What a pleasant surprise to see that they used my illustration of the universe in the thumbnail of this video... The video is great, the questions they chose and the eloquent answers made my head explode with emotion... thank you!!!
@wavemaker54
2 жыл бұрын
I remember how exciting it was when modem speed doubled from 14 to 28 kilobytes per second. Downloading a picture only took less than a half hour.
@perpetualbystander4516
2 жыл бұрын
I had a 56KB modem, but very slow too. 😴
@blitzmotorscooters1635
2 жыл бұрын
send these videos to your friends, grow this underated channel. Year after year, I do not see enough subs for this channel. Fraser is a gem and taken for granted. Grow interest by sharing the content.
@muzic3977
2 жыл бұрын
When realize that Lunar Gateway station in constant sunlight doesn't have deal with the two week long lunar, it started more sense for me.
@frasercain
2 жыл бұрын
Wow, great point. I'd totally forgotten about that too.
@Chamuzi
2 жыл бұрын
Hi Fraser. I had to pause the video and come back to the room about a minute in to write this message. That first question I believe is from Mr. Dobelina (pronounced knob), Mr. Bob Dobelina. Which is an excellent hip hop song from the early to mid-90s. Very good song. I figured someone may not have explained the reference, as I doubt that is an actual name :). Great musical reference. Very obscure.
@longboardfella5306
2 жыл бұрын
Nice episode Fraser. You've said a couple of times now that the shuttle was more powerful than the SLS but that's not my reading of sources. Shuttle was 7million pounds at liftoff. SLS at 8million. Four rs25 engines on the SLS (vs shuttle 3) and extended boosters as well. The shuttle was only ever a heavy lift LEO machine. I agree the Frankenstein SLS can only ever be short term. We need full reusability and also studies on ways to minimise upper atmosphere impact as you highlight. Thanks!
@DustinCable
2 жыл бұрын
Question: We seem to treat the photosphere of the sun as a "surface" but If I had spaceship impervious to heat/radiation and dropped below the photosphere, would I even notice? How deep do you need go before reaching anything like the density of Earth's atmosphere? Are stars like ours just large puffy clouds with linearly increasing density until you hit the core? Is the photosphere just a visual artifact? Could something orbit the sun within the photosphere? Thanks!
@beesod6412
2 жыл бұрын
Smart Phone emergency Satellite use will save lives. I'm all for it! Thank's Fraser!
@isaackitone
2 жыл бұрын
It's ok to have a rant once in a while. It what keeps us sane.
@ibewcountry
2 жыл бұрын
Your conversation / ideas / insights starting at 32:54: are profound and mind bending !!! You have a new fan in me because of it ! We are NOT worthy oh rantful one ! WE ARE NOT WORTHY !
@Life_42
2 жыл бұрын
I greatly enjoy your videos. They are part of my life now. Thank you sir!
@Mr_Kyle_
4 ай бұрын
Hi Fraser, love the show, and love the question about raditaion and Europa. A follow-up question, would the thick ice sheet actually be potentially preventing the chance for life in the Europa ocean? Arguably, we have life on earth because the surface is exposed to radiation from the sun, so wouldn't it be beneficial for these ocean moon worlds to be in a sweet spot of getting radiation into the right areas in order for life to thrive, in addition to any thermal heating that may be coming from the interior of the moon itself?
@collindwebb
2 жыл бұрын
I found that Mick West is a good example of how to talk to conspiracy theorists from a sane and effective point of view.
@rogerwilco1777
2 жыл бұрын
his videos are quick and to the point too..
@Nk36745
2 жыл бұрын
Great episode
@lenwhatever4187
2 жыл бұрын
With regard to satellites blocking skies and astronomy. What I do not see any one say is that this is a temporary problem. Right now, putting large observatories in space is already possible. It is a matter of time before we decide to do that. It will only be a few years (I expect by 2100) before space or the Moon surface will be the place for observatories. So really the question is what do we do until then? Is it worth while accelerating infrastructure roll out in space or should we stop adding satellites until space infrastructure catches up? The obvious point here is that space infrastructure will likely be brighter than starlink. So the only way to get to that point of being able to do a better job of scanning our skies for asteroids (or whatever else we fell like) is to put up with bright bits in the sky until we get better space observatories. If this is really important to us, the money to assemble in space observatories is all that is needed, the technology to assemble them in space has been here since we started putting space stations together in space. So the real answer, is that we as humans, don't see this as that important. Talk to your government official if you feel their spending of your money is misplaced and should be spent in this area. Get your friends to do likewise. It really is that simple. The next ground based observatory was downsized for only one reason, money.
@domjrl
2 жыл бұрын
Question: What would a war in space look like in the 21st Century? Would a super power conflict end up cutting off our access to low earth orbit and for how long? What would be the overall effect?
@isaackitone
2 жыл бұрын
We better have weapons that vaporise the target by then, these exploding weapons of today cannot cleanly fight space wars.
@michaelconnaireoates5344
2 жыл бұрын
Dropping a pebble behind you as your target is zooming by and hacks
@Life_42
2 жыл бұрын
All we really need to focus is on planetary protection from the dangers lurking in space.
@emmanuelmahuni8163
2 жыл бұрын
Hi Fraser, about @19:00 about Starlink, you asked if someone could figure out... I've asked Elon, other KZitemrs this question and suggestion to solve the astronomy issue, but it seems none read my comments or tweets. The idea is to put small telescopes at the back of Starlink satellites, then use them as a huge telemetry. Imagine the kind of telescopes humans would have. SpaceX can make money from allowing access to these telescopes and astronomers will have more data and views than they ever had. Each satellites can have multiple or a single different type of optical instrument for different type of observations. This way it's a win win. Internet plus astronomy solved.
