do understand. So-called magic eventually turns out to be such new understanding. To say magic doesn't work is to assume that we already know all there is to know. Usually magic turns into real science as our understanding increases. Just because we don't understand how something works, or can't explain it within the framework of known science does not invalidate it when it clearly works. To discount it is not science - it is ignorance. The first and most important tenet of real science is to acknowledge how much we do not understand, not to flaunt how little we do.

magic
noun    (Concise Encyclopedia)

"Use of means (such as charms or spells) believed to have supernatural power over natural forces. It constitutes the core of many religious systems and plays a central social role in many nonliterate cultures. Magic is often distinguished from religion as being more impersonal and mechanical and emphasizing technique. Its techniques are usually regarded as means to specific ends (an enemy’s defeat, rainfall, etc.), although another view ascribes a more symbolic, expressive character to such activity. Thus, a rainmaking ritual may both elicit rainfall and stress the symbolic importance of rain and the agricultural activities associated with it. Both the magician and the magical rite are typically surrounded by taboos, purification procedures, and other activities that draw the participants into the magical sphere. Strains of magic in Western tradition, formerly associated with heretics, alchemists, witches, and sorcerers, persist in modern times in the activities of satanists and others. The art of entertaining by performing apparently magical feats (sometimes called conjuring) relies on the use of sleight of hand and other means. See also shaman, vodun, witchcraft and sorcery."

Magic is a term applied to something that is not comprehended or that goes against known theories. "Its techniques are usually regarded as means to specific ends (an enemy’s defeat, rainfall, etc.)". Science is a tool used to try to define the "why" or "how" of something rather than the term magic being applied to something that is not comprehended, with no attempt to explain the "why" or "how". So yes, science is used to explain exactly why something is not magic. Magic = a speculative explanation without basis, enforced ignorance. science = an attempt at understanding, knowledge. The exact opposite of one another.

Regardless, it is just an opinion thread about the new show. I myself do not see much good about it, hopefully it will be more beneficial to other people. Finding knowledge and learning to question things that you don't understand I see as a good thing, and it seems that isn't being taught enough anymore. So hopefully this new series will morph in to more of a teaching and questioning experience.
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: clongton on 03/16/2014 07:04 PM
...

Really not worth pursuing but the Cosmos series will explore and explain many things, provided it follows the Sagan model, that would have been called magic by more ancient peoples. For example heal a person with an infection in the 10th century by giving them an antibiotic and you would likely be accused of and executed for performing magic and sorcery.

That's all I was saying.
Keep and open mind about things we don't understand and you will learn much.
Keep a closed mind about things we don't understand and you will learn very little.
Hopefully this new series will encourage the former, not the latter.
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: Star One on 03/17/2014 06:27 AM
Pretty good first episode. The last five minutes where Tyson was talking about meeting Carl Sagan was probably the best of it. The bit about Bruno started off interesting but then went on too long.
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: wjbarnett on 03/17/2014 12:57 PM
Anyone find a streaming link for episode two?
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: bad_astra on 03/17/2014 02:12 PM
Enjoyed the second episode. Good explanation of biological processes for persons pushed through the American school system. It may be slightly less erudite than the original Cosmos, but I think part of the show's damage control must be reintroducing a great many people in this country to concepts they abandoned in lieu of nonsense their preachers have been spoon feeding them to keep money in the coffers.

Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: NovaSilisko on 03/17/2014 07:47 PM
Episode 2 was grand, definitely an improvement over the first. I only hope they keep at this level!
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: rayleighscatter on 03/17/2014 11:58 PM
Enjoyed the second episode. Good explanation of biological processes for persons pushed through the American school system. It may be slightly less erudite than the original Cosmos, but I think part of the show's damage control must be reintroducing a great many people in this country to concepts they abandoned in lieu of nonsense their preachers have been spoon feeding them to keep money in the coffers.

Ironic that you find it as a plus and I find it as a minus. Taking a factual explanation of science and the universe and injecting opinions on religion (in both episodes so far) means many people will walk away from an episode knowing they were presented both fact and opinion. From then on they will view the show knowing there is both fact and opinion presented and will try to parse the two, and many will inevitably get things wrong. Is the segment about how dogs were domesticated fact or opinion? Is the segment about the reproduction DNA fact or opinion? Is the segment about intelligent design being wrong but evolution being "spiritual" fact or opinion? It's interesting because it's something I've noticed its something people on this forum normally police rather vigorously, the presentation of opinion as fact.

People will walk away from the show asking themselves this when instead they could have walked away without these being questions at all.
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: ß-OriCinco on 03/18/2014 02:20 AM
Agree.

I'm not enjoying this series as much as I thought I would.  He is presenting more questions than facts with an apparent anti-religious objective.  Then he flys off to space with this leading expectation that because his theories of evolution on Earth are supposedly so self evident, there must be large creature swimming around in the totally non-explorable / never to be seen depths of Titan in a methane ocean *and* is supposedly breathing hydrogen or acetylene. 

Full tilt.

