Crwthod A lot more amusing than I thought it would be.

CrawlerChunky In truth, there is barely enough story here to make a film.

Kien Navarro Exactly the movie you think it is, but not the movie you want it to be.

Mathilde the Guild Although I seem to have had higher expectations than I thought, the movie is super entertaining.

Bruce Wilner I used to love this show. It revealed fascinating developments at the forefront of neuroscience, genetics, exobiology, and so forth.It has degenerated to nearly useless. I shall provide an example drawn from this evening's new episode, "Do We Live in the Matrix?" whereby it is opined--and, ostensibly, justified--that we could very well be living in a computer simulation.We meet a renowned Swiss AI expert. He tells us there's no need to express pi in so many zillions of digits that wrap around the globe ad infinitum: we can just put "C/d"--where, of course, C is circumference and d is diameter.Uh . . . the difference is that the first one is practical (I can measure off 3.14159... inches.) The other is purely notational (I cannot measure off C/d inches.)The same expert tells us that, "I can express the entire universe in ten lines of code," and beams with pride as he presents an extremely vague and general algorithm in an ALGOL-like PDL.Uh . . . in a suitably high-level language, I can express the entire universe in ONE SYMBOL of code. SO WHAT: what PRACTICAL, IMPLEMENTABLE purpose is accomplished?Another scientist shows some symmetric matrices to mathematicians without any commentary and is disappointed that they don't get excited. When he builds corresponding models of atomic structures, then everyone's excited.Perhaps if he had TOLD them they were looking at symmetric spin tensors within a Lie algebra, they would have achieved a meaningful apotheosis. Instead, we hear snippets of some meaningless argument about bits and bytes and shmits.(I recall from a previous episode--although it's in the same vein--that some physicist claimed that, if he builds such and such a fiber optic circuit, he can go backwards in time by 10 to the -18 seconds. I presume that even a physicist realizes that this is completely unmeasurable and thus unverifiable: sending the data from the measuring device to the managing computer takes literally billions of times longer than the 10 to the -18 seconds putatively recovered. I know, I know, physicists pooh-pooh anything that isn't physics as beneath them, but I don't think that's the issue here.)I SEE WHAT THE PROBLEM IS HERE: the producers of the show have ZERO understanding of the concepts being discussed, Morgan Freeman's golden throat notwithstanding. This, combined with the PERPETUAL problem that participating experts in TV shows experience, viz., that pieces and snippets of their cogent essays are quoted out of context, results in a stream of meaningless dribble that endeavors to sound technical in its misapplied terminological splendor but ends up delivering just so much imbecility in sheep's clothing, albeit dressy and richly ornamented.What a PROFOUND disappointment!(FYI, the popular go-back-in-time theme is utterly impossible. This is trivially easy to demonstrate. Suppose I set a box on my kitchen table and send it into the past. IT WOULD HAVE BEEN THERE YESTERDAY! Case closed.)

RNMorton So I sort of checked in once in awhile, it seemed like a lot of it was speculation passed off as hard-science possibility (a general trait of the Discovery cable group). Then I watched the episode on the extinction of religion. The theory was that when something reaches a percentage "tipping point" it is headed for extinction. To prove that religion might be headed for extinction the "mathematician" went into a store and ordered something in a no longer used Incan dialect. No one understood him (he wouldn't have been understood using many existing languages, but whatever). Looking at a decrease in religious affiliation, he hypothesized that at some point religion will also hit a "tipping point" like the Incan language, where it heads towards extinction. Now this all assumes that religious affiliation will continue to decline (who knows?) and also ignores that the Jewish religion - a distinct minority since its inception 4,000 years ago - is still going strong. Figuratively I sat with my mouth agape. As the teacher said to Adam Sandler in Billy Madison, we are all dumber for having listened to you. Pass 'em by.

Mark Fitzgibbon Circular reasoning, tautologies, you name it - all in the name of walking 'a line between' science and religion.The claims, suppositions and assumptions of the scriptwriters are puerile to say the least.The entire series pushes people towards the possibility of the 'intelligent design' theory of creationism rather than expressing the wonder of the universe through truth - scientific progress and knowledge from the ancient Greks and Egyptians, through Copernicus and Newton to Einstein and Hawking.It was definitely scared of offending those whose minds are hobbled by religion - so much so that it makes no mention of the fact that basic evolutionary theory and proof (e.g. the evolution of the eye) destroys the creation and the intelligent design fallacies.Also it avoids the destruction of creationism (a universe <7000 years old) through basic astronomy, the visible universe and the nature of light and its speed.All of these are irrefutable but the entire series avoids anything like this in favor of puerile Disneyland New Age mysticism, intellectual cowardice and pseudoscience.The graphics were nice and that is the only thing that got it 1 mark out of 10 - otherwise it would be a zero.With TV science programs like this I can now understand why evolution is not taught in American schools - pathetic.

Hassan Tanvir A huge disappointment for people who're looking for actual latest information & knowledge about Stars, Galaxies, Planets & Universe. I was hoping this would be more about Space & time, NASA's new missions & mysteries of the Cosmos but its all about newbie scientists sharing their weird ideas which they can't even prove. This season has totally drifted away from the word "WORMHOLE" & into information overload which basically causes a loss of interest since as viewer i'm not interested in what Mr. XYZ believes about reality, rather i'm interested in what's going on the far reaches of space & time & whats the latest on Wormholes, Darkmatter, Darkenergy, Blackholes, Supernovae etc. If it wasn't for Mr. Freeman I don't think this show would have gathered any significant audience at all. My review, a confused show.