@frasercain
2 жыл бұрын
Small telescopes aren't that useful compared to giant Earth-based scopes. And there's no easy way to connect them together.
@emmanuelmahuni8163
2 жыл бұрын
@@frasercain oh I see, but it sounds like it's not impossible, let's just say they can be connected with some clever software, Elon is good at these kind of problems... The SATs already have this kind of meshing and connectivity, they know where each other is. I'm sure with a clever algorithm keeping track of let's say a galaxy shouldn't be a problem. What are the other possible issues one can encounter? What I'm asking here is, are there optics good enough to mount on a Starlink sat, keeping in mind that we are swamming v2 SATs that can carry large mirrors of up to 3 metres in diameter.
@AnthonyBouttell
2 жыл бұрын
Uh huh… 1. The satellites are travelling way too fast to be of any use as an observation platform. 2. The satellites are too small to add a mirror and and all the instruments they would require. 3. any satellite that had the right hardware to act as a telescope, would cost far too much to be profitable.
@frasercain
2 жыл бұрын
No, there's no way to do it. The solution is for Musk to help launch additional space telescopes that fly above the Starlinks
@69Solo
2 жыл бұрын
21:11 well said! 👏
@mitseraffej5812
2 жыл бұрын
10:30 Missions to Europa. I understand that the bearings in Hubble telescopes attitude control reaction wheels have been eroded by high energy particles, and that is in low earth orbit and somewhat protected by earth’s magnetosphere. How long would any mechanical equipment last on Europe’s surface?
@daos3300
2 жыл бұрын
Q: what's your take on the proposal to focus on venus before mars in terms of crewed human missions (not to the surface obv), both as a practice run for future mars trips and scientific data gathering, as presented recently at the IAC in paris. the idea seems to have a lot going for it. i believe nasa's chief economist, alexander macdonald, is a proponent.
@ToomasVane
2 жыл бұрын
I had a similar situation with wifi. Me and my friend got drunk and decided to go on a bustrip to Lithuania. Arrived at 5AM, hugged a wall of a mall to get wifi with a laptop, and booked a hotel. Year was 2009.
@tinal.hennessey8105
Жыл бұрын
💯 Great video!
@oisnowy5368
2 жыл бұрын
I find it weird Fraser thought that StarLink would provide huge access to those unable to pay for StarLink. It's a commercial company.
@georgespalding7640
2 жыл бұрын
The fact that the new satellites are taking away the clear night sky should not be taken so lightly in the conversation. Right now we are building Billion dollar telescopes on Earth that were assumed to have an unobstructed VIEW of the Stars when they were first thought of. Why isn't there some kind of an International Astronomical panel who can approve or disapprove of these satellites? For Frasier or anyone else who has a passion for astronomy, they must be concerned about its future and how the Internet technology will affect it.
@evropej
2 жыл бұрын
It’s an endless universe with no bounds! You will never see the end no matter how far you go or how long you wait! Endless! The human has limits, math does not!
@redbaronsnoopy2346
2 жыл бұрын
Thank you, always great info. Luv the rant, cathartic. "Those" people are not "believers" they are just Contrarians, the original Trolls. Just life's gremlins, but only here were they believe they have anonymity, which they do not. I myself live in Freedonia! Duck Soup anyone? Take care, Dr Cain.
@jeffmathers355
Жыл бұрын
Water/ice is also a great thermal insulator. Almost sounds like a perfect solution.
@charlesrichardson8635
2 жыл бұрын
About using ice to shield a spacecraft. You don't get to use it. You have it for a shield. If you use in any way you lose your shielding. It's shielding and mass. A problem with using water as a shield is you need more of it if you are leaving the Earth vs. leaving Saturn. You are farther down in the Sun's gravity well so you need more energy to move away but you need more shielding.
@suyapajimenez516
2 жыл бұрын
The thin layers of the jwst aren’t vulnerable to tear or being damaged for space travelers
@blitzmotorscooters1635
2 жыл бұрын
great content as usual.
@paai74
2 жыл бұрын
Where can a leave a longer question about time dilation?
@chrisoconnell8432
2 жыл бұрын
Starlink just connected a school in the Amazon, so they are serving the underserved regions now, just not all of them. When Starlink first launch their satellites required a ground based station to relay the data through so only areas with existing infrastructure could use it. But now they are launching V1.5 satellites which can interconnect via laser with each other so ground stations are no longer required. This has allowed then to serve the south pole and other remote areas. As more V1.5 and V2 satellites are launched more remote/underserved areas can be reached. Not to mention the 15,000 terminals they donated to Ukraine, showing profit is not their only motivator.
@jari2018
2 жыл бұрын
the most dangereous will be those astreoid and comets (+ rocks) that come from interstellar space and some sling shot by black holes to 100 km second or even faster - the galactic black hole might throw them out at 1000 km/s - Maybe we are not aware just now but they should be there if we can find them
@Rod934
2 жыл бұрын
I think satellite companies should also be required to pay into an international fund for research satellites to offset their interference in astronomy, including asteroid hunting. The justification would be that a single company doesn't get to unilaterally make decisions for the entire world. I believe it's important that this rule be at the heart of space law. An additional benefit would also be that less wealthy nations would also have access to satellite research since they would be internationally owned and operated.
@KenMathis1
2 жыл бұрын
Question: Assuming we could directly image it and laser strength isn't an issue, what's the farthest exoplanet we could hit with a laser? For example, if we want to hit an exoplanet planet 100 light years away, we'd have to be able to predict it's position 100 years from now based on data of where it was 100 years ago. As the exoplanet gets farther way, the error bars on those calculations would grow to the point where we wouldn't be able to target the exoplanet's future position with any degree of certainty. What is that distance?
