Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?
Space Science

Neil deGrasse Tyson Pinpoints Superman's Home Star System 102

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."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Neil deGrasse Tyson Pinpoints Superman's Home Star System

Comments Filter:
  • NIce (Score:5, Insightful)

    by geekoid ( 135745 ) <dadinportland&yahoo,com> on Tuesday November 06, 2012 @08:24PM (#41901777) Homepage Journal

    More science stars please.

  • by Horshu ( 2754893 ) on Tuesday November 06, 2012 @08:27PM (#41901825)
    What's with the trend of these guys spending time calculating fictional things? Wasn't there a mathematician last week who tried calculating some Cthulhu/wormhole fantasy? Waste...of...reputation.
  • Re:NIce (Score:4, Insightful)

    by CRCulver ( 715279 ) <> on Tuesday November 06, 2012 @08:40PM (#41901957) Homepage

    I'm not sure that science stars are all that helpful. Something they can be self-aggrandising publicity whores that, instead of really educating the public, obfuscate the sciences by offering vacuous factoids on fields they have only a passing acquaintance with. At the same time, science popularizing takes time away with their own research.

    Michio Kaku's a good example: once a fine research physicist, he has now become the media's go-to man whenever they want to look deep, even if it is on something outside his field like climate change or UFOs. (The signs of losing rigor were showing already in the early '90s with his first popular science book Hyperspace [], which seemed curiously obsessed with -- and optimistic about -- humanity gaining "god-like powers").

    Some might counter that these folks do good in attracting young people to the sciences, but I would like to see some hard figures on that. I suspect the bureaucrats that quietly set educational policy, not media go-to scientists, can have a much, much greater effect.

  • by geekoid ( 135745 ) <dadinportland&yahoo,com> on Tuesday November 06, 2012 @08:41PM (#41901971) Homepage Journal

    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.

  • Re:NIce (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Mr2cents ( 323101 ) on Tuesday November 06, 2012 @09:52PM (#41902469)

    I agree that Michio Kaku is a bit "way out there". But in regard to Neil Tyson, I have nothing but praise. Search youtube for his interviews, this man really knows how to spread scientific thinking and knows why it is important.

  • Re:NIce (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Guru80 ( 1579277 ) on Tuesday November 06, 2012 @10:02PM (#41902537)

    Going to have to disagree with you. Michio Kaku and Neil deGrasse Tyson are probably the best thing to happen to the various science fields in a long time when it comes to connecting with those outside the field. They give science a much needed boost in perception to those that see it as nothing more than a bunch of guys in white lab coats hunched over a microscope all day getting off on microbes or other invisible "stuff". They can explain everything from the unbelievably complex to the down right absurd in a way that no matter who you are you know exactly what they are talking about.

    Science only wins with those two, no matter what they are talking about. Tyson especially has the whole cool factor that transcends stereotypes.

  • Re:NIce (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Mr2cents ( 323101 ) on Tuesday November 06, 2012 @10:03PM (#41902541)

    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.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 06, 2012 @10:26PM (#41902641)
    Jesus Christ, I'm so tired of the whole sell out're right, he should obviously not have any fun with the public whatsoever and go shove his microscope so far up his ass he doesn't have to bend over to look into it and only do research.

Today is a good day for information-gathering. Read someone else's mail file.