Jump to content

Banner.jpg.b89429c566825f6ab32bcafbada449c9.jpg

Tonights Wonders of the Universe

CGolder

By CGolder
in The Astro Lounge

Recommended Posts

mikeknowle

mikeknowle

Posted
Posted

It was excellent!

After watching the rugby and football down the cricket club today, it was just getting dusk (7pm)...and my son spotted Orion's belt and Betelgeuse as we walked outside.

Then for him to see how stars form elements sequentially in groups, and to learn that Betelgeuse may go supernova any day - woah! He's not only learnt some good stuff for his studies, but he's hooked and will sure look up at Orion with a new interest now.

Good stuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 119
  • Created
  • Last Reply
starstalker

starstalker

Posted
Posted
I always thought of it this way. Start off with 100 cars. After a few years they all breakdown. From those 100 cars you can slavage enough parts to make 85 new cars. After a few years they all break down and again you can salvage enough parts to make 65 new cars. And so on. Eventually though there will not be enough parts to make a single car and that will be the end!

excellent way of explaining it!:o

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RikM

RikM

Posted
Posted

Well I did fall asleep last week, I thought it was a very disappointing start to the series, perhaps it would have been better somewhere middle to end of the series instead. I missed tonight's episode because I was out imaging, but it sounds better so I will have to watch it on catch-up when I can.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
astroimpulse

astroimpulse

Posted
Posted

Some of the places he goes to to make a point are incredibly tenuous! :o

Why Brazil just to stand in an old jail before its demolition!

Lucky swine :)

Good program and well worth watching. But it does seem like one big BBC expenses scam :(:D

Best thing on telly at the moment, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JamesF

JamesF

Posted
Posted

I very much enjoyed it, though it could still have been fifteen minutes shorter. There's quite a bit of time spent on CGI imagery or panoramic shots with him looking wistfully into the distance that doesn't really add to the programme IMNSHO.

And I'm really not sure about the bit with the bubbles...

James

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Steep

Steep

Posted
Posted

I thought the content this week was better, I enjoyed it more anyway. I still don't understand why we need the strange and exotic locations or the long zoom to a BC face profile and the music is still too loud.

Bet I'm first to spot Betelgeuse going supernova! :o

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Uranium235

Uranium235

Posted
Posted

Was a cracking programme, with a bit of a chemistry lesson thrown in too. A really good explanation as to why heavier elements are so rare.

And when i saw the photos of sunspots on betelgeuse, I was stunned! Had no idea anyone had managed that. When that star decides to go, the planet earth will have a front row seat :o

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stephen

Stephen

Posted
Posted
It takes 600 years for the light from Betelgeuse to reach us. It could already have gone supernova and we don't know it yet!

Imagine the dissapointment if you set off in a space ship to Betelgeuse and it wasn't there when you got there :o

"I'm sure it's round here somewhere!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites
themos

themos

Posted
Posted

Apparently, BC will be going into the "vomit comet" to demonstrate Gallileo's observation that all things fall under gravity at the same rate. Was footage of the same experiment done on the Moon by Apollo 15 astronauts not deemed sexy enough?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
angusb1

angusb1

Posted
Posted

I don't want to get anyone's back up but I think that its fine for the BBC to spend my license fee on shooting things in interesting, exotic and visually pleasing locations sometimes. It makes the programmes different from watching the same stock footage over and over again on cheaper documentaries like you see on some other channels.

I'll get my coat.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RikM

RikM

Posted
Posted

It's better if the location actually reinforces the message though. Like the calendar bumps thingy in the first episode. Great location linked to the measuring the passage of time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
astroimpulse

astroimpulse

Posted
Posted
It's better if the location actually reinforces the message though. Like the calendar bumps thingy in the first episode. Great location linked to the measuring the passage of time.

You're completely right. Same for the old desert town thing. When it has a purpose it's not a tenuous link.

And it's far more attractive than the UK :o

Still doesn't explain going to Brazil for the exploding jail though! lol

If he fell out of a plane he'd land in a bed of feathers. Lucky so and so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cunhaval

Cunhaval

Posted
Posted

Don't think they actually have to go to many of the exotic locations - that's just current programme making fashion, in pursuit of the all-important viewing figures.

Perhaps we should remind ourselves that most of the target audience is probably less passionate about the subject matter than most of us on this forum, and if the makers think that some extra "flash" is necessary - maybe they are right.

Suspect that most of us here would be just as happy (if not more) with a studio-based discussion version chaired by Brian Cox (or Sir Patrick!), but it would NEVER achieve the viewing figures of the glossy WOTU.

If getting science a higher profile amongst the public requires the BBC to try and turn Brian Cox into a poster boy (and if he is prepared to put up with it), then that's fine with me. He's a pretty good communicator, and people tend to react well to presenters who have genuine enthusiasm for their subject. After all, this is REAL science being presented by a REAL scientist - you don't get a chair of physics or a job at Cerne on the basis of a 90s pop career :o

Personally, I would see both episodes so far as excellent, even if not perfect, given the time constraints. Given that the subject matter is vast, and the concepts complex we are being pretty well served in a prime(ish) time presentation.

Of course, I wouldn't mind a more detailed, deeper studio version AS WELL - weekly Sky at Night, perhaps? :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hobbes

Hobbes

Posted
Posted
Mine came from HSamuel :)

Good episode, but I have to complain about one bit ...

It's pronounced Bey-tel-geu-ze :(

Not so sure about this. There appears to be no consensus on how you pronounce it :o

Link to comment
Share on other sites
callump

callump

Posted
Posted

Though not a big fan of prof. brian cox, the discussion on start the week today (R4) was quite interesting. Explained how he wanted the programmes to have a cinematographic effect - and why he didn't like the idea of the music being turned down.

When he's being moderately serious he's ok (like in the Huw Wheldon Memorial Lecture) - i think its when he's trying to be a celebrity that he gets my goat...

/callump

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Andrew INT

Andrew INT

Posted
Posted

I thought the first episode spent too long on saying not that much - although I did like the section on entropy. Far too many "mood" shots for my taste.

The second episode however I thought was a real turn around. I'm about half way through my physics degree at the moment and I thought the section on electromagnetic spectroscopy was well explained without going into great detail.

I'm looking forward to the next two programs :o)

All the best, Andrew

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • 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.