8 ms·

That's an incredibly detailed image. Every single time I see one of these amazing space pics, it's hard not to get all philosophical and wonder about the size

by devsda 2y ago

That's an incredibly detailed image. Every single time I see one of these amazing space pics, it's hard not to get all philosophical and wonder about the size of space & time on cosmic scale, how small our earth is and how insignificant our regular problems are. I don't care if I don't get to see flying cars or AGI in my lifetime but I will be very disappointed if our knowledge of space remains more or less the same as today without much progress. Edit: typo

the_af 2y ago
> it's hard not to get all philisophical and wonder about the size of space & time on cosmic scale Indeed! Never a bad time to re-watch Cosmos and (in my opinion) the awesome sequel(s) by Neil de Grasse Tyson. Is it weird to admit I even choke up during some of the episodes? (As an aside, why is it so hard to find the sequels to Cosmos in any streaming service. In my country it's not on Netflix, Disney+, Apple, HBO/Max, Star+, Prime Video. What the hell...? I just want to re-watch the damned thing and I don't own a Blu-ray player. Do I have to pirate the stuff?)
- nsbk 2y ago
  You are not alone
- bjelkeman-again 2y ago
  We wanted Spotify for video, we got Netflix, Disney+, Apple, HBO/Max, Star+, Prime Video, and your local thing too. And they still haven’t got what you want to watch. /sigh
- xandrius 2y ago
  You gave it a fair shot, go ahead and come join us at the bay where the grass is green, the videos full HD and nobody wants your money (just your soul).
- seabass-labrax 2y ago
  Neil de Grasse Tyson is still on my 'to watch' list, but you may be interested in Brian Cox's 'Wonders of the Solar System / Universe' series. From what I've heard, Brian Cox is something of the British equivalent of Tyson. 'Wonders-' is a beautifully shot series that is both educational and remains impressive over a decade on (2010-2011). The only thing that might be disappointing if you're already into astrophysics is that it's rather dumbed-down compared to his books, which are more earnest, closer perhaps in style to Feynman's Lectures.
  - the_af 2y ago
    Wow, never even heard of Brian Cox! Will find this series you mention. Thanks for the recommendation. I'm not a physicist of any kind so I'm ok at the "science divulgation" level.
  - antod 2y ago
    I really like Brian Cox, but I do really wish he'd aim his content a bit higher and pack a bit more information into it. I hesitate to use "dumbed down" though (maybe I would if I didn't like him so much), more like it's just a bit too laid back and slow like it's aimed at people not really paying attention.
    - WorldMaker 2y ago
      I feel like Brian Cox over-corrected as his career has progressed further and further into the "science edutainer" career. His early books were fascinating glimpses into String Theory and M-Theory and often got criticized for being too dense. To be fair, a similar criticism is often levied at Niel deGrasse Tyson as well that his modern persona is too laid back and slow and aimed at people not really paying attention, but some of his early astrophysics stuff was dense and cool and you still get those glimpses when he is advocating for astrophysics content. (Relatedly, it's a part of why I respect Bill Nye's late career attempts at aging his attempted shows up and advocating for things like climate science in them, even if those messages and content density sometimes sadly falls to bad or mixed reviews. It is impressive to see him trying.)
      - the_af 2y ago
        I think the divulgator role is necessary though. I like Neil's laid back & slow persona. He communicates for effect, glossing over details which would overwhelm casual audiences. He is emotional, grave or funny as needed. He simplifies where it's needed for a 40 minute episode of a show aimed at general audiences (like myself!). I feel the role of science communicators/eduitaners such as these is to spark an interest in the topic. You can later go for details elsewhere, or even pursue a career in science.
- WorldMaker 2y ago
