Paul M. Sutter is a theoretical cosmologist at the Institute for Advanced Computational Science at Stony Brook University and the Flatiron Institute in NYC. He is also an award-winning science communicator, author, host, and U.S. Cultural Ambassador.
Oh my gosh! It cost the US $280 billion dollars to get to the moon! 😱 The Afghan War cost the US $2 trillion. $280 billion is chump change. The US should just declare war on the moon.
I have been to the Houston NASA space museum and seen a Saturn V rocket and the space shuttle in person, so I don’t doubt that they existed, and obviously they took off based on the countless videos of it happening, but I have a difficult time believing that all the Apollo missions (save 13) successfully landed on the moon given the unbelievable logistical problems that seem to be insurmountable in 2024. Occam‘s razor suggests that the simplest explanation is the most likely-the simplest explanation for why they can’t do it in present day is because they have never done it before and are having to legitimately solve these technical challenges for the first time.
So according to the Hubble deep field, there could be more than 90000 galaxies within each CMB data point. But we know this radiation is from the beginning edge of the Big Bang because...? Confirmation bias?
I desperately want to believe.....but.....consider giving the skeptical some cover: please explain how that signal is found beneath the foreground, please.
What's the brand new technology that we have today, with the ability to communicate faster amongst the world and with the ability to detect CGI and disect video it's only harder to return to the moon with today's technology because people would find out it's all a show faster than they h could back them
Because it's expensive and there is no ROI. It's a barren wasteland with zero resources that can exploited that are not already available on earth far cheaper.
why no money ,,,, it was super expensive ,,, or they have bases on the moon ad do not want anyone know ,, oh its so impossible to go to the moon .. bases on the moon with nukes
The government also says there's no genocide in gaza when in fact we see it happening in front of our eyes and this is on earth, and you expect me to believe what the government tells us about something that happened 50 years ago on the moon?
According to James van Allen, whio discovered those belts, they will not "kill anyone who crosses them”. You just don’t want to stay in the belts for a long time.
IF the CMB is a measurement of the photon field in the microwave range totally a quantum mechanical field, How would a graviton fit? I'm looking for gravitons and a correlation to Gen Relativity and dark matter. I just wanted to let you know that I'm reserving my opinion of dark energy.
This is a way to steal taxpayer money. Who was filming this entire mission, this is hysterically funny, there was a craft following a craft to film the landing, film the flight, yeah right. So fake. No way, we have no true way to know the atmosphere on the moon, it’s a guess, the rover on mars. Yeah right, that’s not believable either. They have video of the rover running around mars, who’s videoing it. lol
The entire mission was filmed by the astronauts themselves. The only film we have of the landings was made by a film camera inside the LM, so we do not have any outside view of the landing, or the flight to the moon. “so fake” is an opinion based on a lack of basic knowledge. Similarly, the only video we have of the rover on Mars is recorded by the rover itself. Five seconds of looking at the footage would have told you this, but no, you decided to jump to conclusions instead.
Is US taxpayer really happy with the story presented in this video? In summary. “Yes Saturn V is still the most powerful rocket ever built but it is not a good idea to use it as a trampoline for future mission as it is based on technology developed in the 50s and 60s. Yes we still have blue print but it is not so useful because it was the skilled worker, no longer available, who were able while building the rocket to give the final tweak. This black magic about rocket tuning has gone lost. Therefore it is better to rely on the engine of Shuttle. Yes they are a step backward compared to Saturn but you know, it is good for politics, we need to keep a lot of people happy and at least we know how to build them. Building from scratch a new generation of rocket it would be more efficient and cost effective but it would make too many people unhappy and because of that NASA could be shut down altogether. That is not what we want, do we? ” What an incredible bunch of BS. With such appalling attitude it is no surprise US is nowadays virtually bankrupt
Hello! Not using Newton's F = ma, allow me ask: 1 - Where does the { Action = Integral (K - U)dt} come from? 2 - Where does the {Lagrangian (K - U)} come from? 3 - Can I deduce that I must minimize the Action integral equation from minimizing the potential energy U? 4 - Can you elaborate? Thanks!👋
We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are EASY, but because they are HARD. It was never about technology, it was always about the human will.
Every physicist I know of insists that the Universe has no edge. Unless you break this, there is no surface for this hypothesis to work with. So this is DOA unless you can go back and explain away all the evidence that there is no edge.