@r3b3lvegan89
2 жыл бұрын
“If you want to understand the secrets of the universe, think in terms of energy frequency and vibration” I love that einistein told the reporter when asked what’s it like to be the smartest man alive?” He replied “ask Tesla” Einstein: “reality is merely an illusion; albeit a very persistent one” peace to all
@Stephen-vu2gk
2 жыл бұрын
Perhaps a space based mega-constellation would make a better asteroid detection system than ground based telescopes 🧐
@jeffstillman9508
2 жыл бұрын
Here's a question that perplexes me: The current theory is that the rate of expansion of the Universe is accelerating. As I understand it, this is based on the red-shift of galaxies and that the measured red-shift is greater the more distant the galaxy. While the measured red-shift increases with distance so does the time it takes for the light of the measured red-shift to reach us. So, we're actually measuring historical red-shift, and the velocity of the most distant red-shift galaxies is the velocity they had some 12 billion years ago. I can only assume that I'm missing something that the simplified lay-person explanations don't include, otherwise, it would seem more likely that the expansion of the universe is actually slowing down, since the nearest red-shifted galaxies, like Andromeda, are less red-shifted and is more recent measure of expansion.
@mrbaab5932
Жыл бұрын
You aren't going to see a laser without a narrow band filter for a common visible laser or LED laser, or better a tunable filter to scan the visible spectrum or the full spectrum of your camera.
@tantuncag
2 жыл бұрын
I loved the Bobiverse series by Dennis E. Taylor. I'd read the whole series a while ago based on your suggestion, so thank you. When I think about Von Neumann Probes, in reality, it is easier said than done, almost impossible in fact. In order to manufacture even a single chip, you need whole industries, mining operations, factories, vehicles and whatnot. Not to mention that the said planet might be devoid of a certain materials needed to replicate the probe. Then the whole operation would cease to exist. What's your thoughts on this?
@NP-sd9md
2 жыл бұрын
Great series. I also really liked “children of time” by adrian tchaikovsky
@agentdarkboote
Жыл бұрын
This is a little late lol, but you could make chips more simply than we do today - the reason the process is so complex is to make them cheap and to take advantage of economies of scale. You can make incredibly pure silicon in many ways, but some of them are prohibited now because of cost, whereas for a Von Neumann probe this wouldn't be a factor. The probe could carry a lot of the fab with it, mining equipment, spectrometers, chemicals etc. from it's planet of origin. And it's not anticipated that it must only a short stay on the planet, it could stay there working for centuries and still colonize the galaxy in a few million years. Probably most terrestrial planets would have the required materials, or ones that would do in a pinch with sufficiently advanced technology, but if a probe ever got to a planet that didn't have what it needed, that probe would simply not replicate. But as long as the average probe could make more than one copy of itself, the number would still grow exponentially.
@tantuncag
Жыл бұрын
I actually agree with your explanation@@agentdarkboote. After I wrote this I made a quick research on this and I came up with a similar conclusion. Another factor is the competitive nature of our capitalist system. Most of our products are manufactured in an efficient system that's based on profits and Von Neumann probes won't have that issue so they don't need to be super efficient like our production industries and as you've pointed out, they have all the time in the world. And yes, in the future there may be simpler ways of producing certain things that are overly complicated today.
@mitseraffej5812
2 жыл бұрын
13:25 Starlink and other constellations inhibiting earthbound astronomy. Maybe the owners of the constellations should be compelled to build, launch and provide time on orbital telescopes to earthbound astronomers, both professional and amateur. This would surely be within the capability of companies like SpaceX.
@richard--s
2 жыл бұрын
What's the point of getting faster to Mars (with nuclear rockets) "to avoid space radiation" when you are pretty much in space environment on Mars and get all the space radiation there too? ;-) Yes, you can dig down and hide yourself in the underground of Mars, but what a miserably life that would be under ground level and it has to be done first - while being without any radiation shelter on Mars that you also would have on your trip to Mars. And you still can do a trip to and from Mars only every 2 years, when the planets are close together. There is no win. You are out in space envionment for 3 years or for 2.5 years. And Mars is space environment.
@jct1616
2 жыл бұрын
17:57 I Agree in principal holding Satellite companies to their marketing promise of internet for the 50% of terrains not connected. Space is hard. Hasn’t all so far gone bankrupt, hence Elon repeating first goal for Starlink is not to go bankrupt?
@jkn6644
2 жыл бұрын
SpaceX Starship can lift 8 m wide 100 ton satellite to LEO. Cost < 10 M$. (They might make even bigger rocket.) Soon ground based astronomy is not needed.
@alexandermartins65
2 жыл бұрын
Question: I hear that the Sun's core is approx. Earth's size. Can the core of a dead star become a rocky planet?
@luism5514
2 жыл бұрын
Nuclear power and carbon capture would negate a lot of the adverse effects of climate change if scaled correctly. Carbon capture does not have to be big sucking fans either, it can be natural greenery, both on land and in sea.
@richarddeese1991
2 жыл бұрын
Thanks. Moonbase or Gateway? I'll take (at least) one of each, if you don't mind. tavi.
