# Cosmos: A Waste of Spacetime **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [March 10, 2014, 3:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cosmos-a-waste-of-spacetime/683324 "2014-03-10T03:06:41Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![ambushed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3bc359/32.png) [@ambushed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ambushed)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2014, 7:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cosmos-a-waste-of-spacetime/683324/101 "2014-03-12T07:45:42Z")
> [@Voyager](#): > > You just don’t get it, do you? First, if you listened closely to the trial scene, you could hear the judge charge Bruno with the theological crimes he was put to death for, like denying Jesus. > True Bruno was not a scientist. Science as a discipline hardly existed. What Bruno did do was push out against the limits of what was accepted then, and for what I think most today were sound theological reasons. Even the most fundamental of fundamentalists wouldn’t argue that God is limited to the sphere the Church accepted then. > And Tyson clearly said that he was right because he got lucky, not from reasoning. So it is not like Cosmos is holding Bruno up as a model scientist. They are holding him up as the model of someone who, to coin a phrase, could think differently. Which anyone can do without a PhD in astrophysics. Sheesh! **You** just don’t get it, do you? Did you even _read_ my post with any care before responding? Didn’t you notice anything I wrote about Bruno being an ignorant, anti-skeptical, anti-scientific crackpot? Which _should_ have disqualified him from consideration – let alone granting him such a large segment – given that the prime mover of the new _Cosmos_ emphasized that skepticism must be a key part of the program? You want more evidence of his ultra-crackpottery, even for his day? Galileo mocked him and his writings, even as so-called “philosophy”. Kepler had no respect for him either. He argued that native Americans were descended from “a second Adam”, and thus unworthy and inferior beings. He worshiped Thoth, an Egyptian deity. The new _Cosmos_ disingenuously suggests he was martyred in part because he read ‘banned’ books, like Lucretious. But no one got in trouble – let alone was martyred – because he read or spoke of Lucretious, which contained only utterly preposterous bullshit, and wasn’t rare and wasn’t controversial, just stupid. And as a side note, there’s this: > [@The Galileo Project](#): > > It is often maintained that Bruno was executed because of his Copernicanism and his belief in the infinity of inhabited worlds. In fact, we do not know the exact grounds on which he was declared a heretic because his file is missing from the records. When will _you_ get it? ---
**Author:** ![ambushed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3bc359/32.png) [@ambushed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ambushed)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2014, 7:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cosmos-a-waste-of-spacetime/683324/102 "2014-03-12T07:52:04Z")
> [@levdrakon](#): > > Nothing inspires the young’ns like an expansion of the space time manifold from a singular point at time equals zero to a four dimensional manifold growing with time. > > And lose the sound effects in space! :mad: The post to which you’re responding was in response to all the posters who kept insisting that the Big Bang _was_ an explosion, or was plenty close enough. They’re completely wrong. But when asked which term _I_ would have used to a low-brow general audience, I already posted my reply above: I would use the word “inflation”, and the decades-old image of an inflating balloon with galaxies painted on the outside (like surely we’ve all seen dozens of times already) would have been extremely easily understood. ---
**Author:** ![ambushed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3bc359/32.png) [@ambushed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ambushed)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2014, 8:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cosmos-a-waste-of-spacetime/683324/103 "2014-03-12T08:09:20Z")
> [@B.Serum](#): > > Here’s a thought experiment for you, professor ambushed: > Neil DeGrasse Tyson, Ann Druyan and all the producers of Cosmos… > [ol] > [li]honestly don’t understand that there was no space for the Big Bang to explode into.[/li][li]thought that [inflation](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zyuIde09YHY) was kinda underselling to the general audience the staggeringly rapid amount of energy expelled.[/li][/ol] You deliberately left out the far more rational alternative, which I addressed very early in the thread, as follows: > [@ambushed](#): > > > [@bump](#): > > > > I somehow doubt that one of the premier science educators of our day would go off saying things that are flat-out wrong. > > I’m puzzled by this as well, which is why I pointed it out in my OP. NGT definitely knows better (as does Ann Druyan), so why did they misrepresent the facts? My guess for now is that somewhere along the line (at Fox perhaps?), some knuckle-dragger forced them to dumb it down into imbecility for the sake of network TV ratings. And to be pedantic, what you did there is commonly termed _The False Dilemma fallacy_. > [@B.Serum](#): > > One of the biggest problems scientists have in communicating with the public is the kind of obsession with details that nonetheless fail to convey the implications of the mechanics in a way that average people understand. It appears to me that the producers are trying to avoid that pitfall. Feel free to be as stubborn as you like, but you are making yourself look like an out-of-touch pedant. And _you_ are blithely defending bullshit and unnecessarily dumbed-down ignorance. I’ll take the epithet “pedant” over that any day. ---
