# Cosmos: A Space-Time Odyssey



## JustThisGuy

With Neil deGrasse Tyson.










It's a sequel to Carl Sagan's Cosmos: A Personall Journey.

Airs on March 9th simultaneously in the US across ten 21st Century FOX networks, including FOX, FX, FXX, FXM, FOX Sports 1, FOX Sports 2, Nat Geo, Nat Geo Wild, and FOX Life. They're really pushing this show. Never heard of such a thing as a show getting so many channels at once, without it being a news or sports event. I'm excited.

Seth McFarlane is producing, as well as Ann Druyan, Carl Sagan's widow.

Anyone interested?


----------



## TerminalBlue

Yes, definitely. They will probably cover some basic topics but Neil makes anything interesting.


----------



## minimized

I want to catch it. I'm expecting to up and forget and miss it because I'm dumb and know nothing about tv and can't hold a thought for longer than 5 seconds.

But this is the kind of tv I'm actually interested in seeing. And, of course, Neil deGrasse.

Got to support intelligent television among all the refuse out there.


----------



## herk

I'm super pumped for this, I love NDT and the old Cosmos, this is gonna be huge!


----------



## JustThisGuy

TerminalBlue said:


> Yes, definitely. They will probably cover some basic topics but Neil makes anything interesting.


Indeed he does.



minimized said:


> Got to support intelligent television among all the refuse out there.


Amen.



herk said:


> I'm super pumped for this, I love NDT and the old Cosmos, this is gonna be huge!


I hope so. Having at least one hour a week where people actually learn something would be nice for mainstream television. Not to be snobby.


----------



## novalax

woohoo, im super excited. i love physics and neil seems like an awesome dude. im going to make sure i catch this


----------



## JustThisGuy




----------



## WillYouStopDave

I feel the need to post in this thread. Just to say I did.


----------



## JustThisGuy

WillYouStopDave said:


> I feel the need to post in this thread. Just to say I did.


This show is gonna rock. Not to be overly dramatic, but maybe start a revolution on learning television coming back in a big way. :yes


----------



## Richard Pawgins

Airs on Biggie Small's death day


I also find it hilarious that its being aired on Fox....


there will be alot of protest letters when their viewers realize that "God" makes no appearances in this series


----------



## JustThisGuy

Richard Pawgins said:


> I also find it hilarious that its being aired on Fox....
> 
> there will be alot of protest letters when their viewers realize that "God" makes no appearances in this series


I could see that happening, honestly.


----------



## Arbre

I'm definitely going to watch this.


----------



## JustThisGuy

Tomorrow night, people! 9PM EST.


----------



## Richard Pawgins

i thought it was tonight.


march 9th


----------



## OrbitalResonance

its was on tonight at 9 on fox, but its on at 9 on national geographic tomorrow at 9


----------



## sebastian1

It's rerunning on Nat Geo channels right now


----------



## MrKappa

JustThisGuy said:


> I hope so. Having at least one hour a week where people actually learn something would be nice for mainstream television. Not to be snobby.


http://www.museumsecrets.tv/

Is an excellent documentary series running currently.

The space stuff, I'm afraid the only last good documentary on space was The Electric Universe. However, the majority of the mind blowing revelationary segments have since disappeared from the web.






The best of it begins around 6 minutes 15 seconds into this one...






I mean that absolutely blows my mind that the solar wind accelerates, and that recently we have discovered magnetic ropes that physically connect the planets to the sun, and that was proposed as early as the 1910s or 1920s.


----------



## minimized

Glad I got to see it :roll


----------



## MrKappa

This one?


----------



## MrKappa

Anyways, yeah, thoughts on the opening sequence where they claimed what Earth looked like 250 Million years ago.






LOL! That one cracks me up every time. Dead pan, straight to the point, blows the theory to absolute pieces!

Although yeah, the rest of the video is pretty good. Had no idea who the Harvard Alumni's were. I love Harvard people, swear to God.

Here's one you need to know about -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barry_Fell (well he taught there, good enough)


----------



## JustThisGuy

I really enjoyed the first episode. Though I knew some of the info, it was a nice retelling. It was a general episode of the cosmos, so I'm guessing I'll start learning more as the series goes on.