@rogerwilco1777
2 жыл бұрын
1st you get the Gateway, then you get the MoonBase, then you get the MoonWomen
@GrouchyHaggis
2 жыл бұрын
The solution (IMO) for satellite constellations is (with cheaper launches the more viable it becomes ofc) public owned (open source) space based telescopes removing the need for ground based optical telescopes. I get the astronomy arguments of constellations, but to the naked eye they're practically unnoticeable (unless you know) but the positives are just too great to not advance the tech. (Hopefully in future we can darken or find better techniques of course)
@mitseraffej5812
2 жыл бұрын
9:08 “Water protects from radiation”. Only high energy particles only I thought, not electromagnetic radiation. High energy particles is what Jupiter’s radiation belts are I assume.
@MusikCassette
2 жыл бұрын
Question: What is the point of bringing Humans down to the Lunar surface?
@Bargeral
2 жыл бұрын
Given that the rest of the universe may not be using base 10 math, how would aliens send us Pi?
@AmitAviv99
2 жыл бұрын
Question: What is the white gas/vapour that can be seen leaking from the sides of the SLS
@Daltem
2 жыл бұрын
If you're talking about 38:00 (and most other cases) Then it's coolant, as the thrusters need to be kept pretty cold to work properly
@kindlin
2 жыл бұрын
It's frost - ice. The propellant is so cold that it instantly freezes the air and you get insta clouds/fog/frost. During a rocket launch, you'll see massive sheets of white falling off of almost any space bound rocket, and that's all water ice accumulated on the surface just from the air because the fuel is so cold. It's so cold because most rockets use some or both cryogenic fuels. Liquid Oxygen is about -200°C, and liquid hydrogen is even colder, within about 20°C(K) of absolute zero.
@Aeolus_ca
Жыл бұрын
I wanna play catch with a primordial black hole like a base ball is this at all possible?
@Corvaire
2 жыл бұрын
Occasionally you'll come across "Alien Believers" that will bring up the argument that they are so advanced they can't be seen because they are so advanced and choose not to. If you come across them, just remind them that no matter how advanced they are they can't erase their past. As in, they had to have followed an evolutionairy process there which they would leave past progress in the Universe. They can't go back an erase their past because we see backwards in time. Yw! ;O)-
@greggweber9967
2 жыл бұрын
11:10 As you use water for propellant you lose your shielding.
@frankyboy4409
2 жыл бұрын
Something about the gateway I haven't quite understood yet ... whats the advantage compared to - lets say - flying the same trajectory directly? I.e. when you fly up from earth you got to sync your speed and orbit with the gateway anyway, so you would already be on the same trajectory to the moon, and the same applies on the other end, so why put the gateway in the middle of that journey?
@fireofenergy
2 жыл бұрын
Okay, speaking of golf ball sized universes, would you agree that *the constant of the* speed of light would be different (like it might take a long time just to transverse that little distance)?
@doncarlodivargas5497
2 жыл бұрын
Perhaps all those low flying satellites could have a camera on the top filming the space and a display on the bottom showing the view the satellite is blocking, making the satellite invisible for astronomers?
@adzaaahhh
2 жыл бұрын
Hey Fraser, love your shows and this one was no exception. I 100% share your exasperation with conspiracy theorists! To quote the late, great Carl Sagan: “You can't convince a believer of anything; for their belief is not based on evidence, it's based on a deep-seated need to believe.” However, I can't help but think you kind of downplayed the elephant in the room with Starlink, namely the ramifications re space junk/possible Kessler effect. Seems to me, 42,000 extra objects whizzing around in LEO is a heck of alot to keep track of by anyone's standards, and there is no international regulatory body to ensure the flight paths of these and other similar satellites remain clear - as far as I'm aware(?). It would potentially only take one, or a fragment of one to see a future manned space launch end in tragedy... unless I'm missing something here..?
@frasercain
2 жыл бұрын
As I mentioned in the video, if the Starlinks do create space junk, they'll all re-enter within a year or so cleaning it all up again.
@rosieserna2119
2 жыл бұрын
Is there different images every day or every so often do they effect anything in the universe?
@FredBennett-q5e
Жыл бұрын
Could we make the photons streaming from the sun do mechanical work? I'm envisioning a huge waterwheel in space.
@floridarich9250
2 жыл бұрын
"Equalizing OPPORTUNITY for wealth. Made just the slightest adjustment to your comment. Yw. 14:23 The more people there are participating and competing in the global marketplace, the better off all of us will be. And yes, Starlink will do just that.🙂
@normanhairston1411
2 жыл бұрын
Global WiFi... A decade from now, two explores are on Antarctica trudging toward the south pole. One of them suddenly has a heart attack and keels over. His partner gets on his cell phone and calls his local doctor. The guy relates that his friend has just dropped dead. The doctor says, OK, lets make sure that he is really dead. The doctor hears the guy drop the phone, trudge trudge in the snow, blam blam, more trudging in the snow, and the guy says, "OK, now what?"
@replica1052
2 жыл бұрын
infinite acceleration gives the brain the ability to grasp/fathom infinite space (infinite acceleration eleminates time --> time is inertia)
@bassangler73
2 жыл бұрын
I used to get excited to go out and watch Iridium Satellites flare, now satellites do nothing but photo bomb astrophotography! It is cool to get an Iridium Sat in frame flaring but the constant streaks of light from Satellites and Aircraft have made Astrophotography next to impossible here..It doesn't help that I live under the Dallas / Fort Worth flyway and under the Memphis flyway, they actually intersect overhead..
@hoang.allen1
2 жыл бұрын
So was the universe at the time of the big bang 13.8 light years in all directions from us today?
@Raz.C
2 жыл бұрын
re - 7:30 It's beautiful, in a way... Also, in an utterly pointless kind of way, it also proves space-deniers to be delusional. The reason I say that it's pointless is that it is undeniable, verifiable, concrete, demonstrable evidence that satellites are currently flying through the medium of space and that said medium is a vacuum and NOT liquid water!! Unfortunately, for those space-deniers out there, it's just more 'lies' for them to deny. The evidence is only evidence to those who already know that space is objectively real. Deniers gonna deny... Still... It's beautiful, in a way, isn't it?
