Can’t really choose any specific story but they are all good and great food for thought. As far as Voyager is concerned, we need to send a couple out that this time has the primary goal of getting to interstellar space with the highest velocity possible. Put all the instruments on it, and do the orbital boosts around the sun and Jupiter. If you want to explore on the way, fine, but realize the primary mission is interstellar space. Since we know RTGs will work decently, send it with several RTGs that are more than 150 W. Send them out with 500 W each. This deals with the normal decay. Then they can run all of their instruments all the time and not have to worry about not having power to keep everything warm.
41:52 I was talking with my bestie the other day about the emotions of discovering one is wrong about some belief. Like you I almost always enjoy this novelty and greater understanding of 'reality'. And then you said "I am an agent of chaos in my personal life, just ask the people around me" and I guffawed so hard, because yes.
Was there a canceled project to make a lander for Pluto that was going to take like 100 years to land? I just remember my professor complaining about the cancellation it like 10 years ago. I can't seem to find anything about it online, though.
Could be that it wasn't "cancelled" per se but was instead merely not selected to be developed in the first place. I haven't heard of this mission but I'd love a dual lander mission with an orbiter between Charon and Pluto and landers on each. I think we really ought to formally recognize the Pluto and Charon system as a binary dwarf planet system.
The problem with that is that you'd probably have more advanced tech developed in the next 100 years so like 90 years from now we could probably get a lander on pluto using nuclear powered ion drives or something.
Question: How do the recent solar flare impacts rank against the Carrington event? Are we ready for or have we already experienced an event equal to or greater than a Carrington event?
your last episode (new voyagers) was the best explanation of the universe that I’ve ever heard in my life, you would be the guy I would want on the big space ship flying across the galaxies - you’re able to explain the universe in the same down to earthiness as one would give directions to finding a good sushi place, there are so many admired scientist and physicists that just can’t convey these subjects without drifting into outer space- you just have that science je ne sais quoi - so many good and fascinating subjects; safe travels - cheers
Question: if you feed a neutron star one atom at a time to turn into a black hole, would it slowly fade out or would it instantly turn dark like a light switch?
Is it possible that the large scale Voids in the universe were the original locations for the Pop 3 stars,the Voids having expanded with the expansion of the universe?
To expand on how hard it would be to see stuff in our own Oort cloud, consider the brightness scaling. Most comets are small, so Oort cloud objects probably are small to start with. Since they are cold, radiation directly emitted by an Oort cloud object would be very long wavelength (far infrared?), then expand outward in a sphere as that radiation travels out, so the brightness drops off as the distance squared. Pluto is less than 50 AUs (Astronomical Units, earth to sun distances) away. An Oort cloud object 50,000 AU away is 1000 times farther so a million times dimmer...if it were as big as Pluto, and they probably aren't. But it gets worse. The distance squared law is for (very cool) heat radiation they are emitting directly. We first detected Pluto in visible light, reflected from the Sun. The Sun's light gets dimmer with the same distance squared relationship, so 1000 times farther than Pluto the sun is a million times dimmer than at Pluto, then that light gets reflected scattered in many directions (not a mirror), so that million times dimmer light then goes through another distance squared brightness relationship coming back. So, for reflected light, it is a distance to the fourth relationship. A 50,000 AU Oort cloud object about 1,000 times farther than Pluto will be a trillion times dimmer in reflected light (and be smaller than pluto, and be moving slowly in such a distant orbit that you might need to get a spectrum of the light colors to know it's not a very distant, faint star.) Given the distance relationships, I find it impressive that we have found so many Kuiper Belt objects even!
Ardena Question: Lately (well at least the past 10-15 years) there has been more and more conversation and hypothesis, and some theoretical work in regards to emergence. You have emergent gravity championed by scientists such as Erik Verlinde and then even towards the far far end, the concept of emergence of spacetime itself with physicists such as Nima Arkani-Hamed… The question is, do you think once we have figured out the next lower level “stuff” that spacetime emerges from, we’d then eventually develop a technology to allow us to be everywhere all at once? But, don’t think of as gods, but more like Q 😊
23:50 Using thrusters near the Sun is more effective - Oberth effect. Fast spaceship gains more kinetic energy from Delta V and potential energy of fuel left near the Sun is smaller.
Speaking of orbital velocity, a question occurs to me, in terms of the sidereal day(ie:what would be the duration of a single rotation) how fast would the earth have to rotate in order fling off it's crust?
Micro gravity vs zero G. NASA acts like micro gravity is superior but is there any use for it practically or experimentally. My guess is only for station keeping.
Dakara. And in regards to that topic, if the universe is infinite, then the chance of the exact "fundamental particles" coming together in the same way to recreate "you" is a certainty, it just might be an unimaginably long period of time before it happens again. It will be "you" and "your body" exactly as it is now made of the same materials. The odds of such things are ridiculously low, but multiply any odds by infinity and you get a certainty. I think in terms of your perception, this would probably be like living forever, you would cease to exist for trillions of trillions of years, but then you would "wake up" in a new you without your previous memories and live another life.
That's the answer I wanted from Frazer. We may die but we won't experience the near infinite amount of time until the next universe comes around and suddenly we are reborn again.
I wonder how many times it has happened. Once? 4 times? An infinite amount of times already? Also how mamy times was it the exact same atoms. Not just the same composition but the exact same particles?!?! I think thats what needs to happen to becomena god. Infinite things hurt my brain sheesh.
In launching to a lunar orbit from Earth in order to get a slingshot, can you aim for a Lunar pole so that the inclination will change and you can go away from the ecliptic?