----------



## CEB32

How "American" is it? I have looked forward to such shows before only to be disappointed by the god awful typical Americanized trash.

I find it strange Fox would pick something like this up, that fact alone makes it sceptical that it would be factual enough and not laden with agenda to be worth watching


----------



## JustThisGuy

CEB32 said:


> How "American" is it? I have looked forward to such shows before only to be disappointed by the god awful typical Americanized trash.
> 
> I find it strange Fox would pick something like this up, that fact alone makes it sceptical that it would be factual enough and not laden with agenda to be worth watching


It's very accurate. This show is a trip. Enjoyed it immensely. (Don't think FOX news.)


----------



## CEB32

JustThisGuy said:


> It's very accurate. This show is a trip. Enjoyed it immensely. (Don't think FOX news.)


I shall try and catch a youtube clip or something, cheers


----------



## JustThisGuy

MrKappa said:


> This one?





CEB32 said:


> I shall try and catch a youtube clip or something, cheers


Here's the full episode. Tis good.


----------



## Brad

I had it DVR'd, was pretty interesting. Will definitely watch more in the future.


----------



## CEB32

JustThisGuy said:


> Here's the full episode. Tis good.


Cheers but i decided to torrent it, looks like the video got taken down anyway


----------



## TopDawgENT

Yeah i watched it, i really enjoyed it & can't wait for the next ep. I always liked Neil Degrasse Tyson, & his little Carl Sagan story was cool. I still watch " The Universe " show aswell, which i always find interesting.


----------



## Hank Scorpio

Like a lot of documentaries I found it really basic. Anybody with any interest in science already knows this stuff. But the effects were good and I guess I'll keep watching, if only to support educational tv.


----------



## Brad

http://thedailybanter.com/2014/03/t...ights-cosmos-debut-is-about-what-youd-expect/

Oh boy :doh


----------



## In a Lonely Place

It starts Sunday 16 March at 7PM, National Geographic Channel for UK viewers


----------



## Jcgrey

I really enjoyed it. Especially liked Tyson's story at the end about meeting Dr. Sagan. I have been spoiled by the original Cosmos with no commercials as it was on PBS.


----------



## TerminalBlue

You can also watch on the Cosmos site: http://www.cosmosontv.com/

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


----------



## Richard Pawgins

JustThisGuy said:


> I really enjoyed the first episode. Though I knew some of the info, it was a nice retelling. It was a general episode of the cosmos, so I'm guessing I'll start learning more as the series goes on.


if you're fairly educated then u won't really learn anything from this series. It's mainly a quick review for the laymen. Its also good that it's aired on Fox because their base really needs this more than anyone else (hardcore christian republican conservative) Maybe they'll learn something about the world and how it works.

If you enjoyed the first episode I suggest you also check out Nova: Origins.... it's basically the same as this cosmos reboot and it's also narrated by Neil Degrasse Tyson.


----------



## JustThisGuy

Richard Pawgins said:


> if you're fairly educated then u won't really learn anything from this series. It's mainly a quick review for the laymen. Its also good that it's aired on Fox because their base really needs this more than anyone else (hardcore christian republican conservative) Maybe they'll learn something about the world and how it works.
> 
> If you enjoyed the first episode I suggest you also check out Nova: Origins.... it's basically the same as this cosmos reboot and it's also narrated by Neil Degrasse Tyson.


Cool, thanks.


----------



## Kairoz

Loved the first episode, will defo watch it!


----------



## nullnaught

Neil pushes string theory and string theory is NOT science.


----------



## Hank Scorpio

Why is everybody so worried about religious nuts? It's on after Family Guy.


----------



## CEB32

So i watched it last night. Its not as bad as i expected however there are some holes in what was said. Not keen on all the CGI, i understand for some things there is no choice but to use CGI. When available though the real images are far more thought provoking and amazing in my opinion.

