Slashdot Mirror
Interviews: David Saltzberg Answers Your Questions About The Big Bang Theory
As the science consultant for The Big Bang Theory for the past seven seasons, Dr. David Saltzberg makes sure the show gets its science right. A few weeks ago, you had the chance to ask him about his work on the show and his personal scientific endeavors. Below you'll find his answers to those questions.
Your Own Life Experience
by Anonymous Coward
Were you ridiculed at all in your youth for being interested in science? Do you feel the show promotes acceptance towards those of us who enjoy the various sciences? Or does it perpetuate the stereotype that if someone is interested in science then they must be socially inept and interactively dysfunctional?
Saltzberg: When I meet a random stranger and say I am a physicist, I used to get a blank stare. Now, I generally get a warm smile and asked “Just like on the Big Bang Theory”? So my experience tells me that many people genuinely like and care for these characters. One of the writers says he can tell the audience is even protective of them.
I did get picked on a little bit when I was younger, more around the age of junior high school. I don’t know if it was because of my interest in science or the of other things you mentioned, or one of many other things, or maybe no reason at all. If you or anyone reading this is being picked on, I understand that it feels terrible.
So if you or anyone else reading this are in school and having trouble like this, find a teacher, counselor or someone in the school to talk to. You don’t have to ask this person to step in and solve your problems, but having someone with more experience at life to talk to can help you make things better. And if anything ever gets worse (or better), you will have someone to go to who has been following and understands the context and what is going on. Teachers and other advisors who work in schools are there in part to help you navigate exactly this kind of trouble, and nearly every one will want to help guide you through it.
Back when the show started, I didn’t know how the portrayal of scientists would go. Then as the episodes started coming out, I saw the writers and actors treating the characters with respect and making them each specific individuals. The show soon received positive reviews from scientists who care about this kind of thing, such as from the head of the American Physical Society’s Office of Public Outreach, Rebecca Thompson-Flagg. I took comfort in the fact that she is an expert on what is good for our field and she loves the show so much she came to see a taping twice and spent time with the writers and crew. Since then, the support we have had from scientific icons-- Stephen Hawking, Woz, Astronaut Mike Massimino, Neil de Grasse Tyson— has been a joy.
As for being “socially inept and interactively dysfunctional”, I am not a writer so can’t speak with authority, but as viewer and fan I see these characters have a great group of loyal friends, a wide circle of other interesting people they interact with, and have terrific romances going on. They have meaningful jobs and lots of fun outside of work too. We should all have such troubles!
Advancing science
by korbulon
By exposing a mass audience to scientific principles and archetypes, do you think a show like Big Bang Theory somehow advances the cause of science, or is it basically irrelevant?
Saltzberg: There is no way I can think of to measure this effect. But I hope the show conveys first of all the joy of doing science and leading the great life with science in it. I do believe the love of science by the characters comes through clearly. Maybe there are young people out there who read science in their textbooks but don’t realize that one can have a career and life filled with science. And it shows the life of science is also often one of adventure. Many of us are able to travel around the world and to interesting places and with interesting people to work on interesting problems.
As for specific science topics, the show at least gets the word out there. The show obviously isn’t Nova-style documentary. Rather, when the audience hears the words “dark matter” they can tell the characters think it is important. If even a small fraction of viewers web-search the term, that represents a very large number of people learning about perhaps the most interesting scientific question of our time. As a way of follow-up, I try to write a blog post (although I was remiss lately) to teach a little more deeply about the science in each episode.
I hope the show inspires those who are already scientifically minded or considering it. I also heard from the director of the Society of Physics Students, Dr. Gary White, who told me he thought students were “standing a little taller” with seeing physicists represented on television. So I hope beyond advancing of science, it also gives aspiring physics and other science students one more reason to feel a sense of pride in becoming scientists or engineers. Bill Prady the co-creator of the show gave a commencement address to our graduating physics and astronomy students at UCLA a few years ago. He reminded us how great it is to be a scientist and I believe that message comes through in the show.