@tompava3923
2 жыл бұрын
Could use more info on the lava tubes on the moon. How widespread are they? How is temperature measured within if there is no atmosphere?
@jasongannon7676
2 жыл бұрын
Fraser much of conspiracy theories are suffering from undiagnosed illnesses like schizophrenia. I fill more sorry for them than frustrated.
@NP-sd9md
2 жыл бұрын
13:19 What would happen if a hostile nation attacked one of these low constellations, causing several to “disassemble”? Could they produce enough orbital junk to mess with reliable gps? comms? radio based science?
@ekaa.3189
2 жыл бұрын
SpaceX and Methane production. They have to make Methane on Mars. That is non trivial. In fact the whole colonization enterprise is non trivial. At the peak they will be sending 1000 Starships to Mars, and return flights every conjunction. Making the methane for them, on both Earth and Mars, is just a minor cog in that effort.
@kdub3890
2 жыл бұрын
RE: religious objections...scientists are not above the same types of psychological impediments. Fred Hoyle objected vehemently to the Big Bang proposal mainly because he thought it sounded a little too much like Creationism and he wasn't having it.
@user-jx9dm8tj9j
Жыл бұрын
Regarding your comments on religion vs. science; you should invite Dr. Bart Ehrman on your show. He is a universally respected biblical scholar and serious historian with mass appeal.
@shadowxsm
2 жыл бұрын
early hype !
@jack00scarecrow
2 жыл бұрын
yippy
@alangarland8571
2 жыл бұрын
The only thing I know is that there are things I don't know.
@scottmedchill4210
2 жыл бұрын
Question: Have we ever found any asteroids that contain metallic hydrogen in their composition? Isn't it possible they were formed in the early solar system when planetoids collided with Jupiter or Saturn and knocked some of the solid metallic hydrogen into space?
@frasercain
2 жыл бұрын
You need the pressure of Jupiter's interior to keep the metallic hydrogen... metallic. If it gets out, then it just turns into regular hydrogen again in the low pressure environment of space.
@MusikCassette
2 жыл бұрын
@@frasercain I thought under enough pressure it would become more or less stable.
@Raz.C
2 жыл бұрын
@@MusikCassette It becomes stable *at that pressure.* Have a look at the video in the link. The CO2 would normally go from solid (dry ice) into a gas, but because of the pressure chamber it's locked in, it goes from solid to liquid. However, the instant that the pressure is released, the CO2 molecules gain energy from the decrease in pressure and thus vaporise once more (ie - become gaseous). The same would happen for metallic hydrogen. So long as you were able to maintain the pressure necessary to constrict the H2 molecules so tightly together, that they form a metal-like lattice, then it would remain stable. However, as soon as that pressure is released, the H2 molecules would revert to whatever their normal state is, for the pressure that they find themselves in (ie- gas or liquid). kzitem.info/news/bejne/woqjvYl4s6Clgno
@MusikCassette
2 жыл бұрын
@@Raz.C So what was the hype about? I thought it wer theorised, that once brought into a metallic structure it could keep that at lower pressures. I remember there was something about it being a high temperature super conductor. was the idea, to induce a magnetic field to keep up the pressure?
@Raz.C
2 жыл бұрын
@@MusikCassette I don't know what you're referring to. If I had to guess, though, I'd suggest that the "lower pressures" were still enormously higher than what we'd consider normal atmospheric pressure, but that they were lower than what one might find in the core of a gas giant.
@DasWookie
2 жыл бұрын
Question: How is it that the hot plasma in space hasn't cooled after eons (billions!) of years to the point that it has returned back to hydrogen and helium in a non ionized state? Voyager is flying through a plasma wall, and our solar system is full of plasma from our sun. How does this plasma not lose it's energy and heat to the cold of space?
@aaronperelmuter8433
2 жыл бұрын
Have you heard of a vacuum flask, aka thermos flask? Or dual pane windows, which for all intents and purposes could be thought of as 2 pieces of glass separated by a vacuum. The common theme here is the vacuum. For heat to be exchanged, by the very definition of the concept, there has to be more than one participant in said exchange. What exactly is the plasma supposed to warm up, thereby cooling the plasma? If there is no air, no atmosphere, etc in intergalactic space, then there’s nothing and nowhere for the heat of the plasma to drain into, no heat sink in a manner of speaking. And if there’s nothing for the heat to sink into, the only place it can be is where it currently is, in the plasma. Hope that helps mate.👍
@PetraKann
2 жыл бұрын
Not all galaxies are red shifted. Andromeda for example is blue shifted and is predicted to collide with our Milky Way Galaxy (in ~20 billion years). Collide is probably the wrong word. Merge or mix are better descriptions because even though there are 100s of billions of stars involved, very few stars will actually collide.
@talkingmudcrab718
2 жыл бұрын
IIRC the odds of any stars colliding is so astronomically (heh) low that there will almost certainly be zero collisions between stars. Lots of near misses with things in stellar systems being jostled around, and even some new stellar companions for some, but no collisions. Possible, but highly unlikely.