  It should be one of the things that Disney owns outright today (from having bought some but not all of Fox/News Corp), so Disney+ is the natural home, but that version of Cosmos was a very expensive show so between the "Disney Vault" and Disney again remembering they can get revenue from lending shows to other services it does seem to be off Disney+ for the moment. JustWatch says it is streaming on ad-supported Free service Tubi in the US right now: https://www.justwatch.com/us/tv-show/cosmos-a-spacetime-odyssey https://www.justwatch.com/us/tv-show/cosmos-a-spacetime-odys... (JustWatch is a too useful service at this point in the Streaming Wars to figure out where shows and movies currently are. I am getting to point of buying more Blu-Rays again, though, because there are too many services and many of the ad-supported ones like Tubi and Pluto are sometimes really obnoxious, and some of the paid services I have strong reasons I don't want to pay for them. I certainly have friends that have gone back to piracy, and it does sound more tempting as the Streaming Wars get worse.)
  - the_af 2y ago
    Thanks, JustWatch is indeed very useful! I'm not in the US so Tubi doesn't work for me. Apparently none of the Cosmos series (original or the two sequels) is available in my country. Not even to buy. I'm so thrilled! I cannot wait to NOT watch this anywhere legally! Oh well, to the Bay it is.
markus_zhang 2y ago
That always makes me want to ditch whatever I'm doing and switching gear to hiking, coding and studying Mathematics and Physics. Bitter realization at the end, of course.
layer8 2y ago
We are lucky that we live in a sweet-spot era where the universe is old enough that we have 13 billion years to look back on, but young enough that all the galaxies haven’t receded behind the cosmic horizon yet due to the accelerated expansion of the universe. In some billion years, intelligent beings will only have historic records, if anything at all, to look back to how the observable universe used to be filled with billions of galaxies.
- kulahan 2y ago
  Life will survive beyond humanity, trust me. Intelligence already exists in a few animals on this planet, and another few million years could have them at the top of the food chain, exploring our relics.
- deanCommie 2y ago
  I don't understand people that aren't filled with dread with this concept. And I understand why so many humans fall back to something like religion to cope. It's the only way it seems to become complacent with our role in the cosmic horror. I know all the intellectual arguments for optimistic nihilism. I vote in elections even though my "one vote" doesn't matter amongst millions, and in some degree my single human life is the same on a timescale of (hopefully) trillions of humans by the time we get to the point of worrying about the receding observable universe. And yet...
  - layer8 2y ago
    The change is too slow for anyone to be personally affected by it. Besides, the universe as such is devoid of any meaning; meaning is only something that we create internally. The fact that we dread voids and emptiness is also a result of evolutionary needs, there is no “dread” outside of us.
    - mensetmanusman 2y ago
      Humans are the universe defining meaning.
  - 2y ago
zoeysmithe 2y ago
We're probably not getting to space without AGI or at least some level of sophisticated AI. At a certain point our biological bodies are just wed to the Earth and its ecosystem, as we are animals that are products of the Earth. If "we" ever get out there, some form of mechanical AI will. And we will never know it because once we send those ships off, we'll be long gone before the return signal gets to us from some far of locale. Imagine a voyager who can self-repair, mine asteroids, print circuits, etc. Now imagine giving it a 1 million year mission. Maybe by then we'll all have given up on biology and we'd be the "robots" on that ship. Sometimes the universe makes beings like us, but not often, and probably makes all manner of interesting beings that will most likely be forever out of reach, and us out of their reach. Kudos to some life on a faraway planet, I wish we could meet. Also its fun to think of the universe as a system. Here's this incomprehensibly large thing constantly in motion, constantly having stars die out and explode, and new ones born, etc all the time but to us at incredible slow speeds, everywhere, yet at incredible distances from each other. Its like this bellows that keeps a fire lit, over and over, non-stop. But not quite non-stop because this great furnace too will (probably) have a proper death. This universe life cycle chart is both a feat of science and an incredible work of a permanent and grim mortality of all things. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphical_timeline_from_Big_Bang_to_Heat_Death https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphical_timeline_from_Big_Ba...