As a first episode though i guess an overview approach was needed and i shall reserve judgement for a few episodes and see how it goes.
Still for me there is no beating 'the planets' http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Planets_(TV_miniseries)

Bit old now and a bit British lol but that is my favourite factual/educational series ever. I used to have it on VHS


----------



## ugh1979

CEB32 said:


> How "American" is it? I have looked forward to such shows before only to be disappointed by the god awful typical Americanized trash.
> 
> I find it strange Fox would pick something like this up, that fact alone makes it sceptical that it would be factual enough and not laden with agenda to be worth watching


Fox and Fox News are very different animals with no apparent cross over of agendas.

Remember this is produced by Seth McFarlane, of Family Guy fame, which is also shown on Fox, and couldn't be much further from Fox News agenda wise.


----------



## ugh1979

Richard Pawgins said:


> if you're fairly educated then u won't really learn anything from this series. It's mainly a quick review for the laymen. Its also good that it's aired on Fox because their base really needs this more than anyone else (hardcore christian republican conservative) Maybe they'll learn something about the world and how it works.


Fox viewers aren't typically hardcore Christian republican conservatives. Only Fox News viewers.

Most hardcore Christian republican conservatives hate what Fox TV show, such as Family Guy, American Dad etc which often ridicule them and shows like Glee which are are pro-gay. Their other programming doesn't typically appeal to them either and ranges from the actually pretty good to trashy, with zero pro-religious/conservative agenda.


----------



## CEB32

ugh1979 said:


> Fox and Fox News are very different animals with no apparent cross over of agendas.
> 
> Remember this is produced by Seth McFarlane, of Family Guy fame, which is also shown on Fox, and couldn't be much further from Fox News agenda wise.


Still the fact of the owner remains. It would be like not thinking twice about playing firefall after they got Orson scott card to write the story


----------



## Brad

ugh1979 said:


> Fox viewers aren't typically hardcore Christian republican conservatives. Only Fox News viewers.


Meanwhile in Oklahoma..

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/oklahoma-fox-station-cut-only-mention-of-evolution-from-cosmos/



> *Oklahoma Fox Station Cut Only Mention of Evolution From Cosmos*
> 
> Tyson waited until the last ten minutes of the show's premiere to bring up the theory of evolution. But just before he described how humans "stood up and parted ways from" our ancestors, viewers in Oklahoma City were treated to sharp mid-scene cutaway to a local news promo. After about 15 seconds, when Tyson had finished talking about the human transition to "standing on two feet," the station returned to the show.
> 
> KOKH Fox 25 responded to the controversy surrounding the edit on Twitter, saying they "regret" the "operating error."


Yeah, just an "operating error", that's what it was. And it's just a coincidence that it happened in Oklahoma, home of anti-evolution laws and repeated attempts to introduce more anti-evolution bills.


----------



## ugh1979

Brad said:


> Meanwhile in Oklahoma..
> 
> http://www.mediaite.com/tv/oklahoma-fox-station-cut-only-mention-of-evolution-from-cosmos/
> 
> Yeah, just an "operating error", that's what it was. And it's just a coincidence that it happened in Oklahoma, home of anti-evolution laws and repeated attempts to introduce more anti-evolution bills.


Wow. :lol That's definitely suspicious.


----------



## Richard Pawgins

Brad said:


> Meanwhile in Oklahoma..
> 
> http://www.mediaite.com/tv/oklahoma-fox-station-cut-only-mention-of-evolution-from-cosmos/
> 
> Yeah, just an "operating error", that's what it was. And it's just a coincidence that it happened in Oklahoma, home of anti-evolution laws and repeated attempts to introduce more anti-evolution bills.


Doesn't surprise me one bit


----------



## Angelfire

Why does everything have to be political with Americans!? I mean, how did this thread suddenly turn into a discussion about Fox News and whatnot?

I did watch the first episide (which was preceded by a speech from your president... again with the politics!). 
Anyway I thought about half of it was good, as for the rest I don't care who Charles Sagan was nor was I interested in the cartoon history stuff so I flipped channels & watched "The Flintstones" instead 

I thought the part about our "cosmic adress" was fantastic (not that I haven't seen it all before). Really gives you some perspective on how ridiculously expansive the universe is. 
I wish they would elaborate on that whole "our universe is contained in a bubble & is part of the multiverse" gig. Like... what happens when you reach the "lining/edge" of this bubble/universe?