Popularity
by korbulon
Why do you think a show like BBT has been such a huge hit with a wide audience given its geeky characters and plot devices?
Saltzberg: If I knew what made a hit TV show, I would be very wealthy.
I am not a writer or a professional critic but I think it would be a mistake to think the stories are narrowly pitched to a so-called geeky audience. I think the problems these characters face week-to-week with their friends, lovers, jobs and generally how to interact with the world touch on something universal. You didn’t have to be a New Yorker to like Seinfeld.
But maybe one key part is the excellence in every corner of the production. A viewer can see the excellence in writing and acting most clearly. But from being at the production, I see the excellence in all the departments from sets, to sound, to props, to lighting, to wardrobe, to production and many others. I see dedicated people with often decades of experience who love the show themselves and work so hard. It is inspiring to see the show come together each week from so many people at the top of their craft with such pride and I believe it shows in the finished product.
Are you a "geek"?
by krygny
... meaning, do you also provide input on some of the pop-culture in the show (e.g., Star Trek, Star Wars, comic books, Dr Who, etc.)?
Saltzberg: Sad to say, I am not. I am so out of it that for a long time when I would hear students talking about “Battlestar Galactica” a few years ago, I wondered why everyone started watching an old TV show from the 1970’s. I wish I were more of a pop-culture, SciFi and comic geek -- in part because BBT characters make it seem like so much fun. I have at least gone back to learn about some of these things as they have been mentioned—much as I hope others are doing with the science that is mentioned. The writers are such fans of this stuff there is nothing I could possibly ever tell them. Even some of the comic books you see in Sheldon’s bedroom actually belong to the writers.
What would they NOT let you do?
by Higaran
Was there anything that you tried to put in the show they they told you wouldn't be put in because it was to complex, or for some other reason. I know there is a lot of stuff that made it in, but what didn't get in there that you tried for?
Saltzberg: There was one thing we removed from the dialogue and I totally agreed with it. In one scene, the characters made their voices artificially deep by breathing in sulfur hexafluoride. However we read up about it and there is a real chance that someone could suffocate when trying this because that gas is heavier than air and can settle in your lungs. The odds may be low, but you have to remember that there are millions of people watching and we didn’t want anyone to hurt themselves so we removed the name of the compound. Slashdotters probably already knew the name of the chemical so there is no harm in revealing it here.
When the writers ask me questions, I generally try to give them about three or four options since they know best what fits into the rhythm of the dialogue and the story. Often they ask a follow-up question to land on the final answer. I never “try” to get any one individual thing on the show since the writers always know better than I do about how to put a story together. I just want to give them as many good options as I can think of and sit back and watch.
Guest stars
by MiniMike
There has been a very impressive list of tech or geek related guest star appearances on the show (Stan Lee, Stephen Hawking, Neil deGrasse Tyson, ...). Do you have any control over who guest appearances are written for? Are there any tech related people who you would like to have on the show as a guest star, but have been unable to get?
Saltzberg: I have no input into the guest stars nor do I even make suggestions. (So I am not the person to volunteer to.)
No one knows everything, so...
by MiniMike
The show touches on a somewhat wide range of technology and culture. There must be science related questions that are outside your area of expertise. Who do you contact for advice when you need it?
Saltzberg: Absolutely. I don’t even know all of physics, let alone science outside my area. For some of it, I can do my own research but in general I do want to get the writers more information than they could have found by themselves on the internet. So I often consult experts. For the current season, for example, the writers mention the work of some famous psychologists. So I called them at their university and asked if the line of dialogue was exactly correct and we made a one-word tweak as a result. (We also found out the exact pronunciation of their names that way.)
With the addition of Amy Farrah Fowler, suddenly I had a lot of neuroscience on my plate. And I stopped learning biology in ninth grade. I never cared for touching living samples. I have friends though who conduct neuroscience experiments such as Dr. Ricardo Gil da Costa at the Salk Institute and Prof. Mayank Mehta in my own department at UCLA that I go to. And most importantly, Dr. Fowler is played by Dr. Mayim Bialik, who herself has a Ph.D. in neuroscience. So she would never let us slip up. Most recently she helped catch the difference between a 1.2 mole and 1.2 molar solution. So Dr. Bialik has my back.
