Stephen Hawking's Universe Channal 4 8pm Tonight

[Rob1961]

Hi, Stephen Hawking's Universe 8pm Channel 4 tonight Part 1 of 3 - Clashes with Archive Hour on Radio 4 on Richard Fenyman....

Cheers

Rob

[Lincoln]

Thanks very much - watching it now

[Space Oddity6]

Seen both episodes so far and they are pretty good. Such a change to see something like this on terrestrial TV instead of some vacuous talent show.

I thought the 1st episode was better than tonight's but the theme of tonights was fascinating once you get your head around it. I didn't quite understand the concept of orbiting a black hole meaning time goes half as slowly as it would further away but when he explained about pushing the speed of light barrier in a spaceship travelling away it made more sense...kind of.

Disappointed to learn time travel into the past is impossible though! Looking forward to next week's already.

[johnkirkpatrick]

recorded both so will watch them in morning..

[matt c]

Went to a party last night and missed it, just realised this morning, damn it!!

[Toadeh]

4od should have it. Failing that, discovery have just started again.

RE time travel backwards: Not impossible, just can't think how. They used to think the earth was flat until someone said different, just because they say it can't be done, doesn't mean it can't (we are still discovering new things all the time, so who knows).

[Space Oddity6]

Hmmm, very true but I kind of got the feeling that if Stephen Hawking says it can't happen, then it can't happen. I wonder if there are any counter theories that argue against his judgement. Well any genuine ones anyway.

[Toadeh]

Got round to watching it tonght. Its a very well put together program and explains a lot. Don't want to go on the train mind, and if you are at the front of the train, would you age more than those at the back of the train over the weeks???? and who says that just cause time appears to slow down, you still might age at the same rate or faster??

As for reverse time travel, perhaps in the future all his findings have been discredited hence why noone showed up.

Admitidly there are far more bright people than me looking into this and I do think he is a VERY clever man.

[barkis]

I'm sad that travelling back in time is a Nono too.

I'd like to revisit some very good times, and do it on a regular basis.

Well?, I can dream can't I .

Ron.

[Ogri]

I'd like to go back in time and see who left the modern human type footprint in some slates (it was in clay then) I got from India, from circa 65 million years ago. They were so crisp you could almost make out the sworl patterns (it was phenomenal quality silver grey slate, easily split again and again down to sub 1mm thickness, flexed like a sheet of steel, and rang like steel when struck).

It was a size 43/8.5'ish foot, and my own foot fitted into the print perfectly. No hair at the side or back (their weight had pushed up the surrounding material into a gentle curve away from the print, and any hair in range would have definitely left a mark), and the toe nails were 'manicured' trim and short.

At the heel, behind it, were the little triangles you get from walking, like the scuff in sand on the beach our feet make.

It was an incredible experience just holding the thing in my hands, let alone putting my bare foot into the print (eta: and it really was 'into' the print, it was very 3 dimensional, with the print sinking into the slate and the cutting of the slate peeling the layer out of the print, so to speak).

As an aside, that foot normally wore shoes. Feet that don't wear shoes, look very different to that.

It 'might' be explained by time travel I suppose, but I'm more of the mind that we have been around for far longer, and have been far smarter for far longer, than we give ourselves credit for.

[MikeWilson]

65 million years ago, that's interesting. This is around the time of the land & sea dinosaur mass extinction. Our Homo genus is only 2.5 million years old, so that means whatever you have was almost certainly not formed by a humanoid.

65 million year old clay is also quite deep in the geological strata. Do you have the dating test results as a more likely explanation is that the clay isn't as old as you think it is.

Who knows, you might be right but I'm intrigued as to where you got this clay or slate from and how you know it's 65 million years old