My theory on the matter is rather unscientific & it goes thus; nothing really exists outside of our (my) visual range. Our brain is making things up & the universe/existence/reality conforms to our expectations, so to speak. 
Anyway, can't wait for the rest of the show. Hope they speculate on possible alien cultures & stuff!


----------



## TerminalBlue

Another excellent episode. I personally find the theory of evolution extremely inspiring. Thinking about all the life that is now gone makes you think about how precious each day is.


----------



## sebastian1

Brad said:


> Meanwhile in Oklahoma..
> 
> http://www.mediaite.com/tv/oklahoma-fox-station-cut-only-mention-of-evolution-from-cosmos/
> 
> Yeah, just an "operating error", that's what it was. And it's just a coincidence that it happened in Oklahoma, home of anti-evolution laws and repeated attempts to introduce more anti-evolution bills.


Instantly reminded me of this


----------



## Richard Pawgins

loved the last episode where he proved how the universe couldnt possibly be 7 thousands years old. It was a nice little slight jab at creationist


----------



## Richard Pawgins

IMO, the latest episode was the best in the series thus far


----------



## bottleofblues

Yeah I watched the first one the other day good show, I like how these people who produce these shows can make it informative but entertaining as well rather than dry.


----------



## bottleofblues

ugh1979 said:


> Fox viewers aren't typically hardcore Christian republican conservatives. Only Fox News viewers.
> 
> Most hardcore Christian republican conservatives hate what Fox TV show, such as Family Guy, American Dad etc which often ridicule them and shows like Glee which are are pro-gay. Their other programming doesn't typically appeal to them either and ranges from the actually pretty good to trashy, with zero pro-religious/conservative agenda.


Interesting, I don't have fox channel so I'm unaware of its content but we get fox news which is as much as a propaganda channel as kim il sungs radio stations. But apparently married with children (one of my fav comedy shows) was first aired on fox and back then it was like the 'rebel' channel as it was new and wanted to establish itself as different from the rest.Which runs in contrast to fox news, guess you can't judge the channel by its news programme.
Is it just me or do a lot of the fox news female reporters look like pornstars?


----------



## ugh1979

bottleofblues said:


> Interesting, I don't have fox channel so I'm unaware of its content but we get fox news which is as much as a propaganda channel as kim il sungs radio stations. But apparently married with children (one of my fav comedy shows) was first aired on fox and back then it was like the 'rebel' channel as it was new and wanted to establish itself as different from the rest.Which runs in contrast to fox news, guess you can't judge the channel by its news programme.


Shows on Fox such as _American Dad_ actually go as far as slandering Fox News which shows just how far apart they are politically/socially.

Case in point being the Ollie North song on _American Dad _where they inferred that Reagan and North committed high treason in the Iran-Contra scandal in the eighties, then at the end mention how North is now on Fox News. :lol


----------



## bottleofblues

ugh1979 said:


> Shows on Fox such as American Dad actually go as far as slandering Fox News which shows just how far apart they are politically/socially.
> 
> Case in point being the Ollie North song on American Dad where they inferred that Reagan and North committed high treason in the Iran-Contra scandal in the eighties, then at the end mention how North is now on Fox News. :lol


I also love the radio station on gta 4 I think its on 5 as well weasel news, such a great mockery of fox news and their views.


----------



## Sacrieur

Latest episode was goddamn awesome.


----------



## Caramelito

Sacrieur said:


> Latest episode was goddamn awesome.


Agreed


----------



## arnie

nullnaught said:


> Neil pushes string theory and string theory is NOT science.


What? The show never even got into quantum mechanics.


----------



## Sacrieur

arnie said:


> What? The show never even got into quantum mechanics.


The show's latest episode got into the very basics of quantum mechanics, but it's impossible to discuss the topic without it.

It has made no mention of string theory.


----------



## arnie

Sacrieur said:


> The show's latest episode got into the very basics of quantum mechanics, but it's impossible to discuss the topic without it.
> 
> It has made no mention of string theory.


All the mentioned was the fact that electrons jump orbitals instantaneously without giving a good reason. Not string theory and just barely hinting at quantum mechanics.