@Raz.C
2 жыл бұрын
Heyya Fraser. re - 9:00 ish While you're right, of course, about being able to block ionising radiation with lots of water, there's two things I think are important to add (as well as a third thing that's fun to imagine). 1 - As the water blocks incoming radiation, it also absorbs the radiation, becoming radioactive in turn. It will then, eventually, begin to emit its own alpha and then beta and then finally gamma radiation. Nuclear power plants experience this phenomenon through the formation of heavy water (D2O, which also forms the tritium isotope of hydrogen). Though I should point out that nuclear power plants use their water for cooling and not to specifically block radiation. In any case, one would eventually expect to see the majority of the water on Europa converted to heavy water, meaning that eventually, it will become impossible to 'hide' from the radiation, once the radiation starts coming from the water. 2 - Life- as we know it- is capable of developing radio-resistance; resistance and eventually immunity to radiation. The process isn't terribly common on Earth and seems to disproportionately affect simple/ simpler life forms. However, one would think that if life were to develop in the oceans of Europa (or other Jovian moons) that it would start as simple, single-celled organisms, which would necessarily select FOR radio-resistance, which- as luck would have it- IS a heritable trait, allowing ANY life that ultimately develops on Europa to be resistant/ immune to what we might consider to be immediately lethal levels of radiation. In fact, it's within the realm of possibility that a form of life might develop within such an environment, that feeds off this radiation. Perhaps it develops the ability to absorb the energy from alpha and beta radiation, while remaining unaffected by the gamma radiation, which it can't use? Perhaps such life forms might "irradiate" themselves the way reptiles currently "sun" themselves. Then again, I feel it's important to clearly point out that this part is entirely speculative, with ZERO supporting evidence, whereas conversely, the numbered points above are verified phenomena that are both supported by evidence and are both non-controversial.
@aaronperelmuter8433
2 жыл бұрын
You say that your numbered points are verified phenomena, so please explain, how exactly does a body of water which is being used to block ionising radiation (which consists of photons and nothing more) go from being ordinary water to emitting helium nuclei?? From where does the helium originate? By what process is it somehow first put into said body of water and subsequently making this water now emit the helium? Further, how does water absorbing radiation ITSELF become radioactive? By what unknown process does this occur? If your statement was true or correct, the entire universe would be radioactive as everything which absorbs radiation must therefore become radioactive, according to you. Why then, is the entire earth not radioactive? With all the radiation emitted by plutonium, uranium, etc, by your reasoning, anything which absorbs this radiation would then, itself, become radioactive. That simply is NOT how radiation or radioactivity works. Also, you don’t need any huge amount of water to stop or massively reduce radiation levels, a few tens of cm is far more than enough. You then go on to claim that all life forms can develop radiation resistance mechanisms but how, by what means and how long does this take, on average, how many hundreds or perhaps thousands of generations until the resistance has become strong enough to be of any use? Also, you claim that it would somehow be possible for these creatures to absorb or even feed off the alpha and beta particles it encounters while not being affected by gamma radiation. Seriously?? You’re joking, right? Beta particles are far more lethal and have an ability to ionise far in excess of gamma radiation. When you claim that this imaginary resistance to extreme highly ionising radiation is actually inheritable, wtf!!?? Really, how do I get to be a part of THAT family? Yet again, I ask, please provide some evidence of any species which is able to actually inherit this form of radiation resistance. Where is the evidence that such a thing is even remotely possible? How do you know that such a biological process is actually inherited and not, umm, coded into its genes in a similar manner to the way in which scorpions all fluoresce and glow green under UV radiation? What is the actual dosage/level of radiation which you say is considered to be “immediately lethal”? How many Sieverts are you talking about? Even at doses that will produce immediate 2nd and even 3rd degree burns, flesh literally falling off bones but the organism is most definitely not dead. Unless you’re being ridiculous and suggesting something like being within a light year of a pulsar or magnetar, there is no known lethal dose of radiation to humans, or, for most forms of life, that will instantly kill them. Some people can absorb 10x or even 50-100x the dose of someone standing a metre away and this is due to the fact that we have no way of knowing exactly what cells and processes are being disrupted by the radiation. Even Chernobyl didn’t record any deaths on the night of the incident, due purely to the amount of radiation received. Sure, many died that evening, but from burns, impact trauma, being soaked with superheated steam and water tends to have that sort of effect. Finally, in the early to mid-nineties, a French-Canadian cancer radiation therapy machine, I think it was the Therac-25 from memory, was put into hospitals with the safety cut-out mechanism either faulty or completely inoperative. Some patients were given 10,000-100,000 times the prescribed dosage of radiation but not one of them died there and then. That simply isn’t how radiation affects living organisms. One last point, there’s a VERY good reason why the terms alpha and beta particles/radiation are so very seldom used in the past 40-50+ years is due to the fact that they are completely meaningless and actually, as evidenced by you, can be very misleading when one extrapolates when they should have interpolated. No, that’s not it. When they should have simply studied, rather than not. Alpha particles are helium-4 nuclei, not radiation. Beta particles are electrons and positrons, also not at all radiation. They are both ordinary matter, NOT any form or kind of radiation at all. A far better term, which is why it is so often used in the aforementioned timeframe is cosmic rays. EM radiation is simply photons. The core of every star is resisting the effect of gravitational collapse with radiation, specifically radiation pressure from the immense number of photons being produced. Consider that of the three ways in which energy can be transferred, radiation, convection and conduction, only radiation is able to occur without the presence of matter. Matter does not radiate. It moves in reasonably straight lines. But EM energy/radiation DOES in fact actually radiate from wherever it was emitted. All forms of EM radiation physically radiate from their source/origin. That IS the very meaning of radiation. It has nothing to do with matter, nor alpha or beta particles. Please provide evidence and sources for all of the points you made that are simply untrue and incorrect. No physics text books or courses would ever teach anything like what you’ve said are “verified phenomena that are both supported by evidence and are both non-controversial”. Actually, no part of that statement has any truth of facts whatsoever. What you claim, IS very controversial as it’s simply untrue and incorrect and absolutely has never once been supported by any evidence. Ever. If I’m incorrect, please enlighten me. I will be glad to eat humble pie and apologise if I am but I’m guessing you will have an impossibly arduous and difficult time finding the evidence you say supports your frankly preposterous notions and misinformation regarding the very basics of what radiation is and is not, what it does, how it does it and also what it cannot do.