For me all this research has been helpful in my scientific life. In my main job as a professor I should have broad knowledge about physics beyond my immediate research. But without a specific reason to go read, it sometimes hard to find time to keep up. However, questions from the writers keep me on my toes and I try to keep abreast of new developments now in case I think the writers would be interested. From time to time, during my scientific life, I find myself the expert in a room on a topic, all because I had researched it for Big Bang Theory. (I don’t let on to the reason, of course.)
non-science questions
by globaljustin
Mr. Saltzberg, thanks for taking questions! It's much appreciated.
My question: Do the writers (or actors) ever ask you about your daily life or your experiences as a scientist? What non-scientific/factual input have they asked from you?
Saltzberg: Early on, some of the actors came to UCLA and met mostly with graduate students work in the lab, and saw what they were working on. We even all had lunch. But the actors do their own research essentially entirely on their own. I am amazed at how much they own the dialogue. We are not just talking about pronunciation, but the whole rhythm of the line.
The writers have also visited UCLA a few times and may even have been inspired to a few ideas. But generally what they come up with is a so many steps away from the initial input, that if I weren’t told by them what inspired them, I would never have known. For many tapings, I bring a scientist to them. Some weeks it is a physics undergrad or graduate student, and other weeks it has been Nobel Laureates. The writers talk to all of them.
Dramatic plot vs. Scientifically accurate
by Opportunist
What was the hardest bit of scientific inaccuracy to fight, because the writers deemed it necessary to keep it "wrong"?
Saltzberg: In all these years, the writers have NEVER put in something I told them was wrong scientifically. They would never do that. So any mistakes that have made it through (and sad to say I can think of a couple little ones) I have to accept blame for. For the most part, when people on the internet complain something is wrong, they actually have either made a mistake themselves or didn’t realize what we are thinking.
The only deviation from scientific reality is how their jobs are organized within the university and who controls their promotions and job assignments and complaints. But that’s outside the domain of science itself and I am fine with that.
The fact that this show is scientifically accurate doesn’t mean we need all shows to be. When I was younger, I had fun with my friends finding the scientific inaccuracies in television and movies. And besides, we would never have had “Back to the Future” if we insisted on everything being grounded firmly in science fact.
Are the actors interested in physics?
by Anonymous Coward
Do any of the actors have an interest in learning about physics? Or do they just read their lines and that's it?
Saltzberg: You would really have to ask them, but I think they are interested in understanding the science at least enough well to understand what the character is thinking and doing. The actors and the writers express a great deal of respect for science and I have talked to them over the years and can tell how much they value scientific literacy and a society that promotes science. A few little things:The actor who plays Leonard (Johnny Galecki) even came up with the name for my blog about the science behind the show, “The Big Blog Theory”. The actor who plays Sheldon (Jim Parsons) even caught a mistake in the script, “electrical dipoles” instead of “electric dipoles”. I told him he seems to know more physics than he is letting on.
by Anonymous Coward
Were you ridiculed at all in your youth for being interested in science? Do you feel the show promotes acceptance towards those of us who enjoy the various sciences? Or does it perpetuate the stereotype that if someone is interested in science then they must be socially inept and interactively dysfunctional?
Saltzberg: When I meet a random stranger and say I am a physicist, I used to get a blank stare. Now, I generally get a warm smile and asked “Just like on the Big Bang Theory”? So my experience tells me that many people genuinely like and care for these characters. One of the writers says he can tell the audience is even protective of them.
I did get picked on a little bit when I was younger, more around the age of junior high school. I don’t know if it was because of my interest in science or the of other things you mentioned, or one of many other things, or maybe no reason at all. If you or anyone reading this is being picked on, I understand that it feels terrible.
