Back to the thesis: Sara Seager
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 5 ก.พ. 2025
- Astrophysicist Sara Seager accidentally founded a field when she did her PhD on extrasolar planets in the late 1990s. Nature Video takes her back to the thesis in the second episode of our three-part series.
Read more: www.nature.com/...
'...it's when you're in that zone, actually, you're happy. That's how it is.' Absolutely.
Love sara's passion for her subject.
She is so smart and entertaining at the same time.
she's inspired me to get into astrophysics and physics in general, the first time i heard her talk about how she studies the atmospheres and how we can understand them, i fell totally in love with the thought of exoplanet atmospheres !! i thank her and her research so much for my future
She is sooooo amazing! I love her
Ohh I love the clarity and excitement she has for her work. She motivates other people to get into what she does, it's truly inspiring :)
Great. Thanks to Sara and Nature.
I love this series so much. I wish there were more videos
Aren't you ready for your own show? I'll watch it! Isn't there a ton of stuff on exoplanets, now? You don't need to hang out with Plait, Thaller, and Fillipenko....C'mon! Sara! Sara!! Sara!!!
She's soooo awesome. ✌🏾🙃
you open a new door for me, after my stroke I've been scattered all around. you said something to be said about focus on one subject, and CLICK I reali zed what it means to use that happiness!
Loved the pause.
Follow that dream.... Good show Sara.
Great video and great graphix!!!
Did she or the interviewer make that smirk at 0:47? either way gold also 1:52 - 1:58 gold.
So modest...
l read your book and get courage. cause the same experiences. In this moon festival, I hope to own same lucky to meet and enjoy universe together.
I really like this video and think I would love hanging out with Ms. Seager. I do have to say thought, as a professional software engineer... I can't help but wonder just how bad that code in the thesis is... I also wonder, since her experience is a fairly normal one, with programming picked up in an ad-hoc manner as needed, what kind of influence this has over research. They go into it with a preconceived notion of what results they will get, and they keep banging on the code until they mange to make it produce the results they want. That's kind of antithetical to science itself...
Just because you are a software engineer doesn't mean you know how physics study the celestial plane using programming. What kind of software engineering do you do?
ElectroMagneTech My comment wasn't meant as some kind of grave insult. Any person who writes code for a time realizes that the early things they wrote were terrible in many ways. Experience pays. Software engineers, at least, aren't ashamed of having written poor code in their past, that is simply how it must happen. Working at such a high level of abstraction to orchestrate the necessary computations is not something anyone can just jump into and start off as a skilled professional.
There is also in the field of science overall a growing role played by simulations and modelling things in code. This has given rise to a very real concern - most of the code is being written by people who have no training in computer science or great experience in writing code, and they often leave their code out of their publications completely. How are we supposed to be confident of their results if they hide their methods? Most don't do it out of any sort of malice, they do is for a variety of different reasons, from knowing their code isn't magnificent to having used commercial products which they are not permitted to share.
(It doesn't matter what kind of software I write or whether I'm a crazy hobo, my claims stand on their own or not at all. But since you asked, I've written software of all different sorts, from boring billing systems for government systems to building a web-based portal to enable hotels near airports to rent their parking space to travellers to reaction-diffusion simulators to statistical analysis tools. I just started working on a physically-based renderer which emphasize predictive rendering, modelling the actual wavelength and energy distribution of photons as they bounce off of objects in a scene to predict what a real scene would look like in real life.)
Dude, Physicists *KNOW HOW TO GET RESULTS*. They have been getting results for years. The only reason they are coding now is because it is faster and there is a lot more data. They don't need to be high level software engineers. Eventually they will be high level, but for her, she did not need to know HIGH LEVEL computer program.........................because she already knows HIGH LEVEL PHYSICS CALCULATIONS.
Which videos does she or other woman like her says beat in?
I love you Sara, you are so intelligent and beautiful.
@paul w thank you kindly for that generous remark
Anybody know??
l o v e h e r
Yes she's a lovely lady