On Cosmos

Last week, Neal deGrasse Tyson's reboot of Carl Sagan's classic science series Cosmos aired its first episode. If you're interested in watching it you can check out episode 2, Some of the Things That Molecules Do, on Fox tonight at 9pm. I highly recommend it, not because it is super super in depth, but because deGrasse Tyson and his team work very hard to instill a sense of wonder which science lacks for many in our culture. If you are a cord cutter like me, go get an Antenna at Wal-Mart or something and watch it for free over the air.

Spoiler Alert: I'm going to write a bit about episode 1 of the series. I don't know that's it's possible to spoil things like the age of the universe or whatever but if you're really holding out then don't read anymore.

Episode 1, Standing Up in the Milky Way, serves as an introduction to, well, the universe. Again, I need to point out that accessibility and awe are prioritized over the nitty gritty of physics. After hearing from deGrasse Tyson about the origin of the series and the merits of the scientific method, we are treated to a macroscopic vision of the universe we inhabit. We leave Earth and our solar system after brief stops by each planet (not pluto, obviously) and are quickly looking at local galactic clusters and eventually the multi-verse. The show is very clearly trying to communicate a sense of scale and vastness in a way that is fairly easy to understand. There's no time spent calculating light-years and how long it would take to go from one point to another; well done visuals and deGrasse Tyson's chromed-out spaceship (with a bridge straight out of the Mass Effect series' Illusive Man's home) are all that is needed to show just how big we're talking.

Space, as the show's subtitle suggests, is only one aspect of the cosmos. Time is the other. Humans are rather inefficient when it comes to estimating and understanding the passage of time. We've all experienced minutes which felt like hours and hours that seemed to last seconds, so helping an audience with varying levels of understanding comprehend the vastness of time is a challenge. Cosmos uses the tactic of fitting the entirety of the past into a one month calendar. While I've seen similar approaches before, fitting the emergence of life into a 24 hour period, I think the calendar is both visually and cognitively easier to understand. The grid of boxes which deGrasse Tyson walks around on is laid out like a large floor calendar with most of the interesting stuff taking place on the last day.

Between the two sections on space and time, we are treated to a bit of a history lesson about how science challenges prevailing notions of the universe. Using an animated sequence reminiscent of graphic novels, Cosmos tells the story of Giordano Bruno, an Italian Monk who thought a finite universe was disservice to the infinite nature of God. He's shown as a spiritual man who comes to these conclusions seemingly by accident and is then laughed out of the Church and various other places for his whole life. Later he is imprisoned and burned alive. The message seemed two-fold. First, as I noted above, it shows how trying to learn more about the universe can challenge prevailing notions of reality - often with poor results for the early challengers. Second, and perhaps more important for the creators of Cosmos, Giordano Bruno's insistence that the infinity of God and the infinity of the universe are complimentary is a central, although hidden, argument for the whole series.

Let's step out of the show an look at the context in which it is being shown. 21st century America is divided over everything except the idea that everything is wrong. We're convinced of our decline and one big "proof" of that decline is poor performance of our students compared with students in other parts of the world. While I take issue with that claim, that's not what I'm going to argue about here.

Neil deGrasse Tyson is a vocal proponent of improving science education in schools. He's also adamant that students need to be passionate about what they're studying. Yes, scientific literacy is important, but our next generation of scientists needs to love science and not be forced into it. Otherwise they all move to San Francisco and make sexting apps for a living. Enter the Hayden Planetarium and now Cosmos. Science is cool again! Let's learn!

What does this have to do with Bruno and his infinite God? Smallness. People are used to feeling important. They're big and have friends and people know them! If you suddenly place them in context of some huge impersonal universe that sense of importance is shattered. You make people feel small and insignificant. deGrasse Tyson has a response to that, a sort of pop-existentialism. Late in the episode he points out that each of us is made of atoms forged in the heart of stars, just like Mjollnir! Okay, he doesn't mention a space hammer but the point is deGrasse Tyson is trying to stop people from feeling insignificant because that's just as big of a barrier to scientific interest as shitty teachers. Here's a great interview with Terry Gross where he discusses all of this.

Furthermore, some Christians stand opposed to this style of science education because it diminishes their version of God. Whether they're YE creationists or just skeptical of science as a way to undermine faith, a common Christian response to scientific explanations of the universe is that it removes meaning and specialness from God's most significant creation, man. While I tend to think that we overstate humanity's specialness, I can understand where those Christians are coming from. Neil deGrasse Tyson isn't trying to fight the war; he's trying to say the war isn't necessary. That God and science are compatible, largely because both inspire awe at their vastness and complexity. That understanding the universe can be seen as trying to understand God.

Good for him. I hope it works because the larger good, encouraging people to embrace science and students to passionately study science, is sorely needed. Discourse in our country is broken because neither side wants to understand the position of the other. They're content to yell and close off discussion. We need more people like deGrasse Tyson who are interested in finding the common ground.