Sheesh... You need greater faith to believe him without any facts than on any ordinary Sunday morning.  If humans are actually survivors of FIVE epic planetary extinction events, that's all the proof I need for my beliefs.
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: JohnnyNonsense on 03/18/2014 03:09 AM
There were some good moments, but Tyson lacks the earnestness of Sagan. And a large chunk of the episode was a cartoon about the small minds of the Middle Ages. Seemed dark and out of place.


Much the same could be said about the original series too. Sagan's understanding of the history of science was a caricature.  from what little I have seen and read of Tyson he is no different.  So I would expect more of the same unfortunately.

The whole point of the Bruno segment was to illustrate the repression suffered by science-minded people  (free thinkers in general) at the hands of the church.  It is obvious that the dialog in the cartoon was manufactured (just like it is with every other biopic), but it is based on fact.  It illustrated just how difficult it was to advance the state of science back then.  Those people deserve our admiration and respect.  No, they didn't talk about the other charges of heresy (for which he also did not deserve to die), but that was not important in the context of the program.
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: bad_astra on 03/18/2014 10:31 AM

Ironic that you find it as a plus and I find it as a minus. Taking a factual explanation of science and the universe and injecting opinions on religion (in both episodes so far) means many people will walk away from an episode knowing they were presented both fact and opinion. From then on they will view the show knowing there is both fact and opinion presented and will try to parse the two, and many will inevitably get things wrong. Is the segment about how dogs were domesticated fact or opinion? Is the segment about the reproduction DNA fact or opinion? Is the segment about intelligent design being wrong but evolution being "spiritual" fact or opinion? It's interesting because it's something I've noticed its something people on this forum normally police rather vigorously, the presentation of opinion as fact.

People will walk away from the show asking themselves this when instead they could have walked away without these being questions at all.

Dogs domestication by humans from wolves is, yes, fact. I'm not getting into crackpot creationist or flat-eather theories.
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: Robotbeat on 03/18/2014 12:10 PM
The way to teach science to the tribalistic masses isn't by tribalistic one-sided truth-telling. It's by making the message clear to them in a way that, even if it does challenge their worldview, is done to bring them into the fold. For instance, sure mention how Bruno was persecuted for challenging the religious status quo, but mention the political intrigue involved as well. Also, make sure to mention that the Big Bang itself was discovered by a Belgian Catholic priest, Georges Lemaître (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georges_Lema%C3%AEtre ), which challenged a lot of the philosophical assumptions at the time (many scientists had assumed the universe was infinitely old and many initially dismissed the idea of the Big Bang as religious nonsense).

You won't convince many people to "convert" to a scientific worldview by challenging head-on (and one-sided) like that. You'll just lose them to deeper tribalistic madness.
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: Robert Thompson on 03/24/2014 07:43 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KeJoVeKSsyA
Dr. Neil DeGrasse Tyson: A fascinatingly disturbing thought
2:00 - 4:00 "It is the universe itself that exists within us"

A sample of his approach to the spiritual concept that came up in the first or second episode. It is an antidote to assumptions of special creation. It does not arise spontaneously or without basis.
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: Hog on 03/24/2014 12:53 PM
Good episode last night.  I didnt know that Newton almost didnt get published.  I hope I see Halley's comet again in July 2061 to see Halley's Comet again, but it's unlikely I'll make 86.

Maybe we will have made it to Mars by then?
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: Robotbeat on 03/24/2014 04:29 PM
Good episode last night.  I didnt know that Newton almost didnt get published.  I hope I see Halley's comet again in July 2061 to see Halley's Comet again, but it's unlikely I'll make 86.

Maybe we will have made it to Mars by then?
The older you get, the more likely you'll hit 86.
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: Robert Thompson on 03/25/2014 01:10 AM
The closer you are to danger, the farther you are from harm.
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: Hog on 03/31/2014 02:41 PM
Another great episode last night.  A blatant dimissal of the belief that the Earth is 6500 years old, as we are seeing things that much much older, simply because of the speed of light. Lots of explainations of certain topics that are difficult for people to visualize.
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: Star One on 01/13/2018 10:28 PM
The show has been renewed for a second season which will air in the spring of 2019.

https://www.theverge.com/2018/1/13/16888864/neil-degrasse-tyson-cosmos-second-season-fox-national-geographic-science
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: the_other_Doug on 01/14/2018 02:29 AM
The show has been renewed for a second season which will air in the spring of 2019.

https://www.theverge.com/2018/1/13/16888864/neil-degrasse-tyson-cosmos-second-season-fox-national-geographic-science

Kewl!
Title: Re: Cosmos - A New Series Begins
Post by: katenewman on 01/15/2018 09:11 AM
Quote
The show has been renewed for a second season which will air in the spring of 2019.

https://www.theverge.com/2018/1/13/16888864/neil-degrasse-tyson-cosmos-second-season-fox-national-geographic-science

Can't wait for the new series, I miss Neil DeGrasse voice so much. At least we've got enough time to re-watch season one ;)