Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Neil deGrasse Tyson Pinpoints Superman's Home Star System

Soulskill posted about a year and a half ago | from the totally-not-fluff dept.

Space 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."

cancel ×

102 comments

NIce (4, Insightful)

geekoid (135745) | about a year and a half ago | (#41901777)

More science stars please.

Re:NIce (3, Insightful)

CRCulver (715279) | about a year and a half ago | (#41901957)

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 [amazon.com] , 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.

Re:NIce (1)

CRCulver (715279) | about a year and a half ago | (#41901997)

Something they can be self-aggrandising...

That should have been "Sometimes they can be self-aggrandising...", sorry.

Re:NIce (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41902059)

Ahh, somebody has hurt feelings and is somewhat bitter me thinks.

So, who would you rather have talking to the idiot public about things they do not understand?

Michio Kaku is a fine example of somebody who is very smart, and is good at breaking down complex topics so that regular tards can understand at least some of it. He is a very valuable science resource. Just because you have had a bone to pick with Hyperspace for 20 years doesn't mean he does a bad job. It is a good sign that we have science "celebrities". Just because it isn't you doesn't invalidate their usefulness.

You know, smart folks can have a good amount of knowledge about things "outside their field." Feynman anyone? Were Feynman alive today he'd be everywhere on every topic, UFO's to strip clubs.

Quit bitching and be happy somebody lets these folks say anything at all.

Re:NIce (4, Insightful)

Mr2cents (323101) | about a year and a half ago | (#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.

Re:NIce (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41902713)

Yeah I prefer the Feynman types who can _concisely_ show you step by step why it works or doesn't work.

Then hopefully more people will actually understand the universe better, and more importantly gain a more scientific way of thinking.

Re:NIce (3, Interesting)

Mr2cents (323101) | about a year and a half ago | (#41902767)

If you like Feynman, I hope you have watched these lectures [vega.org.uk] , the video quality isn't great but the content more than makes up for it.

Re:NIce (1)

aNonnyMouseCowered (2693969) | about a year and a half ago | (#41902839)

As far as actual physics achievements, yes there's no comparison between the two. But as a science "presenter", Kaku wins. His books are another matter though. The last one I read - not sure if it's Physics of the Future/Impossible - I had the feeling he hired Google as editor. There was so much trivia you even got whole paragraphs enclosed in parentheses. I still prefer Carl Sagan, who managed to connect the dots in Cosmos, or Brian Cox, if he could just get rid of his annoying accent.

Re:NIce (1)

Mr2cents (323101) | about a year and a half ago | (#41902973)

Really? Have you ever watched lectures by Feynman (see my earlier posts)? I think your point is based upon the fact that Feynman is dead and dead people don't answer questions from reporters well.

Re:NIce (4, Funny)

Impy the Impiuos Imp (442658) | about a year and a half ago | (#41903213)

Ya but what if Kaku had rock solid arguments?

Re:NIce (-1, Flamebait)

DNS-and-BIND (461968) | about a year and a half ago | (#41904835)

Why does anyone idolize Richard Feynman? Did anyone read his book? He's a hardcore male chauvinist pig. He actually seems to be proud of it! Why is Feynman's reputation not in the toilet like other sexist pricks?

Re:NIce (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41905253)

http://slashdot.org/~DNS-and-BIND/freaks [slashdot.org]

Wow. :O

Is this asshole envy?

Re:NIce (2)

Mr2cents (323101) | about a year and a half ago | (#41905853)

Which one? I read "Surely you're joking, Mr. Feynman", it was quite funny. But I'm totally missing the part where he's a male chauvinist pig. Is it because he went to titty bars? Are you a male chauvinist pig if you like watching boobies? Really, I don't know what you're talking about.

Re:NIce (3, Insightful)

Mr2cents (323101) | about a year and a half ago | (#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 (3, Insightful)

Guru80 (1579277) | about a year and a half ago | (#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 (4, Interesting)

WGFCrafty (1062506) | about a year and a half ago | (#41903097)

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.