@Raz.C
2 жыл бұрын
@@aaronperelmuter8433 Dude, I'm not reading an essay. I'll answer your first question, though: You understand, don't you, that you're not going to get ONLY gamma radiation, right? If you DO know that, then you should be able to work out the rest.
@aaronperelmuter8433
2 жыл бұрын
@@Raz.C well, you REALLY should as everything you wrote is absolutely incorrect. Please provide evidence for even just one of your claims.
@matthewking4232
2 жыл бұрын
Take advantage of resources like they always do" gitty smirk.🤭🤗
@TheDarkFalcon
2 жыл бұрын
What do you mean you have statlink for 1 more month and then it's gone???
@frasercain
2 жыл бұрын
I'll be getting a fiber connection. 1.5 Gb. :-)
@miinyoo
2 жыл бұрын
32:45: Remarks about people feeling comfortable about safety. That's a non-starter. It HAS to be safe and the payload has to be inert even if catastrophically destroyed. Really annoyed that governments get a pass about the safety of things. "Oh it's not a big deal". Governments have done a lot of Big Deals of harm under that guise. Corporations should get just as harsh treatment for ignoring externalities. You who throw your batteries in the trash. You are part of the problem, too. I can't tell humanity that it shouldn't poison itself and the world around them, but it's a real friggen good idea to at least punish people but more importantly organizations who willingly do.
@lyledal
2 жыл бұрын
Troposphere > Stratosphere>Mesosphere
@ElTurfStuff
Жыл бұрын
If the edge of the observable universe is unreachable at the speed of light, because of the rapid expansion of space, would a vehicle capable of FTL allow you to move into that expanding space? Would you then be fighting against that expansion to return to your own space?
@frasercain
Жыл бұрын
It just depends on how faster you can go than the speed of light.
@ElTurfStuff
Жыл бұрын
@@frasercain would love to know how fast space is expanding sing at its edges, relative to ourselves. Could it be measured by inference?
@donaldhawkins9173
Жыл бұрын
I have a question for you Frazier what percentage of the total hydrogen that was made has been burned in stars to date is there any estimates of this number and how do we know and is there any prediction of how much of it can be burned and how much for just be left in space hard question I know I've always wondered
@EmmetFord
2 жыл бұрын
Fraser, the lighting on your recent videos is absolutely fantastic. You've really dialed it in. It's almost like you have a brand new, purpose built studio on top of a mountain on Vancouver Island. Looking good. Question (rant?): I am a making-rocket-fuel-on-the-Moon denier, and I'm here to righteously rage against the notion. I can't help noticing that after struggling mightily with hydrogen propellant for the Space Shuttle for 30 years, we are now struggling mightily with hydrogen propellant for the SLS today. Nothing has changed. It's a horrendous hassle, a horrendous molecule, a horrendous propellant. And that's with throngs of engineers and technicians and science communicators on site to work to the problem. The universe hates us. It's almost all hydrogen. Imagine how that's going to go on the Moon, in a hard vacuum, at extreme temperatures, in a perpetual cloud of razor sharp, ionized regolith particles, but in the absence of throngs of onsite engineers, technicians and science communicators. Imagine those wet dress rehearsals. Do we cry at the prospect or giggle? Also, Starship runs on methane, not hydrogen. We're gunna need carbon to make methane to refuel Starships from the Moon to open up the inner solar system for human exploration. The water in the permanently shadowed craters at the lunar south pole does not contain carbon. I see that getting glossed over a lot both by onsite and offsite science communicators. "Water can be split into hydrogen and oxygen and used as rocket fuel," they say. Not all rockets. That's what I say. So it did not surprise me when you snuck in the phrase "in 50 years" when you were talking about a permanent Moon base and lunar resource extraction in this video. You know the truth, don't you. Making-rocket-fuel-on-the-Moon is cray-cray. Admit it. Besides, the Book of Genesis makes no mention of it. Dogs are clearly superior to cats.
@rogerwilco1777
2 жыл бұрын
Wait, aren't Ferrari's and Lamborghini's known for catching on fire.. ??
@mattjackson9859
2 жыл бұрын
One thing about the religious element that baffles me, is why they impose such severe limits on their "infinite" God.
@RMBlake007
2 жыл бұрын
I believe in an all knowing, omnipresent, omnipotent God; the Creator/Intelligent Designer of EVERYTHING. I put no boundaries or limits on God because that would be incredibly stupid. SO I am wondering who are the "religious elements" that you say impose limits on God? That would also confound me....
@rgraph
2 жыл бұрын
Hi Fraser, you said that comets are much more dangerous - but they're often referred to as "dirty snowballs" - so wouldn't they just easily disintegrate when they enter the atmosphere?
@perpetualbystander4516
2 жыл бұрын
It isn't about the density, but rather the velocity and the total mass.
@rgraph
2 жыл бұрын
@@perpetualbystander4516 So do comets tend to be much bigger than asteroids?
@perpetualbystander4516
2 жыл бұрын
@@rgraph Comets are generally more massive than asteroids, and they're also up to 3 times faster, so they pack a helluva punch.