----------



## Sacrieur

arnie said:


> All the mentioned was the fact that electrons jump orbitals instantaneously without giving a good reason. Not string theory and just barely hinting at quantum mechanics.


Well that is what quantum mechanics is and why it is named what it is, the electrons that jump orbitals. Because we discovered the light was emitted in singular amounts called quanta.

It was extremely fascinating to watch the experiments unfold before our eyes that led us to discovering it. And it unlocked the door to a whole new world of exploration in astronomy.


----------



## minimized

This show, when I'm able to hear it over the sounds of inconsiderate people and nieces, is bliss. And then, when it's over, I can be depressed all over again at all the bull**** on tv the rest of the week.

It's all background noise...


----------



## arnie

My favorite part was how when you look at the sunrise... it's not actually there. There sunrise is an illusion. What you see is the sun's image being bent by the atmosphere around the curve of the earth a full 2 minutes before the sun actually rises in the east. 

Same is true for stars. It takes many years for the light to reach the earth which means that the stars might not even be there anymore. In fact, the galaxies you see are millions of years old by the time you see them.

Nothing you see is real. It's all an illusion.


----------



## nullptr

I'm hoping they do an episode on the possibility of using quantum states to build super processors.


----------



## RedViperofDorne

I just watched the first episode of this today. It was absolutely amazing. I'm excited to see the rest of it.


----------



## Laboratory Rat

Richard Pawgins said:


> if you're fairly educated then u won't really learn anything from this series. It's mainly a quick review for the laymen. Its also good that it's aired on Fox because their base really needs this more than anyone else (hardcore christian republican conservative) Maybe they'll learn something about the world and how it works.


Yes, I completely agree. It's nice to watch, but I already knoe 99% of the stuff...


----------



## arnie

Reddit explains how the speed of light is actually the speed of *everything*:

Everything, by nature of simply existing, is "moving" at the speed of light (which really has nothing to do with light: more on that later). Yes, that does include you.
Our understanding of the universe is that the way that we perceive space and time as separate things is, to be frank, wrong. They aren't separate: the universe is made of "spacetime," all one word. A year and a lightyear describe different things in our day to day lives, but from a physicist's point of view, they're actually the exact same thing (depending on what kind of physics you're doing).
In our day to day lives, we define motion as a distance traveled over some amount of time. However, if distances and intervals of time are the exact same thing, that suddenly becomes completely meaningless. "I traveled one foot for every foot that I traveled" is an absolutely absurd statement!
The way it works is that everything in the universe travels through spacetime at some speed which I'll call "c" for the sake of brevity. Remember, motion in spacetime is meaningless, so it makes sense that nothing could be "faster" or "slower" through spacetime than anything else. Everybody and everything travels at one foot per foot, that's just... how it works.
Obviously, though, things do seem to have different speeds. The reason that happens is that time and space are orthogonal, which is sort of a fancy term for "at right angles to each other." North and east, for example, are orthogonal: you can travel as far as you want directly to the north, but it's not going to affect where you are in terms of east/west at all.
Just like how you can travel north without traveling east, you can travel through time without it affecting where you are in space. Conversely, you can travel through space without it affecting where you are in time.
You're (presumably) sitting in your chair right now, which means you're not traveling through space at all. Since you have to travel through spacetime at c (speed of light), though, that means all of your motion is through time.
By the way, this is why time dilation happens: something that's moving very fast relative to you is moving through space, but since they can only travel through spacetime at c, they have to be moving more slowly through time to compensate (from your point of view).
Light, on the other hand, doesn't travel through time at all. The reason it doesn't is somewhat complicated, but it has to do with the fact that it has no mass.
Something that isn't moving that has mass can have energy: that's what E = mc2 means. Light has no mass, but it does have energy. If we plug the mass of light into E=mc2, we get 0, which makes no sense because light has energy. Hence, light can never be stationary.
Not only that, but light can never be stationary from anybody's perspective. Since, like everything else, it travels at c through spacetime, that means all of its "spacetime speed" must be through space, and none of it is through time.
So, light travels at c. Not at all by coincidence, *you'll often hear c referred to as the "speed of light in a vacuum." Really, though, it's the speed that everything travels at, and it happens to be the speed that light travels through space at because it has no mass.*


----------



## AlchemyFire

This is the best show on TV right now. I loved the most recent one ... as everyone seems to be talking about already, but I only saw it last night.



arnie said:


> There sunrise is an illusion. What you see is the sun's image being bent by the atmosphere around the curve of the earth a full 2 minutes before the sun actually rises in the east.