So if you or anyone else reading this are in school and having trouble like this, find a teacher, counselor or someone in the school to talk to. You don’t have to ask this person to step in and solve your problems, but having someone with more experience at life to talk to can help you make things better. And if anything ever gets worse (or better), you will have someone to go to who has been following and understands the context and what is going on. Teachers and other advisors who work in schools are there in part to help you navigate exactly this kind of trouble, and nearly every one will want to help guide you through it.
Back when the show started, I didn’t know how the portrayal of scientists would go. Then as the episodes started coming out, I saw the writers and actors treating the characters with respect and making them each specific individuals. The show soon received positive reviews from scientists who care about this kind of thing, such as from the head of the American Physical Society’s Office of Public Outreach, Rebecca Thompson-Flagg. I took comfort in the fact that she is an expert on what is good for our field and she loves the show so much she came to see a taping twice and spent time with the writers and crew. Since then, the support we have had from scientific icons-- Stephen Hawking, Woz, Astronaut Mike Massimino, Neil de Grasse Tyson— has been a joy.
As for being “socially inept and interactively dysfunctional”, I am not a writer so can’t speak with authority, but as viewer and fan I see these characters have a great group of loyal friends, a wide circle of other interesting people they interact with, and have terrific romances going on. They have meaningful jobs and lots of fun outside of work too. We should all have such troubles!
Advancing science
by korbulon
By exposing a mass audience to scientific principles and archetypes, do you think a show like Big Bang Theory somehow advances the cause of science, or is it basically irrelevant?
Saltzberg: There is no way I can think of to measure this effect. But I hope the show conveys first of all the joy of doing science and leading the great life with science in it. I do believe the love of science by the characters comes through clearly. Maybe there are young people out there who read science in their textbooks but don’t realize that one can have a career and life filled with science. And it shows the life of science is also often one of adventure. Many of us are able to travel around the world and to interesting places and with interesting people to work on interesting problems.
As for specific science topics, the show at least gets the word out there. The show obviously isn’t Nova-style documentary. Rather, when the audience hears the words “dark matter” they can tell the characters think it is important. If even a small fraction of viewers web-search the term, that represents a very large number of people learning about perhaps the most interesting scientific question of our time. As a way of follow-up, I try to write a blog post (although I was remiss lately) to teach a little more deeply about the science in each episode.
I hope the show inspires those who are already scientifically minded or considering it. I also heard from the director of the Society of Physics Students, Dr. Gary White, who told me he thought students were “standing a little taller” with seeing physicists represented on television. So I hope beyond advancing of science, it also gives aspiring physics and other science students one more reason to feel a sense of pride in becoming scientists or engineers. Bill Prady the co-creator of the show gave a commencement address to our graduating physics and astronomy students at UCLA a few years ago. He reminded us how great it is to be a scientist and I believe that message comes through in the show.
Popularity
by korbulon
Why do you think a show like BBT has been such a huge hit with a wide audience given its geeky characters and plot devices?
Saltzberg: If I knew what made a hit TV show, I would be very wealthy.
I am not a writer or a professional critic but I think it would be a mistake to think the stories are narrowly pitched to a so-called geeky audience. I think the problems these characters face week-to-week with their friends, lovers, jobs and generally how to interact with the world touch on something universal. You didn’t have to be a New Yorker to like Seinfeld.
But maybe one key part is the excellence in every corner of the production. A viewer can see the excellence in writing and acting most clearly. But from being at the production, I see the excellence in all the departments from sets, to sound, to props, to lighting, to wardrobe, to production and many others. I see dedicated people with often decades of experience who love the show themselves and work so hard. It is inspiring to see the show come together each week from so many people at the top of their craft with such pride and I believe it shows in the finished product.
Are you a "geek"?
by krygny
... meaning, do you also provide input on some of the pop-culture in the show (e.g., Star Trek, Star Wars, comic books, Dr Who, etc.)?
Saltzberg: Sad to say, I am not. I am so out of it that for a long time when I would hear students talking about “Battlestar Galactica” a few years ago, I wondered why everyone started watching an old TV show from the 1970’s. I wish I were more of a pop-culture, SciFi and comic geek -- in part because BBT characters make it seem like so much fun. I have at least gone back to learn about some of these things as they have been mentioned—much as I hope others are doing with the science that is mentioned. The writers are such fans of this stuff there is nothing I could possibly ever tell them. Even some of the comic books you see in Sheldon’s bedroom actually belong to the writers.
