Jump to content

548140465_Animationchallenge.jpg.32379dfa6f3bf4bba537689690df680e.jpg

All Doom and Gloom from Brian Cox


CGolder
 Share

Recommended Posts

you people are unbelievable

you want more astronomy stuff on TV but refuse to accept the inevitable consequence of the physics. We dont make up the physics for the show, just present it.

we do apologise though, we will change the physics for next time.

geez

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 255
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Had to miss about 15min of it when I had to dash out and mess with the mount, but it wasnt too bad overall, with explanations of Entropy in Theromdynamics (an essential part of understanding the physics of the cosmos). The rest was stuff we kinda already knew.

Edited by Uranium235
Link to comment
Share on other sites

i think a lot of people were just expecting loads of twinkly pictures with Dr Cox going 'ooh' and 'aah' a bit and saying 'thats a nebula'

people on here moan that there isn't more on astronomy and astrophysics then whinge even more when there is one thats a bit different.

i personally thought it was really interesting i had no idea what entropy was and his method of explaining it was clear and consice no messing around. you have to remember that the bbc don't do programs for you as an individual it has to appeal to a wider slice of society than just the people on here

Link to comment
Share on other sites

we do apologise though, we will change the physics for next time.

geez

We apologise...? You were involved in the making of the show?

Remember Paul we are all allowed an opinion, and thats what people are doing here.

Get off your high horse.

I'll be watching it tomorrow evening when I'm home again

Ant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i'm not well up on any of this to be honest. but at one point i heard of a theory called the "big crunch" where the universe would collapse back in on itself due to the gravity of the center core or ground zero was greater than its escape velocity, resulting in a new big bang.

is this just nonsense?

my point is, even if everything does eventually burn out, would the "big crunch" result in another big bang large enough to create a new universe?

Sorry for what is most certainly a ridiculous question.

Edited by DrNeb
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I enjoyed it. Ok, it was a bit of a downer subject, but I thought it was handled well.

I think it bodes well for the rest of the series.

Only gripe would be that mebby there was a little to much travel to exotic places just for the sake of it (although some of it was relevant, just about)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you people are unbelievable

you want more astronomy stuff on TV but refuse to accept the inevitable consequence of the physics. We dont make up the physics for the show, just present it.

we do apologise though, we will change the physics for next time.

geez

As I said before, the reaction to the "depressing" nature of the show has, in my opionion, echoes with groups of religious fundamentalists being told about evolution. :)

I actually thought the great man should have made the point (as he has elsewhere) that at the end of the Universe any trace that we might ever have even existed will be lost. Yet more evidence of the total irrationality of humanism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I kept hoping he'd say something facinating or explain some difficult concept in an easy way that joe public would understand

Instead of going overboard with bad (misleading & confusing) analogies.

Could have been much better with a different presenter - Michio Kaku?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I enjoyed it, better than eastenders.
Battle of the Brians! With Brian May, you get Astronomy, MUSIC... and an Eastenders connection thrown in:

No real evidence of consumate Solar Astronomy though. :)

Edited by Macavity
Link to comment
Share on other sites

you people are unbelievable

you want more astronomy stuff on TV but refuse to accept the inevitable consequence of the physics. We dont make up the physics for the show, just present it.

we do apologise though, we will change the physics for next time.

geez

Oh god, we are all entitled to our opinions and if you agree with them or not doesnt mean you can come out spouting this rubbish

Seen a few comments like this from you and frankly they arent helpful in the least... :)

Edited by steppenwolf
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally enjoyed it , although my patience threshhold is HUUGE (thanks to astro-photography I reckon LOL).

I must admit it is difficult to see the target audience, but I LIKE how he uses 'everyday Earth' events to explain things. Afterall its on the BBC in the evening so there will be a lot of casual non-astro peeps watching who need these kind of explanations. But on the other hand it gets quite deep. To be honest, I think there is no easy way to go about this. The subjects he's covering are quite complex. For a prime time BBC Doc, I cant think of any other ways of approaching it.

Im just glad theres anything astro on the Beeb.. hats off to Brian Cox for at least getting the subject on the BBC regularly. yes, there are probably many better physisists/presenters/astronomers out there, but I dont see them queing up for this kind of slot, and are they up to the job presentation wise (The beeb are quite picky). No matter how bad people think the presentation is.. its all good for astronomy :)

Edited by Vega
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why do these threads always end up being so aggressive. Why cant people just be happy there was a programme on the tele that was TRYING to reach or hobby.

I am sure that this series can keep running getting more detailed as it goes on. S@N is a more detailed show so its nice to have an alternative. Not many people are being constuctive here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, I do not want twinkly pictures, and I do not want the physics changed. I, just like others have an opinion, on how it was presented. I could have done without all the world travel too. You could have showed the time Iron takes to degrade down the local scrap yard, you do not have to go to The Skeleton Coast.

I would prefer Brian Cox chatting to the screen on a sofa. I dislike all this analogy rubbish, just give me the Science.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's constructive: Ban the use of "the universe is expanding" as it ALWAYS makes people ask "what is it expanding into" which PROVES it's a bad analogy. Use "the Universe is scaling" which at least makes people think "oh, what does that mean?". Also, ban "the Big Bang" as you get people asking "where did it happen? what happened before?", again proving it's a bad analogy. The concepts are hard enough as it is without making them harder by feeding people a wrong impression and then working towards correcting it. Call it "the frontier of knowledge", the "singularity" or similar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why do these threads always end up being so aggressive. Why cant people just be happy there was a programme on the tele that was TRYING to reach or hobby.

I'm not sure it was. Send a film crew to lots of attractive locations to illustrate something that could have been done equally well - and a lot cheaper - with cardboard models in the lab? And there are other presenters who could have done a much better job - Jim Al-Khalili & Michio Kaku spring immediately to mind.

There was no attempt whatsoever to explain the underlying physics - except for the effort to explain what "entropy" is, which was misleadingly oversimplified in a way I wouldn't expect even for GCSE General Science.

Is this a travelogue, a celebrity monologue or an effort at a serious science programme? If the latter, it's a very poor effort.

Programme Commissioner's Report: Must try harder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not easy to simplify science and entertain the masses. Given the wonders that the Hubble telescope has unveiled this could have been an introduction to what you're looking at in the night sky. Then introduce space time and entropy as features of the changing universe.

Anything which gets folk watching the usual mind rot of dancing/cooking /dining/talent ? on ice is a good thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Could have been much better with a different presenter - Michio Kaku?

I like Brian Cox, but Prof. Jim Al-Khalili is a great presenter, too.

Edited by Revs
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is funny, but when I said on this forum, how much I enjoyed Wonders of the Solar System, from start to finish, I even bought the book, not one person said to me, how dare you like that series, what on earth are you thinking of, enjoying it like that.

But say you do not like something, and everyone is on your back. That is why these things turn a little heated, it is because people who liked the programme could not just say, I like it for what ever reason, they feel a need to tell me what they think of me not liking it.

And then it goes back and forth.

Can we not just post our opinion of the programme and leave it at that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.