Re:NIce (1)

obijuanvaldez (924118) | about a year and a half ago | (#41907399)

You're assuming quite a lot. You assume that because a large viewership means that somehow people changed by watching it. This assumes that people didn't do what people do which is to find within the information presented, something that confirms what they already know. It also assumes that not everyone who watched it knew the information presented. But aside from these simple logical errors you make, I'm not quite sure what point you are making. I am guessing (but not assuming) that you mean to say that somehow getting non-scientists to know what is already known by scientists somehow advances science. I am not quite sure how that works.

Re:NIce (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41908331)

It doesn't advance science directly, and neither did the grandfather post say that it does. What it does is popularize science, making it seem friendlier and more accessible to the layman. This is already a very good thing in its own merit, and it also carries the possibility of attracting more young minds into scientific careers. One of these young minds just might do something big to advance science, or at least be a good sci-fi writer or a passionate high school science teacher who will, in turn, attract more young minds into scientific studies, and so forth.

In other words, Cosmos did nothing to directly advance science, but it sure as hell tweaked the odds in our favor.

Re:NIce (1)

Darby (84953) | about a year and a half ago | (#41903625)

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'd imagine that Brian Cox [wikipedia.org] Has done much to *attract* women to the sciences.

Re:NIce (2)

chthon (580889) | about a year and a half ago | (#41904611)

As for the balance between popularising science and actual research, you should obtain a copy of Isaac Asimov's "View From a Height".

In his introduction he makes the case for both kinds of scientists. After he obtained his degree, his doctorate, etc, he found that he had to specialise too much. He really liked to be able to know a little bit of everything instead of a whole lot of one thing. Its unfortunate that he only had a very narrow channel to popularise science.

His essays are invaluable material to read to understand the mind set of scientists and engineers.

Re:NIce (1)

Hadlock (143607) | about a year and a half ago | (#41907367)

Science Stars are better than NASA's current PR strategy. Go watch SpaceX coverage of a rocket launch, then go watch NASA's coverage some time. Night and day.

Re:NIce (2)

GodfatherofSoul (174979) | about a year and a half ago | (#41902399)

I love this, too. Not everything in science has to be about inaccessible theses. And, there are more people watching than the scientific community; by that I mean kids and young adults who will have the curiosity awakened by this. Oh, geeks too!

Re:NIce (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41902581)

I agree. Finding a fictional star was very useful.

Hopefully the next big revelation is Calvin Klein telling us what colour Darth Vader's underwear is.

Re:NIce (1)

NotQuiteReal (608241) | about a year and a half ago | (#41902597)

You insensitive CLOD! This is the exact same star that I purchased for my MOM! Please, don't make fun of her special, officially registered, star!

Re:NIce (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41902709)

No more science stars please one is too much [independent.co.uk] so one is.

Scientists and fake science (3, Insightful)

Horshu (2754893) | about a year and a half ago | (#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:Scientists and fake science (1)

Black Parrot (19622) | about a year and a half ago | (#41901849)

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.

I think the uncertainty of threatened budget cuts have NSF reluctant to give out research grants, so the scientists have to find something to do with their time.

Re:Scientists and fake science (2)

93 Escort Wagon (326346) | about a year and a half ago | (#41901893)

Apparently they didn't get stuffed into their lockers enough at high school.

Re:Scientists and fake science (4, Insightful)

geekoid (135745) | about a year and a half ago | (#41901971)

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:Scientists and fake science (1)

phantomfive (622387) | about a year and a half ago | (#41902461)

It makes him look like he's not a scientist, and he's sold out to give publicity to an upcoming movie [youtube.com] .

Re:Scientists and fake science (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41902641)

Jesus Christ, I'm so tired of the whole sell out bullshit...you'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.

Re:Scientists and fake science (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41902509)

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

while still being good scientists. if they give that up for popularity/publicity, they instantly become uncool.

Re:Scientists and fake science (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41902103)

Hmm, perhaps thats because normal idiot people will actually READ an article about Superman or whatever. You then slip some information in there about stars and whatnot, and bam - you have educated them without their knowledge.

What is wrong with this? Why are so many asshole science nerds upset by things like this? It is fun, it DOES have legit information attached to it and it hurts nobody.

Asshole science nerds like you can sit around and fume all day long (with nobody to tell how wrong these scientists are) but that doesn't change the fact they are popular and that is a GOOD thing. People listen to them. Even if it is cloaked in bullshit pop culture. Relax.