What would they NOT let you do?
by Higaran
Was there anything that you tried to put in the show they they told you wouldn't be put in because it was to complex, or for some other reason. I know there is a lot of stuff that made it in, but what didn't get in there that you tried for?
Saltzberg: There was one thing we removed from the dialogue and I totally agreed with it. In one scene, the characters made their voices artificially deep by breathing in sulfur hexafluoride. However we read up about it and there is a real chance that someone could suffocate when trying this because that gas is heavier than air and can settle in your lungs. The odds may be low, but you have to remember that there are millions of people watching and we didn’t want anyone to hurt themselves so we removed the name of the compound. Slashdotters probably already knew the name of the chemical so there is no harm in revealing it here.
When the writers ask me questions, I generally try to give them about three or four options since they know best what fits into the rhythm of the dialogue and the story. Often they ask a follow-up question to land on the final answer. I never “try” to get any one individual thing on the show since the writers always know better than I do about how to put a story together. I just want to give them as many good options as I can think of and sit back and watch.
Guest stars
by MiniMike
There has been a very impressive list of tech or geek related guest star appearances on the show (Stan Lee, Stephen Hawking, Neil deGrasse Tyson, ...). Do you have any control over who guest appearances are written for? Are there any tech related people who you would like to have on the show as a guest star, but have been unable to get?
Saltzberg: I have no input into the guest stars nor do I even make suggestions. (So I am not the person to volunteer to.)
No one knows everything, so...
by MiniMike
The show touches on a somewhat wide range of technology and culture. There must be science related questions that are outside your area of expertise. Who do you contact for advice when you need it?
Saltzberg: Absolutely. I don’t even know all of physics, let alone science outside my area. For some of it, I can do my own research but in general I do want to get the writers more information than they could have found by themselves on the internet. So I often consult experts. For the current season, for example, the writers mention the work of some famous psychologists. So I called them at their university and asked if the line of dialogue was exactly correct and we made a one-word tweak as a result. (We also found out the exact pronunciation of their names that way.)
With the addition of Amy Farrah Fowler, suddenly I had a lot of neuroscience on my plate. And I stopped learning biology in ninth grade. I never cared for touching living samples. I have friends though who conduct neuroscience experiments such as Dr. Ricardo Gil da Costa at the Salk Institute and Prof. Mayank Mehta in my own department at UCLA that I go to. And most importantly, Dr. Fowler is played by Dr. Mayim Bialik, who herself has a Ph.D. in neuroscience. So she would never let us slip up. Most recently she helped catch the difference between a 1.2 mole and 1.2 molar solution. So Dr. Bialik has my back.
For me all this research has been helpful in my scientific life. In my main job as a professor I should have broad knowledge about physics beyond my immediate research. But without a specific reason to go read, it sometimes hard to find time to keep up. However, questions from the writers keep me on my toes and I try to keep abreast of new developments now in case I think the writers would be interested. From time to time, during my scientific life, I find myself the expert in a room on a topic, all because I had researched it for Big Bang Theory. (I don’t let on to the reason, of course.)
non-science questions
by globaljustin
Mr. Saltzberg, thanks for taking questions! It's much appreciated.
My question: Do the writers (or actors) ever ask you about your daily life or your experiences as a scientist? What non-scientific/factual input have they asked from you?
Saltzberg: Early on, some of the actors came to UCLA and met mostly with graduate students work in the lab, and saw what they were working on. We even all had lunch. But the actors do their own research essentially entirely on their own. I am amazed at how much they own the dialogue. We are not just talking about pronunciation, but the whole rhythm of the line.
The writers have also visited UCLA a few times and may even have been inspired to a few ideas. But generally what they come up with is a so many steps away from the initial input, that if I weren’t told by them what inspired them, I would never have known. For many tapings, I bring a scientist to them. Some weeks it is a physics undergrad or graduate student, and other weeks it has been Nobel Laureates. The writers talk to all of them.
