Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Neil deGrasse Tyson Pinpoints Superman's Home Star System

Posted by Soulskill on from the totally-not-fluff dept.

kmoser writes "Everybody's favorite astrophysicist, Neil deGrasse Tyson, makes an appearance in upcoming Superman #14, in which Superman visits the Hayden Planetarium to view his original planet. Meanwhile, back in reality, DC Comics explains that NdGT has used his 'astronomical' powers to select the red dwarf LHS 2520 as the most likely real-life red star to fit with Superman's back story."

7 of 102 comments (clear)

  1. NIce by geekoid · · Score: 4, Insightful

    More science stars please.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    1. Re:NIce by Mr2cents · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Comparing Feynman to Kaku is a bit like blasphemy to me. Feynman was able to make rock solid arguments that silenced all opposition (see e.g. the Challenger accident investigation). Kaku, on the other hand seems to be fascinated by what-if scenario's, theoretical possibilities and the like. Not that it's not entertaining or thought-provoking, but it's not the same thing by far. Kaku doesn't explain current science well, he's just good at extrapolating.

      --
      "It's too bad that stupidity isn't painful." - Anton LaVey
    2. Re:NIce by WGFCrafty · · Score: 4, Interesting

      When Sagans's cosmos began it was the most watched show in the history of public television history. You need hard numbers to prove science popularization has done something to influence the public?

      The problem is many modern science shows emphasize effects over knowledge. Carl Sagans "apple pie" episode is so jam packed with essential knowledge it's ridiculous.

    3. Re:NIce by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 4, Funny

      Ya but what if Kaku had rock solid arguments?

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
  2. Re:Scientists and fake science by geekoid · · Score: 4, Insightful

    No it isn't.
    It gives actually science a venue into public discourse. It teaches scientists how to communicate to non scientists.

    Important, and frankly it should be something as many scientists as possible strive to do.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  3. Re:what they totally forgot by vux984 · · Score: 4, Informative

    What I don't get is, if just a handful of kryptonite brings Superman to his knees, how did his parents survive on a whole planet of the stuff?

    I am not at all a comic-book-guy; however I was under the impression that kryptonite was radioactive chunks of his home planet created in the destruction of the planet.

    So there wasn't kryptonite on krypton while people lived on it.

    But I'm sure some comic-book-guy can give you half a dozen arguments about 'canon' and likely as it applies to various timelines or whatever given that they've retconned and rebooted the franchise plenty over the years.

    Me? I saw the first 3 movies with Reeves, the new one with Kevin Spacey as Lex, and read the comics casually for a couple years 20 years ago...

  4. Re:Tyson is definitely not my favourite astronomer by thestudio_bob · · Score: 4, Funny

    I have to post this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Me3-r5rsUSI

    "Hey at least I didn't declassify Pluto from planet status. Way to make a the little kids cry Neil. That make you feel like a big man?"
    ~ Dr. Rodney McKay

    --
    The real Sig captains the Northwestern. This one captains /.