Neil deGrasse Tyson's "Cosmos"

According to NDGT, the closer you get to the center of the sun the hotter it gets.

So the very hottest part of the sun is? (Hint: the show sucks.)

Also all electron orbitals are circles, no?

edited 14th Apr '14 4:16:11 PM by hcobb

How does that hint make any sense in context?

The hottest part of the sun is above the "visible surface", not below it.

Forgive me if I sound ignorant, but there are people who aren't aware of that.

You're wrong, but ok.

According to my research, the sun's corona (the atmosphere essentially) can reach 2 million degrees Celsius. The sun's core can reach 15 million degrees Celsius. The corona is hotter than the next couple layers down, but the interior of the sun tends to be way hotter. Basically, the corona is the hottest part of the sun's atmosphere. It's insane to think that the atmosphere is somehow hotter than the interior.

I couldn't find the numbers in Kelvin and I don't use Fahrenheit because it is baffling and weird.

edited 14th Apr '14 7:57:03 PM by Zendervai

Well they wouldn't know it if they only watched this show.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-is-the-suns-corona-th/

Solar flares are hot enough to make antimatter. This is way hotter than the core.

http://www.space.com/21889-solar-flares-antimatter-particles.html

Tyson, Sagan's ghost is begging you to bring back his lovely p-orbitals.

edited 14th Apr '14 7:59:42 PM by hcobb

Okay, now you're just being nitpicky. Yes, solar flares can be really really hot. They kind of aren't permanent. And the sun does get hotter the further in you go. If Tyson had mentioned the solar flare thing, which is completely irrelevant to the episode, it would have confused things. He was talking about the fusion in the core, not the sun's atmosphere. And the p-orbitals...okay yeah, but that may have something to do with Brannon Braga, who's track record with science is...extremely bad to say the least.

edited 14th Apr '14 8:06:35 PM by Zendervai

Kelvin is just Celsius with 273.15 added to the number. When you get to the millions conversion between them wouldn't really matter.

Did anybody else feel like he could have explained neutrinos a little better?

What was missing with neutrinos was conservation of momentum and spin, and given that Tyson has chickened out (yes, I went there) about the electron, that would be too much to ask for.

But given the format, could any reasonable attempt have been made at dealing with how strange the weak force is? (Pun intended.)

edited 14th Apr '14 8:24:08 PM by hcobb

Couldn't the electron thing be that it's just easy to get the point across for the audience? Science books use the orbital model in diagrams. Or at least they did 13-years ago when I was in high school.

Why not use little pink unicorns instead of ping pong balls for electrons? At least they'd have well defined parity.

The isn't anywhere near the first time we see circular masses representing electrons and neutrons and photons. They're everywhere in class textbooks, online, everywhere. So, by this knowledge, you hate all class textbooks, online diagrams, etc.

You clearly hate this show, okay? You don't need to keep telling people this over and over again.

edited 14th Apr '14 8:43:16 PM by Shota

Unless you're doing really advanced work with ions or whatnot, the Bohr planetary model is good enough.

That reminds me of the shape of water. Ice only makes sense with non-globular electron orbits, but here we got three featureless spheres.

hcobb, why are you even watching this show if you hate it and already know everything?

You Should Know This Already

I was more disappointed at the lack of neutrons than I was at the wavy orbits of electrons, although that's an extremely minor nitpick. Also, the animation style really bugs me.

But this is an excellent show, overall. I can see that his purpose is not so much to cover every relevant fact, but to illustrate the scientific method for a lay audience, and fight the pernicious influence of supertitious thinking.

Talkin' about the ladies this Sunday.

As in "Sisters of the Sun" and not say "Sisters with Ph Ds?"

Does "Sisters with Ph Ds" make for an even marginally competent episode title? No? Then stop trolling the thread for chrissake.

Cosmos may not be #1 in its time slot but people are certainly talking about it more than Resurrection or Believe.

We were talking about diversity?

I'm certainly enjoying both the show and the sheer whine coming from creationists.

Isn't it grand though?

Like music to one's ears.