Re:Scientists and fake science (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41906365)

I remember the paper published about the sustainability of the vampire population in Buffys. Again, silly, yet makes you start to think about stuff. As long as those little gears in your head are working it's good for you and your health, and maybe, only maybe, it may be good to other people too in the end.

As a kid I used to love science fiction, until I grew up and noticed most science fiction is drama disguised with lasers and ships. The thing is, by placing what you want to discuss in a completely abstract setting, you sometimes get people to connect easier with the problem than when it is attached to the real world with its tons of prejudices.

Just try to discuss evolution in the USA to see what I mean... but discussing evolution on an extraterrestrial planet, ok.

Huh? (1)

Black Parrot (19622) | about a year and a half ago | (#41901831)

What's with the newscientist link? I thought this was the badastronomy discussion board.

Re:Huh? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41901895)

Phil Plait says that you're his bitch. Fucking visit his site and suck his dick.

Re:Huh? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41904071)

That's xenu.com

So... (2)

Nyder (754090) | about a year and a half ago | (#41901981)

they used a real scientist to lie about a fake planet?

real scientist in a fictional world (2)

girlinatrainingbra (2738457) | about a year and a half ago | (#41904437)

And Stephen Hawking, a real physicist with impeccable credentials, is used to become part of the fictional worlds of [wikipedia.org] "The Big Bang Theory", Star Trek: The Next Generation, The Simpsons, and Futurama. So that's another case where they use a real scientist to lie about a fake fictional world. It's part of entertainment; and the fact that someone like Hawking can become part of the mass culture and reach to people who may have to ask people like "us" who that person is. Seriously, Hawking on "Big Bang Theory" is pretty cool beans.

Re:So... (1)

formfeed (703859) | about a year and a half ago | (#41915763)

At least he didn't claim Superman is from a dwarf planet.

The comic is actually Action Comics #14 (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41902009)

The summary is slightly wrong. The comic in question is not Superman #14. It is the other Superman comic, ACTION COMICS #14. In stores tomorrow, by the way.

Re:The comic is actually Action Comics #14 (1)

tragedy (27079) | about a year and a half ago | (#41903613)

I haven't read comics in a while. Can anyone tell me what's up with the numbering? Shouldn't Action Comics be in the 1000's by now?

Re:The comic is actually Action Comics #14 (2)

tragedy (27079) | about a year and a half ago | (#41903861)

Never mind, should have just looked it up for myself. Another reboot of the whole DC Universe. Looks like they did it without a Crisis event this time, they just editorially declared "everything is different now, except for some stuff that isn't" and restarted the issue numbers.

Re:The comic is actually Action Comics #14 (3, Interesting)

witherstaff (713820) | about a year and a half ago | (#41905243)

I had been reading comics around the reboot and just gave up on DC. Marvel does a variety of reboots to a point and restarts numbers at #1 on a near regular basis but that's a series not a whole continuity change. But the crossover mania, even not having to err.. pay much.. for comics got so it wasn't worth the time. Last year's Fear itself storyline was over 100 comics. That'd be a lot of money shelled out to follow one storyline.

what they totally forgot (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41902015)

If you look at the actual comic, they are trying to help Superman determine if his planet of origin, Krypton, is still intact or detectable.

What they forget is that any light from Krypton's system is so many light years away that we would effectively be seeing Superman's homeworld *before* it was destroyed. NDGT didn't think of this?

Re:what they totally forgot (3, Interesting)

Black Parrot (19622) | about a year and a half ago | (#41902047)

If you look at the actual comic, they are trying to help Superman determine if his planet of origin, Krypton, is still intact or detectable.

What they forget is that any light from Krypton's system is so many light years away that we would effectively be seeing Superman's homeworld *before* it was destroyed. NDGT didn't think of this?

The Badass Tronomer's blog hints that that time delay plays a role in the plot.

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?

Re:what they totally forgot (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41902085)

"Badass Tronomer" is a fucking prick and a dumb asshole. I hope he goes into something more suitable for his talents, like cleaning up horse shit.

Re:what they totally forgot (4, Informative)

vux984 (928602) | about a year and a half ago | (#41902155)

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...

Re:what they totally forgot (3, Funny)

Black Parrot (19622) | about a year and a half ago | (#41902731)

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.