**Author:** ![B.Serum](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/b.serum/32/14266_2.png) [@B.Serum](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/B.Serum)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2014, 8:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cosmos-a-waste-of-spacetime/683324/104 "2014-03-12T08:27:50Z")
**ambushed, you are factually correct.** Shame on me for not having mentioned that until now. I hope that, as a science enthusiast, you will appreciate that there are scientific principles to communication. And that the challenges for a scholarly pursuit like science are twofold in a world that is rife with magical thinking. In the ongoing challenge to turn people back to science, communicators have to balance slavish detail to scientific exactitude with “user-friendly” metaphor to get their point across and keep someone from turning the channel back to Duck Dynasty. When we communicate, we must speak in terms our audience can understand. The audience for this television show that follows a two-hour block of cartoons are not astrophysics students. They include [people who might still think the sun revolves around the earth](http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2014/02/14/277058739/1-in-4-americans-think-the-sun-goes-around-the-earth-survey-says). You may disagree with the choice they made, but I hope you can respect the experience that NDT et al have with science communication and appreciate they have reasons for the choices they made. Given the real-world gulf between astrophysics and biblical literalism, I hope you can appreciate that the difference between terms like explosion, expansion, inflation, eruption, snowballing, or embiggening is small potatoes. For some interesting listening, I encourage you to give a listen to Robert Krulwich’s [CalTech commencement speech](http://www.radiolab.org/story/91852-tell-me-a-story/) about science communication. It scratches the surface of where I’m coming from. ---
**Author:** ![AaronX](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/7bcc69/32.png) [@AaronX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AaronX)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2014, 8:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cosmos-a-waste-of-spacetime/683324/105 "2014-03-12T08:45:50Z")
As for choosing Bruno, Druyan said they wanted a lesser known figure; I guess that’s why they didn’t go with the usual Galileo. ---
**Author:** ![ambushed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3bc359/32.png) [@ambushed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ambushed)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2014, 9:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cosmos-a-waste-of-spacetime/683324/106 "2014-03-12T09:01:46Z")
> [@SeaDragonTattoo](#): > > Maybe no one commented on it because it’s not true. Are you thinking of the Sunday Disney Movie from how the hell long ago? Are you thinking of one-off TV movies or mini-series, that perhaps had one major sponsor per night, which in turn dropped millions on exclusive commercial rights? Who is going to do that for a 13 episode run of _Cosmos_ which may or may not flop, and is certainly not going to draw the ratings of a summer mini-series? > > You sound like a very old man with a huge wedgie, shaking a myopic fist at a crowd of passers-by. You really _are_ a cretinous yahoo, aren’t you? “Sunday Disney Movie”? Sheesh. After just a bit of googling, here’s a list of just a _few_ of the programs that were aired with limited commercial interruptions in recent years: _Cane_, Sep 25, 2007 _Heroes_, Sep 24, 2007 _Hoarders_, Jul 28, 2009 _Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles_, Sep, 2008 _Big Daddy_ (Adam Sandler abomination), USA Network, Mar 17, year unknown _Mad Men_ Season Three Premiere, AMC, Aug 16, 2009 _Diary of a Mad Black Woman_, TNT, Nov 14, 2010 _Why We Dance: The Story of THON_, Feb 12, 2013 \*Milk \*(Sean Penn biopic of Harvey Milk), USA, June 1, 2013 _Helix_, SyFy Channel, Jan 10, 2014 _Dr. Who_ Marathon, BBC America, Dec 24 & 25, 2012? _Skins_, MTV, Jan 24, 2011 _Teen Wolf_ Marathon, Jan 6, 2014 So what you’re essentially arguing is that _Teen Wolf_, _Hoarders_, and _Big Daddy_ are all significantly _more_ worthy of airing with limited commercial interruption than the new _Cosmos_. That even just airing the \*pilot \*episode with a modicum of respect (with minimal interruptions) is utterly outrageous to consider, and doing so makes me _“sound like a very old man with a huge wedgie, shaking a myopic fist at a crowd of passers-by”_? Yep, you’re a lackwit philistine, all right. ---
