BBC2 tonight 9.00

[Alan_B]

May be interesting - quote from BBC website

Duration: 1 hour

For one night only, Professor Brian Cox goes unplugged in a specially recorded programme from the lecture theatre of the Royal Institution of Great Britain. In his own inimitable style, Brian takes an audience of famous faces, scientists and members of the public on a journey through some of the most challenging concepts in physics.

With the help of Jonathan Ross, Simon Pegg, Sarah Millican and James May, Brian shows how diamonds - the hardest material in nature - are made up of nothingness; how things can be in an infinite number of places at once; why everything we see or touch in the universe exists; and how a diamond in the heart of London is in communication with the largest diamond in the cosmos.

[stargraz3r]

Looks good will certainly be watching it.

[Orion_the_Hunter]

Thanks Alan.

[Hemsy]

Wasn't sure what to watch tonight....this sounds good!

Thanks Alan

[CJBooth]

I've set V+ to record! (I'm forgetful)

[Rols]

been looking forward to this, i hope its not a let down.

[Gra]

I've set V+ to record! (I'm forgetful)

Record what?

[dezmo1]

Just set to record...thanks for the heads up.

[bullettooth]

i recorded it will be watching tomorrow

[661-pete]

Watched it, though I'm not one of his biggest fans.

On the whole, I reckon it taught the audience something overall. There were some glaring gaps in his presentation though. For example: he went to great lengths to explain the Pauli exclusion principle but omitted any explanation of why we have 'pairing' of electrons of opposite spins in each orbital: without that bit of detail, his blackboard diagram would have been a mystery to some.

Ah well - better be no more spoilers, there are some here who've not yet seen it.

[Grunthos]

And (for those "fans" of Brian Cox) don't forget The Infinite Monkey Cage tomorrow at 1630hrs on BBC Radio 4.

[Ptarmigan]

but omitted any explanation of why we have 'pairing' of electrons of opposite spins in each orbital: without that bit of detail, his blackboard diagram would have been a mystery to some.

Yes, no one in the audience questioned the meaning of the two opposite arrows.

I recon he lost most of them in the first two minutes anyway.

Sarah M. did her best to put him in his place though, I did enjoy her contribution

That maths lesson with J.Ross was a total waste of time - the time taken to bambozle him achieved nothing and could have been better used simply to explain the cancelation and divisions of terms in denominator and ,, oh sorry ,, top and bottom.

[JulianO]

I agree - some bits were good, but I think you needed a fair grasp of physics and maths to follow quite a bit of it. I think he could have made things more accessible - I'm not sure how exactly, but I just think he missed a trick or two.

[malc-c]

He lost me after the first 30 seconds....

I think the problem was that the talk was a lot longer than the 60min production, which was why the diagrams on the blackboard changed with out him actually writing on it. Maybe the pairing of electrons was explained, but got omitted in the editing process ?

[Alan_B]

Glad to see Feynman get a mention

Brilliant bongo playing, safe cracking genius who also loved physics, to have had him as a teacher must have been inspiring

[Spackbackle]

My physics knowledge is basic but I felt I did learn something from watching.

The gaps is some of the explanations may have been editing? I imagine it wasn't an hour long lecture but had to be edited for an hours length. I did notice at one point some additional info appear on the black board that I didn't see anyone draw.

Very pleased I watcted it but would have liked it to have been longer.

Edit --- Malc C beat me to it, "I think the problem was that the talk was a lot longer than the 60min production, which was why the diagrams on the blackboard changed with out him actually writing on it. Maybe the pairing of electrons was explained, but got omitted in the editing process ?"

need to learn to think and type faster.

[JB80]

That maths lesson with J.Ross was a total waste of time - the time taken to bambozle him achieved nothing and could have been better used simply to explain the cancelation and divisions of terms in denominator and ,, oh sorry ,, top and bottom.

Not a total waste of time, it resulted in a quick run down from the missus on just what you mentioned. I had either forgotten it or more likely never paid attention in the first place and I was just as bamboozled at first and you're right it could of been done better. However lucky for me my wife explained it how I wish they would of.

That was the only bit I struggled with.

All in all a good show from what I saw, I'm glad I recorded it as I missed bits here and there though so I will watch again.

[Macavity]

Probably why the "overhead projector" was invented? <G> But it is a great aid to memory, particularly where the material being presented might depend crucially on ONE word being defined or some basic concept included. I think they do use such things in RI Xmas lectures etc. And maybe school kids make for a less-distracting audience / demo-participants?

[Ptarmigan]

Agree that a lot may have been lost in the edit, heck the subject could have occupied a 52week series (or more) but sadly quantum phis, the universe and everything doesnt have cuddly bear cubs and penguins !

Nevertheless, his opening monologue didnt win many friends in the audience and his deux exmachina presentation of THE equations reminded me of Arthur C. Clarke - "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."

I knew where he was trying to go with h but he just didnt fill in the gaps in my knowledge of how to get there !

[Orion_the_Hunter]

I agree - some bits were good, but I think you needed a fair grasp of physics and maths to follow quite a bit of it. I think he could have made things more accessible - I'm not sure how exactly, but I just think he missed a trick or two.

I agree with this. I have a grasp of Maths & Physics, it was a good programme but I felt some of his explainations were a bit long winded and how they linked together didn't work too well.

Normally the BBC really 'dumb down', this wasn't acessible to/was too complicated for 'the masses' IMO. There needt to be a middle ground.

But hats off to PBC and the BBC for trying to take Physics to the masses.

[Ptarmigan]

Not a total waste of time, it resulted in a quick run down from the missus

Excellent ! Glad you enjoyed it !!

[Reggie]

I have to say, I can do some maths, was never hot on formulae and equations, don't know particularly much about physics (at least formally), despite my shortcomings, I understood most of it or at the very least what it was getting at, I found it thoroughly entertaining.

I think the blackboard was a little silly, a decent whiteboard would've done the same job, with a little bit of computer magic he could've shown different outcomes for the distance delta by dialing in the numbers and possibly even pointed out that and new (2010) touchscreen technology relies on that very principle.

I wonder what kind of shows we'd get if Prof. Cox got the strictly come dancing budget?

[RogerTheDodger]

I think he did explain about the electron spins but it was lost in the edit - those arrows first appeared on the waves after an edit before he re-drew them on the shell levels. That was a great way of explaining valence btw, that would have made it much easier to understand when I did it in chemistry at school in the '70's

[Karen]

It was like the Royal Intsitute Xmas lectures for adults. Very enjoyable and I learnt a lot, I think.

[chiltonstar]

Enjoyable, although I think he could have used a lot more hydrogen foam with James May....

I wondered about some of the facts; in the dim and distant days when I sat in a university lecture theatre listening to some other rather drier professors intoning away, I understood that the Pauli Exclusion Principle referred to electrons in a single atom not having the same energy, rather than all electrons in the Universe which is what (I think) he was implying. Can someone more up to date on their physics put me right here?

Chris