And once we've worked out the answer to this, we can get back on whether balrogs have wings.

Re:what they totally forgot (2)

tragedy (27079) | about a year and a half ago | (#41903747)

Well, Gandalf and Saruman and Sauron and the Balrog are all the same kind of being: Maiar. The Maiar are supposed to be shape-shifters or at least wear the forms mere mortals perceive them as like a kind of disguise, so the Balrog may be able to have wings some of the time and not have wings the rest of the time (and be man-sized or gigantic as required). Sauron was described as being able to directly shape-shift, for example. That was before he put some of his power into the One Ring and lost it, however, so that doesn't say whether all of the Maiar can do it. There is some evidence that the form they took was handed out when they entered the world and that they therefore might not be able to change it without leaving the world and coming back in, which would be pretty hard for the Balrog to do with Morgoth banished... So, still inconclusive.

Anyway, is that more like it? :)

Re:what they totally forgot (1)

davewoods (2450314) | about a year and a half ago | (#41911359)

Dang it. I really need to read the Simirillion. I thought the Balrog was a a part of a whole race of creatures that looked similarly, now I feel like I am missing out on a big chunk of the story. Thanks for nothing! Jerk! I hope you know that someone out there is going to have a blast because you forced them to read a fantastic book just to get the whole picture! Grrr!

Re:what they totally forgot (1)

tragedy (27079) | about a year and a half ago | (#41912299)

Well, the Balrogs were at least an order of Maiar with an affinity for darkness and fire. How much their appearance was a matter of choice or of base nature is unclear. In any case, Morgoth also had demons who served under the Balrogs as servants. The Balrogs were also referred to as demons themselves.

The big problem with the question of wings is Tolkein's poetic use of language. If he said that a character was flying, you needed context to tell if he meant literally or just that the character was travelling with speed. Given that he described the form of the Balrog in terms of shadow and mystery, it seems pretty hard to make any definitive statement on the subject. It is fun to argue about it with just a few sentences worth of description to go by though :)

Re:what they totally forgot (1)

Darby (84953) | about a year and a half ago | (#41903959)

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.

Me neither, but I thought it was the yellow sun of Earth that gave him his powers and the reaction with the red sun baked rocks that was the problem.

If only there were any comic book nerds on this site this might get settled.

Oh well, I guess we're stuck with speculation :-)

Re:what they totally forgot (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41902205)

That I can actually answer. It is only harmful to Kryptonians when they have powers from a yellow sun. Without that, it is just a normal rock to them.

Re:what they totally forgot (1)

milkmage (795746) | about a year and a half ago | (#41902067)

the NGDT of that reality (in the comic) doesn't have a fucking superman comic to refer to because SM is real.. and I doubt he has his bio (although he is superman. I'm sure he has a wiki page or something....)

Re:what they totally forgot (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41902121)

Superman is actually a tremendous Jackass and not really that powerful. He hangs out with a bunch of jerks like Lamer Woman and BatDork. He has a dog who is also dumb and...

Re:what they totally forgot (1)

mark-t (151149) | about a year and a half ago | (#41902113)

I seem to recall reading a superman comic a number of years ago where one of the premises of the story involved the earth entering the time-space cone that contained Krypton's explosion, so it was finally "visible" (I use the term loosely) from Earth.

As I recall, Braniac was the villain.

Re:what they totally forgot (1)

wierd_w (1375923) | about a year and a half ago | (#41902137)

Perhaps not....

Superman was an infant when his "escape pod" was jettisoned from krypton. He was a toddler when it landed on earth, so about a year and a half flight time. Then, on earth, he aged at least another 20 years before becoming superman.

Then you have any story and plot arcs that have happened between his becoming superman, and deciding to visit the planetarium.

This likely nets us a cozy 30-ish years or so since krypton exploded. Since superman arrived in an FTL capable pod, he can now watch through the telescope as his planet breaks up, from his vantage point on earth, close to 30 LY away. (The starsystem in question is about 27LY from earth.)

This makes it an intriguing prospect.

Re:what they totally forgot (2)

davewoods (2450314) | about a year and a half ago | (#41911431)

Oohh, and if they have good enough resolution (They do not in real life, but hey, comics!) they could see the escape pod travel toward the planet/away from the planet and meet up with itself as it reaches FTL speeds. My brain hurts from the relativity of that sentence, but I think I got it right.

