<p>I don't think that the Discovery Channel would produce science fiction and call it a documentary. The episodes are bases on factual information at the time of production.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-04-05T22:14:01.550Z
That doesn't mean everything is correct. So perhaps I can expand on the original question and ask whether theories, which are still disputed in the community, were included with no mention to that fact.
user3371321
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-04-05T22:30:38.890Z
You would have to cite examples since I don't remember what was said in the entire series.
LDC3
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-04-06T10:05:26.907Z
My background is in no way related to this area; so even if it does happen it is unlikely that I would know about it. The original question was answered so I'll consider your reply correct. Thanks.
user3371321
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-04-05T21:43:00.260Z
2014-04-05T21:43:00.260Z
LDC3
<p><s>The documentary/mini-series <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_the_Universe_Works" rel="nofollow">How the Universe Works</a> is based on scientific evidence and according to what is known nowadays, or sheer bunk?</s></p>

<p>Throughout the series, are there any particular topics which are still disputed among the scientific community and that were portrayed in a different light than they should've had been?</p>

<hr>

<p>I've only watched a few episodes but they always talk in a way that gives you the feeling everything is well-established and accepted but that might not be the case. I figured that an astronomer that watched the series would have remember if this happened or not.</p>

<p>I understand the subjects were researched and there is footage of known scientists in the episodes, but that doesn't mean everyone agrees with them. (By everyone I mean the most part of scientists working on those subjects, and not literally every single one of them.)</p>

<p>To give you an example, on the second episode they state that there are massive black holes at the center of galaxies. From my perspective (i.e. of someone which is not an astronomer) if they say so it's because it's probably true. However, in the real world <em>maybe</em> this is a highly disputed theory and a lot of astronomers disagree with this stance, and they're note telling the audience about it. Why would they do that? I don't know. I don't know if they did, I'm just asking if someone knows whether it happened, or if anyone saw something in the series with which they disagree.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-11-17T23:48:11.097Z
There's very good evidence of supermassive black holes at the center of galaxies, beyond "probably true".   To the scientist, there are different levels of certainty.  Look up 5 sigma certainty or 68–95–99.7 rule.   Stars have been observed whipping around what can only be an enormously dense but very dark object at the center of our milky way and quasars in distant galaxies are difficult to explain without supermassive black holes (there is legit uncertainty on how exactly a black hole behaves), but there's very good confidence in the supermassive black hole theory.  It's sound.
userLTK
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-04-07T14:09:58.673Z
What concept specifically are you concerned about? I don't think you can declare an entire series of material covering hundreds of topics broadly either scientifically sound or bunk. There's no useful information to be had from that. What are you asking about specifically?
Robert Cartaino
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-04-07T16:13:44.330Z
I've edited the question, hopefully it is more clear now.
user3371321
<universe><cosmology>
"How the Universe Works": is it scientifically accurate?
user3371321
# "How the Universe Works": is it scientifically accurate?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2014-04-05)

~~The documentary/mini-series [How the Universe Works](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_the_Universe_Works) is based on scientific evidence and according to what is known nowadays, or sheer bunk?~~

Throughout the series, are there any particular topics which are still disputed among the scientific community and that were portrayed in a different light than they should've had been?

---

I've only watched a few episodes but they always talk in a way that gives you the feeling everything is well-established and accepted but that might not be the case. I figured that an astronomer that watched the series would have remember if this happened or not.

I understand the subjects were researched and there is footage of known scientists in the episodes, but that doesn't mean everyone agrees with them. (By everyone I mean the most part of scientists working on those subjects, and not literally every single one of them.)

To give you an example, on the second episode they state that there are massive black holes at the center of galaxies. From my perspective (i.e. of someone which is not an astronomer) if they say so it's because it's probably true. However, in the real world *maybe* this is a highly disputed theory and a lot of astronomers disagree with this stance, and they're note telling the audience about it. Why would they do that? I don't know. I don't know if they did, I'm just asking if someone knows whether it happened, or if anyone saw something in the series with which they disagree.

**Tags:** universe, cosmology

> **Comments:**
> **username_2**: What concept specifically are you concerned about? I don't think you can declare an entire series of material covering hundreds of topics broadly either scientifically sound or bunk. There's no useful information to be had from that. What are you asking about specifically?  
> **username_0**: I've edited the question, hopefully it is more clear now.  
> **username_1**: There's very good evidence of supermassive black holes at the center of galaxies, beyond "probably true".   To the scientist, there are different levels of certainty.  Look up 5 sigma certainty or 68–95–99.7 rule.   Stars have been observed whipping around what can only be an enormously dense but very dark object at the center of our milky way and quasars in distant galaxies are difficult to explain without supermassive black holes (there is legit uncertainty on how exactly a black hole behaves), but there's very good confidence in the supermassive black hole theory.  It's sound.  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_3 on 2014-04-05. Score: 0 | Accepted answer

I don't think that the Discovery Channel would produce science fiction and call it a documentary. The episodes are bases on factual information at the time of production.

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: That doesn't mean everything is correct. So perhaps I can expand on the original question and ask whether theories, which are still disputed in the community, were included with no mention to that fact.  
> **username_3**: You would have to cite examples since I don't remember what was said in the entire series.  
> **username_0**: My background is in no way related to this area; so even if it does happen it is unlikely that I would know about it. The original question was answered so I'll consider your reply correct. Thanks.  

---