by devsda 2y ago

the_af 2y ago

> it's hard not to get all philisophical and wonder about the size of space & time on cosmic scale Indeed! Never a bad time to re-watch Cosmos and (in my opinion) the awesome sequel(s) by Neil de Grasse Tyson. Is it weird to admit I even choke up during some of the episodes? (As an aside, why is it so hard to find the sequels to Cosmos in any streaming service. In my country it's not on Netflix, Disney+, Apple, HBO/Max, Star+, Prime Video. What the hell...? I just want to re-watch the damned thing and I don't own a Blu-ray player. Do I have to pirate the stuff?)

nsbk 2y ago
You are not alone
bjelkeman-again 2y ago
We wanted Spotify for video, we got Netflix, Disney+, Apple, HBO/Max, Star+, Prime Video, and your local thing too. And they still haven’t got what you want to watch. /sigh
xandrius 2y ago
You gave it a fair shot, go ahead and come join us at the bay where the grass is green, the videos full HD and nobody wants your money (just your soul).
seabass-labrax 2y ago
Neil de Grasse Tyson is still on my 'to watch' list, but you may be interested in Brian Cox's 'Wonders of the Solar System / Universe' series. From what I've heard, Brian Cox is something of the British equivalent of Tyson. 'Wonders-' is a beautifully shot series that is both educational and remains impressive over a decade on (2010-2011). The only thing that might be disappointing if you're already into astrophysics is that it's rather dumbed-down compared to his books, which are more earnest, closer perhaps in style to Feynman's Lectures.
- the_af 2y ago
  Wow, never even heard of Brian Cox! Will find this series you mention. Thanks for the recommendation. I'm not a physicist of any kind so I'm ok at the "science divulgation" level.
- antod 2y ago
  I really like Brian Cox, but I do really wish he'd aim his content a bit higher and pack a bit more information into it. I hesitate to use "dumbed down" though (maybe I would if I didn't like him so much), more like it's just a bit too laid back and slow like it's aimed at people not really paying attention.
  - WorldMaker 2y ago
    I feel like Brian Cox over-corrected as his career has progressed further and further into the "science edutainer" career. His early books were fascinating glimpses into String Theory and M-Theory and often got criticized for being too dense. To be fair, a similar criticism is often levied at Niel deGrasse Tyson as well that his modern persona is too laid back and slow and aimed at people not really paying attention, but some of his early astrophysics stuff was dense and cool and you still get those glimpses when he is advocating for astrophysics content. (Relatedly, it's a part of why I respect Bill Nye's late career attempts at aging his attempted shows up and advocating for things like climate science in them, even if those messages and content density sometimes sadly falls to bad or mixed reviews. It is impressive to see him trying.)
    - the_af 2y ago
      I think the divulgator role is necessary though. I like Neil's laid back & slow persona. He communicates for effect, glossing over details which would overwhelm casual audiences. He is emotional, grave or funny as needed. He simplifies where it's needed for a 40 minute episode of a show aimed at general audiences (like myself!). I feel the role of science communicators/eduitaners such as these is to spark an interest in the topic. You can later go for details elsewhere, or even pursue a career in science.
WorldMaker 2y ago
It should be one of the things that Disney owns outright today (from having bought some but not all of Fox/News Corp), so Disney+ is the natural home, but that version of Cosmos was a very expensive show so between the "Disney Vault" and Disney again remembering they can get revenue from lending shows to other services it does seem to be off Disney+ for the moment. JustWatch says it is streaming on ad-supported Free service Tubi in the US right now: https://www.justwatch.com/us/tv-show/cosmos-a-spacetime-odyssey https://www.justwatch.com/us/tv-show/cosmos-a-spacetime-odys... (JustWatch is a too useful service at this point in the Streaming Wars to figure out where shows and movies currently are. I am getting to point of buying more Blu-Rays again, though, because there are too many services and many of the ad-supported ones like Tubi and Pluto are sometimes really obnoxious, and some of the paid services I have strong reasons I don't want to pay for them. I certainly have friends that have gone back to piracy, and it does sound more tempting as the Streaming Wars get worse.)
- the_af 2y ago
  Thanks, JustWatch is indeed very useful! I'm not in the US so Tubi doesn't work for me. Apparently none of the Cosmos series (original or the two sequels) is available in my country. Not even to buy. I'm so thrilled! I cannot wait to NOT watch this anywhere legally! Oh well, to the Bay it is.

markus_zhang 2y ago

That always makes me want to ditch whatever I'm doing and switching gear to hiking, coding and studying Mathematics and Physics. Bitter realization at the end, of course.

layer8 2y ago

We are lucky that we live in a sweet-spot era where the universe is old enough that we have 13 billion years to look back on, but young enough that all the galaxies haven’t receded behind the cosmic horizon yet due to the accelerated expansion of the universe. In some billion years, intelligent beings will only have historic records, if anything at all, to look back to how the observable universe used to be filled with billions of galaxies.

kulahan 2y ago
Life will survive beyond humanity, trust me. Intelligence already exists in a few animals on this planet, and another few million years could have them at the top of the food chain, exploring our relics.
deanCommie 2y ago
I don't understand people that aren't filled with dread with this concept. And I understand why so many humans fall back to something like religion to cope. It's the only way it seems to become complacent with our role in the cosmic horror. I know all the intellectual arguments for optimistic nihilism. I vote in elections even though my "one vote" doesn't matter amongst millions, and in some degree my single human life is the same on a timescale of (hopefully) trillions of humans by the time we get to the point of worrying about the receding observable universe. And yet...
- layer8 2y ago
  The change is too slow for anyone to be personally affected by it. Besides, the universe as such is devoid of any meaning; meaning is only something that we create internally. The fact that we dread voids and emptiness is also a result of evolutionary needs, there is no “dread” outside of us.
  - mensetmanusman 2y ago
    Humans are the universe defining meaning.
- 2y ago

zoeysmithe 2y ago

We're probably not getting to space without AGI or at least some level of sophisticated AI. At a certain point our biological bodies are just wed to the Earth and its ecosystem, as we are animals that are products of the Earth. If "we" ever get out there, some form of mechanical AI will. And we will never know it because once we send those ships off, we'll be long gone before the return signal gets to us from some far of locale. Imagine a voyager who can self-repair, mine asteroids, print circuits, etc. Now imagine giving it a 1 million year mission. Maybe by then we'll all have given up on biology and we'd be the "robots" on that ship. Sometimes the universe makes beings like us, but not often, and probably makes all manner of interesting beings that will most likely be forever out of reach, and us out of their reach. Kudos to some life on a faraway planet, I wish we could meet. Also its fun to think of the universe as a system. Here's this incomprehensibly large thing constantly in motion, constantly having stars die out and explode, and new ones born, etc all the time but to us at incredible slow speeds, everywhere, yet at incredible distances from each other. Its like this bellows that keeps a fire lit, over and over, non-stop. But not quite non-stop because this great furnace too will (probably) have a proper death. This universe life cycle chart is both a feat of science and an incredible work of a permanent and grim mortality of all things. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphical_timeline_from_Big_Bang_to_Heat_Death https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphical_timeline_from_Big_Ba...