**Author:** ![ambushed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3bc359/32.png) [@ambushed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ambushed)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2014, 9:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cosmos-a-waste-of-spacetime/683324/107 "2014-03-12T09:11:31Z")
> [@Drunky\_Smurf](#): > > Are you a retard? Because this makes you look like you’re a retard. Only a retard would think the ship looks like Boba Fetts’ spaceship. Clearly the ship is a replica of the ship from “Flight of the Navigator”. Also your grammar is shit. Shit like a retard. So you come off as a Double Dare Double Decker Retard. Fuck nose. 😕 Oh, Dear! I’m _so_ sorry! I didn’t realize that you were “special”. But take heart: they say that “slow and steady wins the race”, although I doubt they expected anyone to be quite _that_ slow… :smack: ---
**Author:** ![ambushed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3bc359/32.png) [@ambushed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ambushed)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2014, 9:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cosmos-a-waste-of-spacetime/683324/108 "2014-03-12T09:38:59Z")
> [@Shawn1767](#): > > You do realize that the “Cambrian Explosion,” also wasn’t an “explosion.” Yet, I believe Sagan referred to it that way. If so, I hope he was promptly corrected by more nuanced scientists. Beyond the fact that these are very different contexts, the term “Cambrian Explosion” is also a rather regrettable misnomer, despite Stephen Jay Gould’s captivating but rather misleading book on the subject. Maybe it’s just me, but referring to an “event” which took **~30 million years** to transpire as an “explosion” strikes me as being at least a _bit_ presumptuous, or am I too unforgiving in this? The reality is that that wrong-headed phrase has gifted creationists and ID’ers with untold millions of words of gleeful, anti-evolution bullshit to blather about endlessly. It would have been far better had that spurious phrase never been invented. ---
**Author:** ![ambushed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3bc359/32.png) [@ambushed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ambushed)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2014, 9:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cosmos-a-waste-of-spacetime/683324/109 "2014-03-12T09:51:37Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > To be clear, Bruno’s fate did not arise because of his theories about there being countless stars that were just like the Sun and had planets with life – which, obviously, turned out to be correct, or very likely correct. > > His fate came about because he denied Jesus’ divinity, said that Satan would be saved, and that Jesus had been a skilfull magician. I know that’s what _Cosmos_ said, but do we actually know that? Here’s one source that disagrees. I quote from [The Giordano Bruno page from The Galileo Project](http://galileo.rice.edu/chr/bruno.html) at Rice University: [QUOTE=The Galileo Project] In fact, we do not know the exact grounds on which he was declared a heretic because his file is missing from the records. [/QUOTE] ---
**Author:** ![Wendell\_Wagner](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/8491ac/32.png) [@Wendell\_Wagner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wendell_Wagner)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2014, 10:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cosmos-a-waste-of-spacetime/683324/110 "2014-03-12T10:19:27Z")
All language is about analogies. There is no way to explain new things without making metaphoric statements. Describing the Big Bang as an explosion is an analogy. For that matter, calling it “the Big Bang” is an analogy. Why don’t you object to the term “the Big Bang” as much? It also implies that it’s an explosion. It even implies that there was a noise that someone outside it could have heard. The term “inflation” is a metaphor too, and it’s not very good either. The most common use of the term “inflation” today is with respect to costs increasing, not costs appearing from nowhere. It also seems to say that something was there before and then increased in size. That’s also true of the inflation of a balloon, where the balloon existed before it was blown up. Look, read this book: > **[Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women,_Fire,_and_Dangerous_Things)** > > Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal about the Mind is a non-fiction book by the cognitive linguist George Lakoff. The book, first published by the University of Chicago Press in 1987, puts forward a model of cognition argued on the basis of semantics. The book emphasizes the centrality of metaphor, defined as the mapping of cognitive structures from one domain onto another, in the cognitive process. Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things explores the effects of cognitive me Th... It’s a long introduction to the concept that all statements in natural human language about new things are necessarily analogies. The notion that we can use language in a totally logical manner in which every new statement can be treated as if it were a statement in mathematical logic from which any true consequence can be derived in a series of deductions is wrong. You object because you think the program doesn’t seem to know enough about physics, but you clearly don’t know much about linguistics. You’re complaining because calling the Big Bang an explosion is not true to the best physical descriptions of it. Yes, you’re right, and it’s also true that natural human language is not like mathematical logic. No statement about a completely new concept can ever be anything except an analogy. There is no alternative in explaining the Big Bang (or any concept that someone hasn’t heard of before) except by starting by describing it with an analogy and then slowly explaining why the analogy is not very good. ---
**Author:** ![Lobot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ce7236/32.png) [@Lobot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobot)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2014, 10:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cosmos-a-waste-of-spacetime/683324/111 "2014-03-12T10:25:35Z")
> [@B.Serum](#): > > For some interesting listening, I encourage you to give a listen to Robert Krulwich’s [CalTech commencement speech](http://www.radiolab.org/story/91852-tell-me-a-story/) about science communication. It scratches the surface of where I’m coming from. Thank you for this link. It really was excellent. **ambushed** , if you didn’t listen to the podcast, the gist was this: Most people don’t evaluate claims based on evidence and rational discernment; they go with what simply sticks in their minds. The most compelling story wins. Some people feel that it’s somehow a sell-out move to make things accessible. But the point is that if you want to win the battle against creationists, say, you have to tell a great story first and foremost. ---
**Author:** ![njtt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/ecd19e/32.png) [@njtt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/njtt)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2014, 10:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cosmos-a-waste-of-spacetime/683324/112 "2014-03-12T10:28:54Z")
> [@ambushed](#): > > The new _Cosmos_ disingenuously suggests he was martyred in part because he read ‘banned’ books, like Lucretious. But no one got in trouble – let alone was martyred – because he read or spoke of Lucretious, which contained only utterly preposterous bullshit, and wasn’t rare and wasn’t controversial, just stupid. You are right about Bruno (and about the fact that people did not get martyred just for reading Lucretius, or anything else). Bruno actually had to try quite hard to get himself burned at the stake. He could have stayed out of Italy, or stayed where he was in Venice, and he would not have been arrested. Even after he was arrested, he was repeatedly offered the chance to recant his heretical views and be set free, but he refused. (Heliocentrism, incidentally, was not declared a heresy until several years after Bruno’s execution, and nobody was ever punished for being a heliocentrist except Galileo and maybe one other guy who got a slap on the wrist. By the standards of the time, Galileo’s punishment was a slap on the wrist too.) However, you are quite wrong about Lucretius’ significance. His work is by far the most complete account of ancient atomism to survive from the ancient world, and played a _very_ important role in stimulating the sorts of new thinking about the nature of matter and causality in the 17th century that led to modern science. Bruno, however, just liked weird, far-out ideas, of which Copericanism was, at the time, one. ---
**Author:** ![Frank\_Merton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Frank\_Merton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank_Merton)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2014, 11:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cosmos-a-waste-of-spacetime/683324/113 "2014-03-12T11:03:56Z")
If the big bang explosion tactic is to be overlooked because it is an analogy, why can’t they at least tell us that and explain that it is not possible to actually show it. What we get instead is something that misleads the uninformed: the overwhelming majority. I don’t know how many times I’ve had to deal with “what was before or outside the big bang” and then had such a program cited to me as proof I am wrong when I say nothing, not even space or time. ---
**Author:** ![Lobot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ce7236/32.png) [@Lobot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobot)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2014, 11:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cosmos-a-waste-of-spacetime/683324/114 "2014-03-12T11:41:46Z")
There’s a book out there called _Made to Stick_ that I’d recommend to anyone who wants to be an effective communicator of ideas. People need to be able to connect what they don’t understand with what they do understand. “Sorry, the big bang is so abstract and unrelatable that we can’t give you an image to latch onto… on a television show, no less” just isn’t going to cut it on show designed to make science more approachable. This should go without saying. ---