Dramatic plot vs. Scientifically accurate
by Opportunist
What was the hardest bit of scientific inaccuracy to fight, because the writers deemed it necessary to keep it "wrong"?
Saltzberg: In all these years, the writers have NEVER put in something I told them was wrong scientifically. They would never do that. So any mistakes that have made it through (and sad to say I can think of a couple little ones) I have to accept blame for. For the most part, when people on the internet complain something is wrong, they actually have either made a mistake themselves or didn’t realize what we are thinking.
The only deviation from scientific reality is how their jobs are organized within the university and who controls their promotions and job assignments and complaints. But that’s outside the domain of science itself and I am fine with that.
The fact that this show is scientifically accurate doesn’t mean we need all shows to be. When I was younger, I had fun with my friends finding the scientific inaccuracies in television and movies. And besides, we would never have had “Back to the Future” if we insisted on everything being grounded firmly in science fact.
Are the actors interested in physics?
by Anonymous Coward
Do any of the actors have an interest in learning about physics? Or do they just read their lines and that's it?
Saltzberg: You would really have to ask them, but I think they are interested in understanding the science at least enough well to understand what the character is thinking and doing. The actors and the writers express a great deal of respect for science and I have talked to them over the years and can tell how much they value scientific literacy and a society that promotes science. A few little things:The actor who plays Leonard (Johnny Galecki) even came up with the name for my blog about the science behind the show, “The Big Blog Theory”. The actor who plays Sheldon (Jim Parsons) even caught a mistake in the script, “electrical dipoles” instead of “electric dipoles”. I told him he seems to know more physics than he is letting on.
Since then, the support we have had from scientific ions-- Stephen Hawking, Woz, Astronaut Mike Massimino, Neil de Grasse Tyson— has been a joy.
Too bad the show doesn't portray any intelligent person as normal as those you receive "support" from.
Scientific people can be normal people. You can be scientific and play sports. You can be scientific and be popular. These false dichotomies have found their way into culture -- too bad TBBT persists it.
It's interesting that he chose not to answer (or Slashdot chose not to forward) the several highly moderated questions on whether the show truly makes geek culture mainstream ("laughing with the characters"), or if it just holds geeks up for ridicule to millions of ordinary Americans ("laughing at them"). From Saltzberg's answers, it's at least clear that he has no geek background and simply caught on a good business idea.
I am not a physicist, but I should be able to more or less follow the formulas on the whyteboards in Leonard/Sheldons room. and I do not think they are pertinent or even correct. The only one that I really recognized was Bayes' theorem, in a context that had nothing to do with chances.
Paai
What happened to "Bazinga"?
Also your NFPA diamonds in the lab are the wrong direction.
Yes it's an anecdote! Were you expecting original research in a Slashdot comment?
You said something above... "I am not a writer so can’t speak with authority".
Didn't you mean to say "I am not a writer so can’t write with authority"?
Thanks, enjoy the veal!
Uh, yeah, well, whenever you notice something like that... a wizard did it.
I've only seen a few episodes of TBBT, but I didn't get that there was anything geeky about it. Do geeks actually watch the show?
The first episode has a hot girl meet a couple of nerdy guys who predictable run into her burly ex-boyfriend. In the next episode, said hot chick finds some reason to take a shower in their apartment, and hilarity ensues. It seemed more fanservice than geekdom. There characters were just "Revenge of the Nerds" style over-the-top archetypes of geeks. This is probably typical of sitcoms since realistic people just aren't as funny as exaggerations.
This interview was the first time I had heard of the series as being for geeks or by geeks. It is good that some mainstream writers take their material seriously.
"So, to be considered "normal", people should play sports?"
Maybe in the 70s. I think today normal is to weigh 300+lbs and spend most of your free time sitting in front of a television (sometimes watching sports) and eating crappy food.
Occasionaly 'normal' people get lonely and tone out the tv for a few minutes to look for a mate... on the internet.