Re:what they totally forgot (1)

elrous0 (869638) | about a year and a half ago | (#41902151)

Superman's ship didn't travel faster than light. Otherwise, the Kryptonite would have taken a LOT longer to get here than him.

He was probably in a very long cyrosleep, traveling at some fraction of the speed of light. Either that or he was just a fictional character and some dumbass writers made the whole thing up. One of those.

Re:what they totally forgot (1)

wierd_w (1375923) | about a year and a half ago | (#41902215)

At subluminal velocities, it would take him thousands of years to reach the earth.

I seem to recall that his pod contained educational materials, and was not a chryopod. (If it was, he would have crash landed as a fishstick, and not as a toddler.)

For the narrative to be believable, the pod must have been traveling at approx 30x the speed of light.

Re:what they totally forgot (1)

0111 1110 (518466) | about a year and a half ago | (#41903169)

At subluminal velocities, it would take him thousands of years to reach the earth.

Only if his star system is thousands of light years away.

Re:what they totally forgot (1)

wierd_w (1375923) | about a year and a half ago | (#41904369)

No. Period.

Subluminal travel runs headfirst into special relativity. The energy costs to accelerate a massive body to a nice fraction of lightspeed follows a log curve (approaching infinity on the far end.)

Then you have all the sticky issues with specific impulse, like mass loss, and the constraints about the size of the vessel he was shipped out in.

Basically, baby superman would have split the earth into ball of high energy plasma, if his pod had been doing even half lightspeed when it "landed". Due to the size, it wouldnt have had sufficient reactant to slow down when it neared Sol. In order for the vessel to not obliterate the earth, it would have to have been traveling SIGNIFICANTLY slower than lightspeed. Ergo, thousands of years.

Re:what they totally forgot (1)

oodaloop (1229816) | about a year and a half ago | (#41905665)

In the 1978 movie, Jor El also says that by the time he reaches Earth, Krypton will be dead for many thousands of years. And in Superman Returns, he goes there and back in 5 years. If he travelled at relativistic speeds, he would return to Earth perhaps thousands of years after he departed. I don't know of a way to rectify these two scenes in the movies.

Re:what they totally forgot (2)

alexander_686 (957440) | about a year and a half ago | (#41902315)

Superman’s ship traveled faster than light to get to Earth.

The explanation of all the kryptonite getting to Earth was that the ship created a wormhole to get from Krtyton to Earth and a fair amount of debris got sucked in and followed. Now, mind you, this was 90s comic books science. I don’t know what the start of the art is today.

Re:what they totally forgot (1)

wierd_w (1375923) | about a year and a half ago | (#41902419)

What I want to know is why kalael sent him to sol, an not another red dwarf. Class M stars are copiously abundant in our local star cluster, and sending his baby boy to a G type star would be like our scientists deciding to send somebody to a blue star. Unless they are a dark skinned baby, they would have a hard time there. (G type stars like ours have considerably higher percentages of UV light compared to M type stars, like "krypton's". This may explain why spuderman is fair complected.)

Re:what they totally forgot (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41902483)

Depends on the story, it ranges from Jor-El and Thomas Wayne getting along to the atmosphere being compatible.

Maybe all of the Class M Stars had problems.

Of course there's always Red Son where Superman was a time-traveler, not an alien.

Re:what they totally forgot (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41902607)

In some versions of the story, Jor-El knows that his child will have vast powers under a yellow Sun, and selects a yellow Sun for that reason. (This begs the question of how Jor-El knows that.)

Not long before the "52" reboot, there was a storyline with a bunch of aliens (who turned out to be police of sorts for an alien 'war crimes' tribunal) looking for a Kryptonian (who turned out not to be Kal-El). Seems that the Kryptonians had actually gotten out of their solar system at one point (not just to another planet in the same system), and they proceeded to do nasty, brutish, colonization and exploitation of worlds in yellow star systems. Then, for whatever curltural reason (xenophobia, like the Daxamites would also have?), they retreated to their own solar system, where they stayed (despite their space travel technology) until The End. Except for a few random ex-soldiers, mercernaries, etc. who had stayed on some of the colonized worlds, but who were MUCH-hated and hunted down like dogs whenever the locals had the opportunity...

