To answer questions about
Cosmos,
please sign up.
Maurice Frank
Quite a bit is not up to date, and shows that just like folks he criticised, Sagan was pushing some of his agenda of wishes that have not been borne out:
- Understanding about the prevalence of gamma ray bursts and of high mass stars producing supernovas, has led to understanding that galaxies have habitable zones: large parts of galaxies are not compatible with life. this greatly reduces from Sagan's wishful estimates the chances of prevalent alien civilisations in the Milky Way.
- Milky Way now reckoned to be a barred spiral, rather than plain spiral.
- Density of matter in the universe now clearly favours an open universe (infinite). Sagan showed in chapter 10 he preferred and was hoping for a closed back on itself universe. So there is not a hierarchy of universes nested within each other as subatomic particles.
- The Kuiper Belt, outer asteroidal zone, wasn' t known at Cosmos's time. This includes the planetary demotion of Pluto, and affects the description of how planetary systems form.
- Also affecting that and affecting the estimate for alien life: we now know that gas giants' orbits often don't stay stable at outer distances like Jupiter, but they drag on the early star's nebula and decay their orbits inwards to very close to the star, disrupting in the process any inner zone of terrestrial planets. More gas giants now known with orbits very close to their stars, than orbits like Jupiter.
- Even that evolution of advanced life has needed the moon to keep the Earth's axis stable and hence our zones of climate stable, and you contrast that with how chancy it is that the Moon exists: even that has been worked out since Cosmos as does not feature as known at that time.
- Understanding about the prevalence of gamma ray bursts and of high mass stars producing supernovas, has led to understanding that galaxies have habitable zones: large parts of galaxies are not compatible with life. this greatly reduces from Sagan's wishful estimates the chances of prevalent alien civilisations in the Milky Way.
- Milky Way now reckoned to be a barred spiral, rather than plain spiral.
- Density of matter in the universe now clearly favours an open universe (infinite). Sagan showed in chapter 10 he preferred and was hoping for a closed back on itself universe. So there is not a hierarchy of universes nested within each other as subatomic particles.
- The Kuiper Belt, outer asteroidal zone, wasn' t known at Cosmos's time. This includes the planetary demotion of Pluto, and affects the description of how planetary systems form.
- Also affecting that and affecting the estimate for alien life: we now know that gas giants' orbits often don't stay stable at outer distances like Jupiter, but they drag on the early star's nebula and decay their orbits inwards to very close to the star, disrupting in the process any inner zone of terrestrial planets. More gas giants now known with orbits very close to their stars, than orbits like Jupiter.
- Even that evolution of advanced life has needed the moon to keep the Earth's axis stable and hence our zones of climate stable, and you contrast that with how chancy it is that the Moon exists: even that has been worked out since Cosmos as does not feature as known at that time.
Gia Jgarkava
Absolutely worth reading! Because:
1. Unlike other scientists, Carl Sagan is also a good writer, so it is great experience to read even known issues
2. The books significant parts are about the history
3. As a true scientist, Carl Sagan never states facts while discussing theories, but gives scientific evidence, supporting or objecting them.
4. See #1 again :) this is still the best argument for reading
1. Unlike other scientists, Carl Sagan is also a good writer, so it is great experience to read even known issues
2. The books significant parts are about the history
3. As a true scientist, Carl Sagan never states facts while discussing theories, but gives scientific evidence, supporting or objecting them.
4. See #1 again :) this is still the best argument for reading
Cristóbal
Carl Sagan will remain relevant for a while I think. And also, as Michino said: he was a good, entertaining writer.
Aidan
Yes, it is still relevant in 2016, even.
Vance Frickey
Much of Cosmos has aged very well. What's changed since book and documentary were first released mostly are whole new discoveries, not refutations of any specific assertions Sagan may have made.
That said, if you read Sagan's remarks on any topic, you'll want to Google the same topic for (say) wikipedia articles and other online resources which cover what he doesn't.
As Maurice Frank has noted below, we know much more about the universe since Cosmos was first released. The Hubble Space Telescope and other astronomical tools have radically changed how much we know about the universe around us, and the speed at which that knowledge is increasing is also increasing. It's a great time to be alive.
That said, if you read Sagan's remarks on any topic, you'll want to Google the same topic for (say) wikipedia articles and other online resources which cover what he doesn't.
As Maurice Frank has noted below, we know much more about the universe since Cosmos was first released. The Hubble Space Telescope and other astronomical tools have radically changed how much we know about the universe around us, and the speed at which that knowledge is increasing is also increasing. It's a great time to be alive.
Brian Stuhr
Well worth reading for the history of scientific thought alone! Yes, some of the theories current at the time may have been revised or disputed but the book as a whole holds up well. And if you follow it up with the new Cosmos book by Ann Druyan you'll be up to date!
Elyse
Cosmos was revised in 2013 (I think. I'm listening to the audiobook that was published in 2015.) Some theories were proven wrong but most of it is still relevant.
Paul
This is not a book to learn about the latest astronomical discoveries, so criticizing it on the basis that some scientific data that have been discovered after its publication have changed does not make much sense.
To get up to date in astronomy you should read technical books of the last ones to be published and as it happens to every technical book with time and new scientific discoveries the data will change.
The value of the book is not in those astronomical details that have changed due to new discoveries. The value of the book is that it is a great way to approach science in general in a very human and entertaining way.
This is not a book about astronomy, it is a book about the path of science throughout human history, about the curiosity of the human being, about the philosophers and scientists who wondered about the questions of the natural world, about the great scientific discoveries and above all about the love for science, for discovery and for the universe.
It is a book to put us in perspective as to our place on the planet, in the universe and in time. Something that is sorely needed now and will be needed for a long time to come.
If it is relevant in 2015, it is still relevant in 2023. It is relevant because it teaches us the importance of science in our lives, and as long as we live on this planet, in this universe, it will continue to be a relevant book.
To get up to date in astronomy you should read technical books of the last ones to be published and as it happens to every technical book with time and new scientific discoveries the data will change.
The value of the book is not in those astronomical details that have changed due to new discoveries. The value of the book is that it is a great way to approach science in general in a very human and entertaining way.
This is not a book about astronomy, it is a book about the path of science throughout human history, about the curiosity of the human being, about the philosophers and scientists who wondered about the questions of the natural world, about the great scientific discoveries and above all about the love for science, for discovery and for the universe.
It is a book to put us in perspective as to our place on the planet, in the universe and in time. Something that is sorely needed now and will be needed for a long time to come.
If it is relevant in 2015, it is still relevant in 2023. It is relevant because it teaches us the importance of science in our lives, and as long as we live on this planet, in this universe, it will continue to be a relevant book.
Santiago Arizti
I just finished reading it and I noticed some things that were written as "unknown" as of then, but are known today, for example
- nobody knew why the dinosaurs went extinct
- he never mentions things like dark matter in subjects where today we use it as explanation.
- he mentions that scientists suspect protons and neutrons are made of smaller things called quarks (today we take that to be true, not merely a suspicion)
etc.
- nobody knew why the dinosaurs went extinct
- he never mentions things like dark matter in subjects where today we use it as explanation.
- he mentions that scientists suspect protons and neutrons are made of smaller things called quarks (today we take that to be true, not merely a suspicion)
etc.
About Goodreads Q&A
Ask and answer questions about books!
You can pose questions to the Goodreads community with Reader Q&A, or ask your favorite author a question with Ask the Author.
See Featured Authors Answering Questions
Learn more