@FalconFlurry
2 жыл бұрын
I know some people are going to disagree with me on this, but when it comes to the Bible and science there a lot of misconceptions. One of the foremost is that the Bible says the earth is only 6000 years old, this is not true. It mentions the six days of creation, but many people have taken these to be six literal days which frankly, in this context I believe makes no sense. The original Hebrew word used here was commonly used in both a literal and figurative sense much like the English word "day"; much like the way we might say something has "had its day", we don't literally mean it was around for a day. The use of the word day in the Genesis account makes far more sense if we interpret it as figurative, indicating that these days of creation were of unspecified lengths and were more representative of periods of time or eras. In the very next chapter the bible references all six days as the day of creation, obviously not referring to a literal day. Thus this account gives a brief overview of the order in which creation relevant to earth took place, rather than the timeframe. With this understanding, the Bible provides no conflict with our scientific understanding of the age of the earth, the universe and the means by which it formed. As for the Bible saying the earth is flat, that is also not true. The only reference to that is in Isaiah 40:22 where it mentions the "circle of the earth", however in the original Hebrew there was no distinction between a circle and a sphere, they were the same word, so that leaves the intent of this verse somewhat ambiguous. What is more interesting in my opinion is that Job 26:7 says that the earth hangs on nothing. This concept was not understood by science until thousands of years after this was written. As for the firmament, I'm not sure exactly what the common beliefs are about this, but what I do know is that it is believed that some translations may have used this word because it better reflected the prevailing beliefs about the universe at the time -such as the sky being a solid dome, but the original word was closer to "expanse" which is more descriptive of a vast and open sky. Many translators used expanse instead of firmament.
@expertadvice4u
2 жыл бұрын
So why can’t we observe a star disappearing over this horizon of visible universe?
@geraldcormeraie1009
Жыл бұрын
The light would be way too dimmed for noticing a single star , we might in the future with better telescopes but that's a long way to go. I'd assume we could see galaxies way earlier but would it be detectable in a human life? Those distances are so enormous, even a galaxy going at the speed of light for our reference would take hundred of thousands of years to disappear, one start at a time, it's not going to happen in a blink
@expertadvice4u
Жыл бұрын
@@geraldcormeraie1009 so there are no half galaxies half out of view half in view?
@Raz.C
2 жыл бұрын
I just had a second thought about starlink: In regards to 3rd world nations/ undeveloped nations like many African ones, I don't think it will help in ANY way to give the general populace affordable, or even FREE internet. I don't think that there will be many, among the general populace, who will be able to use the internet, in any meaningful way, to improve anyone's life (apart from a LOT of porn access). The people who are in a position to improve the life of their fellow Africans will be those people who are educated in the physical and medical sciences and as such, they are likely to already have internet access at work/ university/ home. I mean, suggesting that giving internet access to superstitious farmers and uneducated villagers, will allow them to innovate ways to improve their lives is a bit like suggesting that giving them Netflix access will jog their innovative abilities, allowing them to think of ways to improve their lives. Neither one is going to be helpful if part of the method involves someone who doesn't know any better saying "Let's pay a sorcerer to turn our hills into gold!" No, access to the internet is already in the hands of the people who can make a difference. Any wider internet access is just a luxury and it's a luxury that the already impoverished masses don't need and can't afford.
@Yezpahr
2 жыл бұрын
If you drill through kilometers of ice on Europa, on a scale of 1-10 on the likelihood-scale, what **could** happen to the probe? 1) Upon breaching, or slightly before, it is shot back out by a jet of water/ice. 2) It is mangled by the ice/pressure or by the shifts in density before breaking through. 3) It won't be able to get through the ice due to lack of gravity, lack of atmospheric pressure and hardness of the ice.
@seditt5146
2 жыл бұрын
I am curious how the water on the moon does not Evaporate. I was just thinking about it and while there is no Atmosphere there should be thermal convection in the solid materials of the moon and since there is no Atmosphere the only way it should be able to remove this heat is via electromagnetic radiation meaning I am sitting here wondering why the moon or any other body in the solar system is not a giant molten sphere as it should act as a capacitor of heat and just build up more and more as radiating it as EM is slow. Is it due to some sort of balanced effect where the amount it can absorb per meter squared equals the amount it can radiate creating net zero or something? Idk, never really considered it until now but solids transmit heat just as well if not better than Atmosphere so where is that energy from the solar radiation going?
@crp9985
2 жыл бұрын
All sat companies that offer data or voice services have gone bankrupt. Just a fact. The US government paying to keep them in business doesn't count as a working business, BTW.
@PoleTooke
2 жыл бұрын
What are your personal beliefs about the life detected by the Mars lander (Viking mission) back in the 1970s? Was it real or not? ❓
@Barnardrab
2 жыл бұрын
Fortunately, religion is on a decline, with more and more theists waking up. As frustrating as it is now, society is gradually moving toward rational thought. Just keep fighting the good fight.
@RMBlake007
2 жыл бұрын
I am all for religion being in decline. I am not "religious", but I do believe in intelligent design as in "God" and/or "The Creator". It is more rational to believe in intelligent design than in "this all happened by accident". So you can say that I believe in God, but I am not religious.
@joshuawayne9811
2 жыл бұрын
Could we bore into an ice shell around a moon like europa simply by setting a large drum full of a bunch thermite to go off on the surface? I imagine a tripod lander that can land on the ice, drop the drum beneath itself and set it off, using the rising heat to generate electricity and then suck the water out of the borehole as the thermite blob melts deeper and deeper into the ice, and use that water to 3D print a superthick dome around the landing site. Think that would work?
@AnthonyBouttell
2 жыл бұрын
Dude, you really don’t want to know what’s going on in their minds. It’s just too awful to contemplate.
Пікірлер: 199