Re:what they totally forgot (1)

wonkey_monkey (2592601) | about a year and a half ago | (#41904901)

(This begs the question of how Jor-El knows that.)

*grind grind grind*

Re:what they totally forgot (3, Interesting)

alexander_686 (957440) | about a year and a half ago | (#41902617)

Jor-El, as a brilliant scientist, knew that the yellow sun would give his child super powers.

Look, Superman been around for almost 75 years. During that time a lot of above average people have had these types of questions and the writers have answered them. Sometimes with poor science, sometimes they contradict themselves.

On the flip side, there is some good stuff out there.
James Kakalios is my favorite example. Physicist (PhD., Professor.) and lover of comic books. He has done some cool stuff.
http://www.physicsofsuperheroes.com/intro-physics-book.php [physicsofsuperheroes.com]
http://www.physicsofsuperheroes.com/videos.php [physicsofsuperheroes.com]

Re:what they totally forgot (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41903933)

That is correct, and the fact of kryptonite getting pulled along in the ship's wake is also the only way for there to be significant chunks of kryptonite on planet Earth.

Re:what they totally forgot (1)

1u3hr (530656) | about a year and a half ago | (#41902527)

If you look at the actual comic, they are trying to help Superman determine if his planet of origin, Krypton, is still intact or detectable. What they forget is that any light from Krypton's system is so many light years away that we would effectively be seeing Superman's homeworld *before* it was destroyed. NDGT didn't think of this?

That will surely be the whole point of the story.

Superman is 27 years old. Krypton is 27 light years away.

So, what will he see?

Re:what they totally forgot (1)

viperidaenz (2515578) | about a year and a half ago | (#41902583)

Himself popping out his mothers vagina?

Re:what they totally forgot (1)

wonkey_monkey (2592601) | about a year and a half ago | (#41904923)

What they forget is that any light from Krypton's system is so many light years away that we would effectively be seeing Superman's homeworld *before* it was destroyed. NDGT didn't think of this?

Simultaneity is relative - if the light we're reveiving is from before Krypton's destruction, then there is a reference frame (albeit one we're unlikely to get ourselves in) in which an observer would perceive that those events are happening at the same time as our present on Earth.

Re:what they totally forgot (1)

bill_mcgonigle (4333) | about a year and a half ago | (#41907577)

Wat? Kal El didn't travel to Earth FTL. Relativistic speeds, sure, but there is no problem with light observation. Well, Brainiac might hack the Hubble and feed false results...

In related news... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41902397)

... Krypton demoted to "dwarf planet"

Re:In related news... (1)

c0lo (1497653) | about a year and a half ago | (#41903001)

... Krypton demoted to "dwarf planet"

The kryptonians should be grateful for still having one, don't you think?

THE GUY DRIVES A PURPLE CADILLAC !! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41902411)

Pimp my ride indeed !! It was cool for Ron Santo and his Eldorado, but this Hollywood guy ?? I knew Carl Sagn, and ths guy is no Carl Sagan !! He comes across as stupid at times !! TV does that, you know !! Makes people stupid !! On both ends !!

Re:THE GUY DRIVES A PURPLE CADILLAC !! (1)

c0lo (1497653) | about a year and a half ago | (#41903031)

TV does that, you know !! Makes people stupid !! On both ends !!

Ah, that explains why my feet feel dumber by the day... (of course it started with the head end, long ago!... otherwise why would I bother to reply on /. ?)

Fi-Sci (1)

LongearedBat (1665481) | about a year and a half ago | (#41902413)

Fiction -> Science

Holy shi (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41902423)

Slashdot literally can't stop sucking Dawkins and Neil DeGrasse Tyson's cock. It's like Reddit in here.

Re:Holy shi (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41902561)

Just like your mom when presented with Paul Ryan's cute little pecker.

Tyson is definitely not my favourite astronomer (1)

Sussurros (2457406) | about a year and a half ago | (#41902553)

Tyson is not my favourite because he was the man behind Pluto's reclassification. But rather than suggest he be demoted to being classified a dwarf astronomer I'd like to point out that astronomers missed a marvellous opportunity.