**Author:** ![Ludovic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ab992/32.png) [@Ludovic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ludovic)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2014, 12:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cosmos-a-waste-of-spacetime/683324/115 "2014-03-12T12:00:09Z")
Making the Big Bang Explosion [more interesting](https://xkcd.com/895/). ---
**Author:** ![ambushed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3bc359/32.png) [@ambushed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ambushed)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2014, 12:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cosmos-a-waste-of-spacetime/683324/116 "2014-03-12T12:06:36Z")
I’m combining this reply primarily to raise what I think is a particularly important point (that I thought of the other night but forgot to address here) in response to all the criticisms of my emphasizing that the Big Bang was NOT an “explosion” (and it will be my last post till later tonight). > [@Wendell\_Wagner](#): > > [much snipping of very good stuff]… All language is about analogies… Thanks, Wendell, for such a thoughtful reply! Although I’m not particularly impressed with the often pompous and muddle-headed George Lakoff, I certainly take and concede your larger point, _in general._ But let’s hear from **Lobot** before I reply more fully… > [@Lobot](#): > > Most people don’t evaluate claims based on evidence and rational discernment; they go with what simply sticks in their minds. The most compelling story wins. > > Some people feel that it’s somehow a sell-out move to make things accessible. But the point is that if you want to win the battle against creationists, say, you have to tell a great story first and foremost. And then from the equally thoughtful **Frank Merton** , with whom I **emphatically agree** : > [@Frank\_Merton](#): > > If the big bang explosion tactic is to be overlooked because it is an analogy, why can’t they at least tell us that and explain that it is not possible to actually show it. > > What we get instead is something that misleads the uninformed: the overwhelming majority. I don’t know how many times I’ve had to deal with “what was before or outside the big bang” and then had such a program cited to me as proof I am wrong when I say nothing, not even space or time. Here’s my reply to these and similar points made earlier: _ **By far** _, one of the most **crucial** lessons that _everyone_ needs to grasp – no matter how familiar or unfamiliar one is with science – is that modern science is often _ **extremely counter-intuitive!** _ Before even _beginning_ to learn anything truly important about the world, this lesson needs to be over-emphasized and repeatedly drilled into the fresh minds approaching the concepts of legitimate science, and I contend that the new _Cosmos_ has so far failed utterly in that regard! The origin of the Universe _ **not** _ resulting from an “explosion” is actually one of the _easiest_ counter-intuitive concepts to get across. Creationism is intuitive, evolution by natural selection is **not**. A flat or nearly-flat Earth is intuitive, a semi-globular one is **not**. The illusion of solidity and similar basic physical interactions are intuitive, but even truly _basic_ quantum mechanics is **not**. The list goes on and on! I contend that the vast, endless error and confusion that so many billions of non-scientists are drowning in is a result of applying “intuition” where it simply doesn’t apply. The new _Cosmos_ should have been at the forefront of making this crucial fact abundantly clear; that they’ve deliberately passed up the priceless opportunity does not speak well of it at all. ---
**Author:** ![Lobot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ce7236/32.png) [@Lobot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobot)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2014, 12:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cosmos-a-waste-of-spacetime/683324/117 "2014-03-12T12:23:03Z")
Indeed modern science is counter-intuitive, but you’ve gotta start somewhere. If you immediately start throwing abstract, counter-intuitive concepts at someone who isn’t used to tackling complex scientific theories, you’ve lost them. You won’t get to explain _anything_ to them because they’ve already tuned out. It’s OK to simplify things initially. That’s the entry point where the other person says, “Hey, I get this! I’m interested and ready for more!” And then you add layers of complexity as you go, easing them into the real story. There’s only so much a 13-part series can deliver, but this was just the first episode–the initial, simplified introduction. There’s still another nine hours of content, and possible complexity, to come. ---