That show hasn't been about science since around season 3, what has he been doing other than eating donuts in the catering truck? :)
I think nerds understand the deep structure of science play and geeks modulate its surface expression. Thee are nerd things that I would do, like take a vacation to watch a rocket launch, and geek things I would not do, like dress up as a superhero.
Nice bullshit deflection. Read the first Question!
"Your Own Life Experience
Were you ridiculed at all in your youth for being interested in science? Do you feel the show promotes acceptance towards those of us who enjoy the various sciences? Or does it perpetuate the stereotype that if someone is interested in science then they must be socially inept and interactively dysfunctional?"
Yes, his answer does not match your opinion or preferred memes. Too bad for you. There is just as wide an experience among geeks and nerds as in any other subgroup.
love this about /.
it's almost like our secret 'AMA' only it's actually informative
thanks again to Dr. Saltzberg for taking my question!
Thank you Dave Raggett
I would ask that David please collaborate with the Writers of "The Amazing Spiderman 2", because it seems that they have no idea how real science works.
right...I'm totally with you on your analysis of the show's relationship with 'science' and the culture of scientists and academics...100% agree
this guy is a science advisor...that's it...he would be acting very unprofessionally to speak officially and talk about the fact that the characters protrayal is a backhanded ridiculing of geeks
the truth is, YES...there are definitely major things wrong with BBT & science...but this guy is not part of those decisions
to go further, I *wanted* to ask a question like you suggest, but as I typed it, I just tried to picture a day on the set for this guy...he's not part of those decisions that we hate at all...
instead, I tried to get at it from another angle with my question (which he did answer!)....I asked him how much input about his daily life as a scientist the show makers ask him about...the answer confirms what we suspect
Thank you Dave Raggett
this is the THIRD piece mentioning this guy in the last couple months. just how much is cbs and warner bros tv paying you, dice?
Seriously though, that pretty much is the reason for the show's success. The show's creators have done a great job portraying the Penny character as the financially strapped "hot girl" that was won through persistence and pity.
Unfortunately, it also has given many the idea that can neglect working on their social skills and still score the hot chick.
I read something he wrote where he followed the Vitruvius account of the Archimedes experiment. Spotting fallacious scientific preconceptions is apparently not his forte. So it's only about PR?
Why not ask him the questions like;
1. What was there before the big bang and where did it come from?
2. If live evolved then why do we want to talk to him because he is nothing more than a temporary electrical charged mineral deposit and soon will be less than that in death. Oops, there is no such thing as death for true big bang believers.
This is telling. In the show, the scientist characters are always playing games, going to comic book stores, seeing movies, and appear to work 9 to 5. These are not how scientists live. You just don't have a lot of spare time after doing the day's research or grant proposals. BBT is just a show about societal misfits in settings most people can relate to in some way. But it's not reflective of scientists.
If you post it, they will read.
Here we go again. APK - not only an expert on how the HOSTS file is the best way to secure your computer, but now also an expert in the medical treatment of transsexuals. Continually checking my posting history and trying to embarrass me - even though I was outed on slasdot in 2006 to overwhelming community support.
Now, to bring things back on-topic ... "Welcome to the new normal!"
Which kind of speaks to my main point - what is considered normal changes with time. 30 years ago, anyone spending their day glued to their phone, typing messages, and going into a panic attack if they can't find their phone would have been considered an ultra-geek nerd. Today, that's your average 13-year-old.
We've gone from "geek chic" to "can't you put that damn thing away for 5 minutes?"
Look at how fast having your own myspace page went from "that's SO neat" to "that's SO sad!".
Same thing with that other ritual, TV watching. 30 years ago, if there was nothing on, there was nothing on. Go find something else to do. Now? If there's nothing on, people will spend the next half hour channel-surfing. And if there's still nothing on, they'll start over, because "maybe now there's something on." This is normal for a large portion of the population, even as it's dysfunctional.