My life is a lie.


----------



## Richard Pawgins

arnie said:


> Reddit explains how the speed of light is actually the speed of *everything*:
> 
> Everything, by nature of simply existing, is "moving" at the speed of light (which really has nothing to do with light: more on that later). Yes, that does include you.
> Our understanding of the universe is that the way that we perceive space and time as separate things is, to be frank, wrong. They aren't separate: the universe is made of "spacetime," all one word. A year and a lightyear describe different things in our day to day lives, but from a physicist's point of view, they're actually the exact same thing (depending on what kind of physics you're doing).
> In our day to day lives, we define motion as a distance traveled over some amount of time. However, if distances and intervals of time are the exact same thing, that suddenly becomes completely meaningless. "I traveled one foot for every foot that I traveled" is an absolutely absurd statement!
> The way it works is that everything in the universe travels through spacetime at some speed which I'll call "c" for the sake of brevity. Remember, motion in spacetime is meaningless, so it makes sense that nothing could be "faster" or "slower" through spacetime than anything else. Everybody and everything travels at one foot per foot, that's just... how it works.
> Obviously, though, things do seem to have different speeds. The reason that happens is that time and space are orthogonal, which is sort of a fancy term for "at right angles to each other." North and east, for example, are orthogonal: you can travel as far as you want directly to the north, but it's not going to affect where you are in terms of east/west at all.
> Just like how you can travel north without traveling east, you can travel through time without it affecting where you are in space. Conversely, you can travel through space without it affecting where you are in time.
> You're (presumably) sitting in your chair right now, which means you're not traveling through space at all. Since you have to travel through spacetime at c (speed of light), though, that means all of your motion is through time.
> By the way, this is why time dilation happens: something that's moving very fast relative to you is moving through space, but since they can only travel through spacetime at c, they have to be moving more slowly through time to compensate (from your point of view).
> Light, on the other hand, doesn't travel through time at all. The reason it doesn't is somewhat complicated, but it has to do with the fact that it has no mass.
> Something that isn't moving that has mass can have energy: that's what E = mc2 means. Light has no mass, but it does have energy. If we plug the mass of light into E=mc2, we get 0, which makes no sense because light has energy. Hence, light can never be stationary.
> Not only that, but light can never be stationary from anybody's perspective. Since, like everything else, it travels at c through spacetime, that means all of its "spacetime speed" must be through space, and none of it is through time.
> So, light travels at c. Not at all by coincidence, *you'll often hear c referred to as the "speed of light in a vacuum." Really, though, it's the speed that everything travels at, and it happens to be the speed that light travels through space at because it has no mass.*


so ur telling me warp speed will never be possible?

:blank


----------



## arnie

nullnaught said:


> Neil pushes string theory and string theory is NOT science.


Neil Tyson laying down the smackdown on string theory:


----------



## arnie




----------



## Sacrieur

Richard Pawgins said:


> so ur telling me warp speed will never be possible?
> 
> :blank


He's telling you FTL speeds will never be possible. The faster an object travels the more massive it becomes, so that the speed of an object traveling at _c_ would have an infinite mass, thus requiring an infinite amount of energy to propel it.

This doesn't mean FTL travel is impossible and we can apply some physics trickery to work our way around this limit.

One theoretical solution would be to create a field that decreases the mass of your spaceship as the speed increases.

Another would be actual warp travel, in which the space in front of the ship is warped to be a fraction of its normal size. The spaceship then travels through this smaller space, therefore increasing total distance traveled.

My interest in warp field travel is pretty high, and I once considered making it my career.


----------



## Haunty

I already know most of the basics that the show covers, but I like the historical anecdotes about past scientists who made the discoveries.

On Netflix there is another NDT series called "The Inexplicable Universe"
It doesn't have the special effects, but it goes a bit deeper and is very interesting.


----------