**Author:** ![SeaDragonTattoo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/df705f/32.png) [@SeaDragonTattoo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SeaDragonTattoo)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2014, 12:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cosmos-a-waste-of-spacetime/683324/118 "2014-03-12T12:41:00Z")
> [@ambushed](#): > > So what you’re essentially arguing is that _Teen Wolf_, _Hoarders_, and _Big Daddy_ are all significantly _more_ worthy of airing with limited commercial interruption than the new _Cosmos_. That even just airing the \*pilot \*episode with a modicum of respect (with minimal interruptions) is utterly outrageous to consider, and doing so makes me _“sound like a very old man with a huge wedgie, shaking a myopic fist at a crowd of passers-by”_? Yep. A modicum of respect to who? You? People like you? Since you and people like you are not the target audience, they don’t care. Respect to the producers? I’m quite certain they were thrilled to have every single sponsor putting down cash to air their commercials during their show. In that list, there are what, three examples from broadcast TV. The two season premiers I checked are _Cane_, and I’m not finding a cite for it, care to direct me to the search terms needed to find it myself? And _Hoarders_ didn’t air until August of 2009, so I’m not finding the cite for that one, either. Sorry I didn’t check further after the first two duds. The other side of airing a show with limited commercials is getting a sponsor to spring for it. In the eyes of a multi-million dollar single sponsor, yes, already successful box office smashes, and subsequent-season premiers of known successful shows are indeed more worthy than the pilot of a potential flop, by a long shot. And yes, your continued bitching about commercials on broadcast television just makes you look like an old biddy with panties in a twist. Blah, blah, blah, whatever. Watch it online, watch it on DVR, or put up with the stupid commercials that no one cares about. Actually, I’d be interested to hear your take on a re-watch without the commercials, because I really didn’t find it choppy, or hurried. But I’m accustomed to modern editing. ---
**Author:** ![BlackKnight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/eb8c5e/32.png) [@BlackKnight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BlackKnight)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2014, 2:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cosmos-a-waste-of-spacetime/683324/119 "2014-03-12T14:06:47Z")
> [@ambushed](#): > > Can we stop being willfully wrong about this, please? You first. The Big Bang _was_ an explosion. I’ve already provided a definition of explosion that fits the Big Bang just fine. There’s nothing whatsoever inherent to the definition of an explosion that it must be exploding _into_ anything. People (such as yourself) may mistakenly believe this, but that does not make it true. More importantly, the word “inflation” isn’t any less misleading. Aside from the use of the term with respect to money, it is generally used to describe pumping air into tires or balloons. In each case, there must be a pre-existing substance that is being moved to a new location. If the universe is inflating, whose lips are on the balloon? What is it being inflated _with_? From _where_? Saying “The Big Bang was an explosion - only it wasn’t exploding _into_ anything” is no more confusing than “The Big Bang was an inflation - only it wasn’t being inflated _with_ anything other than itself, and it wasn’t being inflated with anything _from_ anywhere else, and nobody was doing the inflating.” ---
**Author:** ![Frank\_Merton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Frank\_Merton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank_Merton)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2014, 2:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cosmos-a-waste-of-spacetime/683324/120 "2014-03-12T14:28:06Z")
Inflation was over with when what we picture as the big bang happened (although maybe it is an ongoing process and the big bang was local). When you say “explosion,” people think chemistry, or maybe atomic, but all that confuses them. Where did the energy of this “explosion” come from (and this is a rare but sometimes mentioned criticism). Depending on dictionary definitions to defend things misleading people will not do. Languages have a range of meanings, some of which are central and some of which are figurative. Use of figurative meanings but failure to make this clear is a propaganda technique, not science, nor proper journalism, although they do it often. Maybe I’m premature; maybe they will come back and fix some of this later. I’m not holding my breath. Also, the link they have engineered with Sagan is unfortunate. His aim clearly was to attack anti-Science, as how he showed the consequences of the victory of superstition over science in the fifth century. This seems to want to avoid controversy and simply produce a gee-whiz audience. In the beginning there was nothing: really nothing – no space no time. This did not go on for eons either; there was no time. There cannot be a before the beginning. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cosmos-a-waste-of-spacetime/683324.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cosmos-a-waste-of-spacetime/683324.md?page=7)