They tried to send humans to the moon but failed. Then, to justify the billions of dollars spent and avoid embarrassment, they faked the moon landing. Now, decades later, they are trying again to send humans to the moon for the first time and are still failing.
The tried to send humans to the moon and succeeded, by throwing huge amounts of resources at the problem. Now, Artemis is being run on 1/25 the annual budget that Apollo had, and people whine that it’s taking longer.
I have serious doubts about the CMB radiation being from the Big Bang shell. Considering the Hubble Filed shows us thousands of galaxies inside a 0.043 degree window. CMB granularity seems to be 100's of times larger than that. You're talking about a spot 5 degrees and you think it's from the shell of the universe? Obviously galaxies emit this energy, the huge thick red line is our Milky Way. Unless the earth happens to be in the center of the universe then the CMB should have a huge cold spot of more than 50%. Very extremely unlikely...
I thought the point of diagrams and schematics were similar to that of music scores written as sheet music? Both require a baseline understanding to work, just like language except with less ambiguity. The language of schematics, diagrams and sheet music hasn't changed in meaning, so scores and schematics written 100 years ago would look extremely similar and function identically. Yes, there is nuance and plenty of stylistic changes, but anyone who understands the language of musical notation written as sheet music can, in real time mind you, read, transcribe and play the same composition in the same beats per minute in the same octaves with the any instrument (that the player knows how to play) with the same exact beasts per measure using the same chords made up of the same exact notes concluding in the production of the same piece of music. Aren't schematics designed to function similarly? Having 0 knowledge in engineering, I built a Tesla coil using schematics designed by someone else.a? At the age of 17, in about a month of taking 30 minutes a day using nothing but a combination of pictures, words and diagrams written out on paper, I was able to build a Tesla coil. Mind you, I had never attempted to understand, let alone complete, a simple circuit before this. So the idea that their is an immense amount of knowledge hidden beneath the schematics designed 60+ years ago isn't hard to believe. The idea that NASA, or any pre-established team of scientists with backgrounds in this area & access to these records, couldn't assemble a team and quickly be able to side step this problem of re-learning how to comprehend this old style of schematic utilization, (especially considering the access to info, the advantages that come from having digitalized records & an exponential increase in computational power in addition to resources that can answer very specific questions extremely quickly with insane precision & accuracy, in addition to AI which could likely redesign old schematics into new ones with todays understanding built in) is what I find hard to believe.
Reading the schematics isn’t the problem. Schematics don’t contain everything though. Things like optimal order of assembly are often not recorded. Neither is any fettling done by the craftsmen that assembled the parts. Then there are the parts that were standard then, but no longer available now. incomplete specifications, etc.
" the technology still doesn't exist to send a human through the van Allen belts” is a fairy tale, yes. 60 years ago, we found that the radiation level is low enough that humans can travel safely through the belts in an unshielded spacecraft.
I loved your video! I knew basically why we haven't gone back, especially the changed safety aspect of going, but you pretty much covered all of the different reasons of why it is hard to go back to the moon today! It was never easy, and it still won't be easy, especially, like you said, "the risk factor"! Going to the moon is going to have to be a hundred times safer now than it was in the 60's and it will still be very dangerous! I just want to thank you again for your very insightful video! Thank you! 👍 J Roncone
The Manhattan Project was the platform used to build the NASA venture Rigid Controls were set so firm need to know walls were established The story that men went on 8 day missions without taking a Can with a Lid is pure fiction But hey, everyone out there are Space Experts because schooling made it so.
The story that men went on 8 day missions without taking a can with a lid is reality. We know how they did it, because we can look it up. Was it smelly and unpleasant? Yes. Did that make it impossible? No.
@@Hobbes746 so you were there? Would you like to explain in detail how that activity was performed and where? Can't wait for this reply. Saying we Know how they did it, on which NG or NASA docco did you see this performed??
@@stronzer59 I haven’t seen video of this, but I don’t need to. I have read NASA documents on e.g. space suit design and cabin life support systems that contain this information.
Despite all of our so-called "progress", we have produced ZERO ergs of electrical energy. Since we have produced ZERO output after 70 years, it is time to CLOSE the damned project down and use the money to do something more useful with it.