There are clearly three main types of natural orbiting object (that we know about) - big round gassy planets, smaller round rocky planets, and smaller again not round objects. The boundary between first two is the natural line between giant planets and dwarf planets.

By concentrating on what planets do and what they orbit rather than their inherent nature is equivalent to botanists agreeing to call bumblebees, hummingbirds, and microbats by the same name because they are all a similar size and they all eat nectar.

Neil DeGrasse Tyson is a discredited astronomer in my view not because he was behind Pluto's "demotion" but rather because he has shown that doesn't understand that taxonomy is not about what things do, but rather it is about what things are.

Re:Tyson is definitely not my favourite astronomer (4, Funny)

thestudio_bob (894258) | about a year and a half ago | (#41902587)

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

"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

Mmmm... Jewel Staite is yummy (1)

Sussurros (2457406) | about a year and a half ago | (#41902815)

Jewel's in that video and I only had eyes for her. I think Jewel Staite is one of the sexiest women on the planet - much sexier than Morena Baccarin for example.

Re:Tyson is definitely not my favourite astronomer (1)

Narrowband (2602733) | about a year and a half ago | (#41903119)

He used to be a good scientist. He's become too enthralled with himself since the Pluto debacle. Now he seems more into being a celebrity, and envisions himself as the next Carl Sagan... even planning to film a new Cosmos series. And a purple Cadillac? And a role in a Superman comic book? Please.

And there's got to be some joke in there about deciding Krypton isn't a planet. After all, one of the more valid criticisms of the definition his camp came up with for defining a planet was that it wasn't particularly suited to classifying exoplanets (planets not in our solar system).

Re:Tyson is definitely not my favourite astronomer (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41912589)

So he has become a celebrity, so what? Don't you think that we need someone (preferably lots of someones) to take up the role of promoting science to the public, I think he does it well and Sagan isn't around any more to do it.

Different universe (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41902611)

I always thought that Superman would have been more believable if he was from another universe where the laws of physics were different. Another star system was always silly. I don't see how plausibly overdosing on yellow light makes him super.

Re:Different universe (1)

0111 1110 (518466) | about a year and a half ago | (#41903233)

How would being from another universe change anything? Maybe in his universe humanoids can fly just because doing so is cool, but those laws of physics would obviously not apply in this universe.

Face it. Superman is just not scientific in any way. Only the super-strength might be explainable if his species evolved on a super-earth with much greater mass than our planet. The whole flying thing is just ridiculous.

Re:Different universe (2)

Killjoy_NL (719667) | about a year and a half ago | (#41918343)

What if the flying is explained by properly timed superfarts?
Superman can do anything, so full control of his sphincter isn't beyond the realm of possibilities.
It would also explain why the cape always flutters while he is "floating" in midair.

why LHS2520? (1)

0111 1110 (518466) | about a year and a half ago | (#41903249)

There are quite a few red dwarfs within a 30 ly radius of earth. What's so special about LHS2520? Maybe it was just chosen randomly.

Re:why LHS2520? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41905049)

I hope it got a known exoplanet in or near the habitable zone.

General Zod (1)

CanEHdian (1098955) | about a year and a half ago | (#41903903)

In case you forgot, Dru-Zod is also hails from Krypton... so I wouldn't attract any attention, or else us Terrans will "kneel before Zod".

Re:General Zod (1)

oodaloop (1229816) | about a year and a half ago | (#41905625)

Oh God.

Mitt's home star (1)

Tablizer (95088) | about a year and a half ago | (#41904689)

Next up: Kolob found

Everybody's favourite? (1)

wonkey_monkey (2592601) | about a year and a half ago | (#41904953)

Everybody's favorite astrophysicist

Hey, speak for yourself, buddy. For me, it's E. Margaret Burbidge or nothing.

Re:Everybody's favourite? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41908209)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_May for me.

Re:Everybody's favourite? (1)

FilmedInNoir (1392323) | about a year and a half ago | (#41909285)

Amy Mainzer could ignite the fusion in my gas cloud anytime... uuuh god that was awful. Sorry.

Re:Everybody's favourite? (1)

davewoods (2450314) | about a year and a half ago | (#41911553)

Yeah, that was just about the least provocative thing I have ever read.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...