Email Updates - Get notified each week via email of the best new documentaries      Sign Me Up!
Processing your request, Please wait....

Enjoy this Documentary? Express your views below!!

Origins

Science|11 Oct, 2012|11 Comments |
Click Stars Below to Vote!
0saves
VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 4.1/5 (8 votes cast)

The universe has always existed? How did a place that could harbor life? NOVA presents some startling new answers in Origins, a new series of 4 parts. New clues from the frontiers of science are presented by astrophysicist Dr. Neil deGrasse Tyson. As the host of Origins, Tyson leads viewers on a journey to the beginning of time and deep space in search of the first movements of life and its traces on other worlds. The documentary is very scientific, taking into account all options / possibilities as possible. Everything is well done. Just when you think you are going to jump from one idea or just a hint that they do a good job addressing the issue. Topics include: How the Earth was formed, how common is a planet like Earth, the search for extra-solar planets, the chemistry of life, the formation of molecules of life, big bang theory, cosmic microwave background and more?. If you like documentaries about the origins of life and space, then this is a chance that you will enjoy. I strongly urge all members of “”Planet Earth”" for a couple of hours of entertainment and information to understand what we know today about the origin of the Earth. Even if you disagree, which gives an idea of ​​what consensis popular in the scientific community today.

Origins , 4.1 out of 5 based on 8 ratings
Subscribe via RSSPlease subscribe to our RSS feed to have new doc's delivered straight to your reader.
This Video is Tagged With:

, , , ,

URL:

11 Comments

  1. Hadeel says:

    That is amazing. How does one caaltclue that to determine this asteroids orbits and path even as now, let along so far in the future? I find it hard to believe that someone, with a great intrest in calculus and/or geometgery, would spend a good part of his life calculating this so I figure it was done by computer. At any rate it’s amazing.

  2. Just leave it man there is no point in debating these fools. You know the truth of it, I know the truth of it. The only sad thing about this is that people like pagan foocker are allowed to reproduce. There’s no point in trying to explain things to fools like this. Save it for the intelligent people who are mislead, forget the zealots. They’re not worth it.

  3. gamesbok says:

    There is more radioactive material in the Earth interior, so the rate of cooling will be very slow. Lord Kelvin’s estimation would have a cold Earth in 20m years, but Rutherford showed that radioactive decay was producing heat. Rutherford made his announcement at the Royal Society lecture, when Kelvin was present. He gave a sigh of relief because he saw Kelvin was asleep. Rutherford claimed there was no chemistry as it was all physics. They gave him Nobel Prize in Chemistry to shut him up.

  4. Poor Science. Ask any Physicist or Astronomer. it is the tilt of the Earth’s polar axis relative to the plane of the orbit that gives us seasons. When you say “inclination of the earth orbit around the sun”, what is that inclination relative to? Without knowing this, that term is meaningless. If we have no tilt of the polar axis relative to the plane of orbit, then no matter how much you tilt the plane of orbit, there are no seasons, as the Sun essentially radiates equally in all directions.

  5. Levon9404 says:

    Well excuse me. My grammar is not as good as yours, Because my major wasn’t grammar in the university the way does guys they have. I pay attention to physics more than anything. Good grammar it won’t make you good scientist, the only thing it will do to help you to be good communicator. The only thing I’m saying if they want to give direction someone. they should be well familiar with the road.

  6. ghjkl543 says:

    I hope this is a joke because I was laughing the entire time I was reading your comment. This is one of the most poorly constructed comments I have ever read; I therefore believe you are making fun of uneducated individuals that believe anything that any priest, pope, etc. tells them.

  7. Levon9404 says:

    Beside embarrassing your self you confusing children round the globe with does unfounded explanations. You have no evidence or any prove planets formed like that or they function like that. Obviously all of current scientists knowledge of nuclear force ends up with nuclear bomb. However nuclear force is more than just nuclear bomb. Its the life source of everything we know it or we see it

  8. P2SUN WILL NEVER SET ON THE ARCTIC.SO IT WILL BE A WHOLE YEAR DAY ON THE NORTH POLE & A WHOLE YEAR DARKNESS ON THE SOUTH POLE!THIS IS ONLY ONE EXAMPLES OF MANY REFUTING THE AXIS TILT OF EARTH TOWARDS THE SUN.Any enquiry regarding this, u can write you can write to me here or email me: ele_2202@yahoo.co.uk

  9. P1WRONG INFORMATION WAS GIVEN AT 29:35 OF THIS FILM.THE TRUTH IS “THE EARTH AXIS IS NOT TILTED TOWARDS THE SUN, AND NOT THE TILT OF THE AXIS WHICH CAUSES OUR SEASONS, IT IS THE INCLINATION OF THE EARTH ORBIT AROUND THE SUN, WHICH CAUSE THE SEASONS, WHILE THE EARTH AXIS IS NOT TILTED TOWARDS THE SUN).AS IF THE EARTH AXIS TILTED IS TILTED TOWARDS THE SON BY 23.45D (THE FAMILIAR VALUE), THEN WE WILL NOT GET THE SUN’S EVENTS WE NORMALLY GET!1 EXAMPLE:SUN WILL NEVER RISE ON THE ANTRACTIC !

  10. sbergman27 says:

    It’s worth noting that the geological record shows that the Earth’s magnetic field is always varying. It’s what’s known as a chaotic system. Very occasionally (100′s of thousands to millions of years) the polarity reverses in a gradual process that takes ~10,000 yrs. Current variation is *well* within the norm for the long periods between reversals. I mention this since some people are freaking out over the pole movement thing, imagining some immediate, looming catastrophe.

  11. sbergman27 says:

    I’ve always found the “We are all star dust” thing a bit trite. But the idea that very close to where we are right now, long long ago, a population 2 star went supernova, and a population 3 star went hypernova, is fascinating. (Local space would not have expanded very much in the intervening time. And our local velocity *in space* relative to nearby stars is not great.)

Leave a Comment