"Normal" is like "pornography" - I may not be able to define it, but I'll know it when I see it. Except even that turns out to be pretty much a case of "in the eye of the beholder." Stuff that was too racy for Playboy at first now adorns bus shelter ads, and nobody really notices, or cares for that matter.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
Seriously, this show is flat out offensive in the way in the stereotypes it uses to portray the intelligent.
Like a man being a transsexual taking estrogen imbalancing his brain: High estrogen levels in men tied to mental decline: http://www.health.am/ab/more/h... Sound like anybody you know "Barb" (or shall we say Tom instead)? After all, it ought to. That's what you've done to yourself, and it's FAR from "normal".
Or didn't you tell others to stalk apk per what's in my subject, quoted here http://news.slashdot.org/comme... ?
"What would Frank N. Furter do?" (R O T F L M A O) http://img3.wikia.nocookie.net...
From it I see You told others to stalk apk in it quoted here http://news.slashdot.org/comme... and that doesn't look good Barb against what you said I am replying to. Pretty dishonest actually. I also saw you have tons of sockpuppet accounts here too. That's low too.
http://img3.wikia.nocookie.net...
THIS is "normalcy" for BarbaraHudson http://img3.wikia.nocookie.net...
Truth is stranger than fiction and that's the truth of transtesticle 'barb'.
You now also say hosts are obsolete. I use them. I saw you run from proving apk's points on hosts wrong here http://news.slashdot.org/comme... Possibly you're unaware of them and are just operating on what you hear online from numbskulls that talk without any actual know how in computers but hosts work great compared to other things like adblock. I had no idea how good they can be in fact and from reading that post you ran from disproving, I got good ideas on how to use them better for more than just blocking out ads or bad sites but also for using hardcode entries of favorite sites to get more speed and reliable connects to my favorite sites even if dns servers get redirect poisoned or downed (like time warner did a week or so go).
No mention of Penny's Tits.
Useless.
I am an expert on that subject. Ask away.
I'm a cosmologist, and I watch the show - I find it funny though sometimes a little too close to certain people with whom I interact. One thing that's always annoyed me, however, is that there are often scientific outputs in the background that are the product of someone else' work. One case that springs to mind instantly is a Powerpoint presentation (OK, PDF slide show clearly made in TeX/Beamer) that was made by a colleague and must have been obtained from a conference website. I find it a bit distasteful, especially given how much the creators of the show would protest if someone copied their work, that not only was the author not contacted before his work was used, but he wasn't even credited with writing the presentation. It would be nice in future if you would actually credit those whose work you're using.
A man being a transsexual taking estrogen imbalancing his brain: High estrogen levels in men tied to mental decline: http://www.health.am/ab/more/h... Sound like anybody you know "Barb" (or shall we say Tom instead)? After all, it ought to. That's what you've done to yourself, and it's FAR from "normal".
"His only "legend in his own mind" was that he claimed that "his" hosts file could completely secure a windows computer. " - by tomhudson (43916) on Saturday February 12, @11:19AM (#35186644) Homepage Journal FROM -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... in the YEAR 2011 years ago no less
I never claimed a HOSTS file can secure you completely... show me where I have? I want a quote, big talker... you'll never get it, because I never, EVER said that: HOSTS files are, however, a valuable layer of defense for the concept of "layered security".
APK
P.S.=> Still @ your LIES, you transsexual weirdo? Ok, asking it again now nearly 5 yrs. later now in response to your bullshit lies again here quoted:
"APK - not only an expert on how the HOSTS file is the best way to secure your computer" - by BarbaraHudson (3785311) on Wednesday September 17, 2014 @07:06PM (#47932519) Homepage
Under your NEW sockpuppet account too no less: SEE my challenge to you above - where've I ever said they completely secure you? I never have, liar...
Of course, YOU ARE welcome to disprove my points on them after you said this lately too:
"I tore apart your stupid hosts file crapola." - by BarbaraHudson (3785311) on Tuesday August 19, 2014 @10:46AM (#47703255) Homepage
Oh, really?
Then why'd you run from disproving my points on them giving users added speed, security, reliability & more here too then -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme... ?
... apk