

What On Earth Is Wrong With Gravity? [video] - wave
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-421765295887486158

======
frossie
By the way, did anybody notice the sequence at GPS headquarters (minutes 24:00
to 27:00), where the air force guy couldn't even name a commercial GPS
manufacturer? It is amazing how much indifference there was towards civilian
use of GPS, contrasted with the vast commercial usage built upon them
providing the service.

~~~
joezydeco
It's not really his job to care what the private sector does with GPS. In
fact, if some kind of combat ever broke out inside the borders of the USA,
civilian GPS would be shut off in a heartbeat.

~~~
andreyf
Is that possible? How could one "shut off" civilian GPS?

~~~
frossie
Yeah it is possible. It can either be shut down, or its accuracy can be
degraded. See for example

[http://www.equipmentworldmagazine.com/apps/news/articleeqw.a...](http://www.equipmentworldmagazine.com/apps/news/articleeqw.asp?id=45940)

How is easy - all the GPS satellites belong and are operated by the US air
force (see video segment above).

I think the EU is/was trying to get a competing network up there in order not
to be so totally dependent on the whim of the US President. I don't know what
the status of that is.

~~~
joezydeco
The European system is called Galileo:

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_(satellite_navigation)>

Supposedly ready by 2013.

------
frossie
I swear, Brian Cox is the next Carl Sagan. He is the most charismatic science
educator I have seen in a long time.

~~~
dazzawazza
yep, I love watching him on TV... brilliant.

------
geuis
I find myself at odds with how I feel about celebrity physicists. On the one
hand, I really really enjoy all of the shows that Brian Cox has done, along
with Michio Kaku and others from the past like Carl Sagan. Cox is such an
engaging speaker, and I have absolutely nothing negative to say about any of
them.

On the other hand, way to often the content of these shows is designed towards
an assumption of a dumb general audience. I find the incredibly frequent use
of flashy graphics to demonstrate ideas glosses over the really interesting
truths about the subjects being discussed. That's definitely not to say that
the visualizations aren't needed and aren't helpful, but I would love to see
more actual data visualizations instead of artists glossy renderings of
important and deep topics.

Its just that personally, I want to be mentally challenged. I want to be
introduced to new concepts that make me pause and rewind, then pause again to
really think about it. 99% of these kinds of shows fail to do that because
they don't go deep enough.

The biggest thing is that these kinds of shows are often to generalized, and
so they bore the scientifically-inclined minds while having nothing to really
grasp the attention and interest of people who don't have normal exposure to
scientific concepts.

~~~
roc
The problem of specificity is one of audience.

Broadcast has to reach a massive audience to stand any chance of reaping a
return. And there just aren't many topics that _enough_ people want to see
deeply explored, to cover the costs of creating 'deeper' programs.

But with broadcast going away, costs plummeting and every niche flourishing
online - i think the paucity of 'challenging' material --in any discipline--
will be soon be remedied.

~~~
axod
FWIW, this is exactly why the BBC exists. It doesn't have to 'reap a return'.
IMHO it's one of the best things the UK has (Along with the NHS).

It exists to make the widest range of high quality programs available, and I
think it does a pretty cool job. Obviously some programs will be deeper than
others, with different target audiences.

>> "But with broadcast going away"

Really? have some data on that? I remember hearing the same thing 10 years
ago.

------
mshenoy4573
well I was just watching it think I heard that and the reflector on the moon
was placed by buzz and Armstrong.... so now tat does mean the apollo 11 did
land on the moon :P

