Take the 2-minute tour ×
Astronomy Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for astronomers and astrophysicists. It's 100% free, no registration required.

The documentary/mini-series How the Universe Works is based on scientific evidence and according to what is known nowadays, or sheer bunk?

Throughout the series, are there any particular topics which are still disputed among the scientific community and that were portrayed in a different light than they should've had been?


I've only watched a few episodes but they always talk in a way that gives you the feeling everything is well-established and accepted but that might not be the case. I figured that an astronomer that watched the series would have remember if this happened or not.

I understand the subjects were researched and there is footage of known scientists in the episodes, but that doesn't mean everyone agrees with them. (By everyone I mean the most part of scientists working on those subjects, and not literally every single one of them.)

To give you an example, on the second episode they state that there are massive black holes at the center of galaxies. From my perspective (i.e. of someone which is not an astronomer) if they say so it's because it's probably true. However, in the real world maybe this is a highly disputed theory and a lot of astronomers disagree with this stance, and they're note telling the audience about it. Why would they do that? I don't know. I don't know if they did, I'm just asking if someone knows whether it happened, or if anyone saw something in the series with which they disagree.

share|improve this question

closed as too broad by Robert Cartaino Apr 7 at 14:10

There are either too many possible answers, or good answers would be too long for this format. Please add details to narrow the answer set or to isolate an issue that can be answered in a few paragraphs.If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

    
What concept specifically are you concerned about? I don't think you can declare an entire series of material covering hundreds of topics broadly either scientifically sound or bunk. There's no useful information to be had from that. What are you asking about specifically? –  Robert Cartaino Apr 7 at 14:09
    
I've edited the question, hopefully it is more clear now. –  user3371321 Apr 7 at 16:13

1 Answer 1

up vote 0 down vote accepted

I don't think that the Discovery Channel would produce science fiction and call it a documentary. The episodes are bases on factual information at the time of production.

share|improve this answer
    
That doesn't mean everything is correct. So perhaps I can expand on the original question and ask whether theories, which are still disputed in the community, were included with no mention to that fact. –  user3371321 Apr 5 at 22:14
    
You would have to cite examples since I don't remember what was said in the entire series. –  LDC3 Apr 5 at 22:30
    
My background is in no way related to this area; so even if it does happen it is unlikely that I would know about it. The original question was answered so I'll consider your reply correct. Thanks. –  user3371321 Apr 6 at 10:05

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.