15:30 Why can't you use the modern version of when they used VCR tapes to record one wavefront as it passes by and then the same front coming from another point of the spread out image that was bent by another portion of the foreground galaxy lens? Looking at a dot beyond the foreground lens, should you see the dot traverse from one picture to the next rather than disappear here and appear there? (The Astronomers episode about John Dobson)
So... Is our universe the result of a massive "sun", in a much larger universe, that went super nova creating our universe? Could we be just one universe in an infinite multiverse?
I'm not familiar with all the theories/evidence of the "big bang" singularity. I did often think it was a "rupture" much like a hole in a dam under great pressure. Massive amounts of material/energy coming thru reactions taking place causing the expansion possibly from another universe? Another analogy would be a breach in the fuselage of a jet liner resulting in violent decompression, most everything that can be gets sucked out and moves away from the plane until pressure normalizes. This only takes seconds but in a universe, trillions and trillions of years. Multiverse is a theory (?)
Need more information on your paramaters. ie. Are you considering having the game played on ice or gaseous giants? Your inquiry presents a Bunch of variables!
@@istvansipos9940 yes! And I'm here now remembering the 1980 Olympics😲. I'm nestled here in Indiana but still find myself rooting the human race rather than a country. ie. Mike Weir did a wonderful job this weekend and I've always been a big fan.
Question: What's crazier, a point of infinite density or some unknown form of degenerate matter at the center of a black hole? Seems like the singularity is the go-to answer, but isn't that more problematic than just extending the white dwarf and neutron star pattern?
Alaris. Question: how can we still see light from the earliest stars in the universe with our telescopes when those stars are probably long dead and their light photons should have already passed by us here on earth?
Great show thanks I have a question; I've heard Neil deGrasse Tyson say that if you go through a black hole or maybe it was a wormhole that you could end up in a different universe or a different time. Does this mean that the very nature of time has been discovered because surely it must be a physical thing in order to allow movement back and forth , what do you think ? Thanks . Jason
Asuria: just dig a tunnel at the base of Kilimanjaro and beneath the peak, make a underground VAB, then lift the launch platform up to the summit on a giant elevator. Easy.
question. what is conscience? To call something "alive" what do we neeed? Do we need a heartbeat or conscience? or do we need both? are blackholes alive? conscient? can matter be conscient? we are matter after all...%? can anti matter be conscient? are blackholes alive?
Is there any experiment that we could carry out at the moment, with current technology, to prove / disprove Hawking radiation? If not now, then what would be a theoretical way to do so, hopefully this century?
I have a question for you. Does the heliosphere, where the solar wind interacts with the galaxy wind (not sure that's the right term), impart a drag on the sun? Is there any thrust from this interaction? If so, how much? Tim Rumph
I often hear about the speed of light "speed limit". What doesn't connect with me is what happens if "something" hit or tried to pass that speed limit. In other words, if there were a way for something to be "infinitely" accelerated, why would it not pass the speed of light and what would happen it is tried? Is there even any way we could know if something other than light hit or surpassed that speed?
Light travels at the “speed of light” because that’s the fastest that anything CAN move. The speed of light is actually the speed of causality; it is the fastest that any action can happen.
well it would have to go... faster than light, for us to notice. try and notice something going half the speed of light, not even remotely possible with our best computers. the speed of light is really the limit of energy, if takes too much energy to go faster than light (it may be easier to accelerate space-time ftl), and even if there were craft going ftl they are practically invisible
I just wonder, say, in a galaxy that was moving near the speed of light according to earth time, launched an object from a planet, would we be able to see it? If it is moving past the speed of light from us, then we can't interact with it unless it is slowed down. I think it's the same for particles. If they are moving really fast, you can't tell if they are really there or what position they are in until you slow them down.😊
About the Voyager 2.0 idea, I have wondered if anyone might do missions to each of the larger planets with many moons, to take close looks at each of those moons.
Not directly immortal. But this could lead to an interesting debate about the physics/metaphysics of what consciousness (and the continuity of consciousness is)....
questions like these are most interesting, it does bring me to a question i've asked a few others of "would you be okay with dying if an identical clone replaced you and followed all your goals and desires" since ultimately there wouldn't be a distinction between you and identical you
That's unlikely because quantum fluxuations and the 'butterfly effect' would mean you'd get everything totally different. Like a Minecraft world with a different seed.
the hydrogen atom or proton came fairly early and with it, a lot of laws. So my guess would be that it burst out from the beginning. or better yet, was already there even before.
Correct. Parts of the ingredient of the equation you mentioned came from the singular bang and that "mated" with the already existing nuclei. I am a newbie so consider the source. It's purely speculative.
they did not come from anywhere. Nature does nature stuff, we understand some of it, and then we describe nature with laws. No need to not overmeditate it. The laws of nature are like the density of copper. It is exactly the density of copper because it is. Only so much copper in 1 cubic meter. Atoms, mass, maybe some heat if you choose to heat a piece of copper. Many reasons, and none of them "come" from anywhere.
@@istvansipos9940 thanks for the example. Ironic too in that I was just reading n article on sodium metal and at what point it starts to tarnish. I don't ever mean to spread misinformation but when I find intuition or instinct calling I usually don't hesitate to put it out there.
Belote... Given Starship's cargo hold length of 17m, theorize a folding telescope that has three mirror segments end-to-end (one in the center, two "wings")... assume segments that are 6 meters by 15 meters, yielding an unfolded/locked mirror that is 6 meters by 45 meters total. What are the limits imposed by the non-circular mirror profile? Do you think the simplicity of three rigid segments simply hinged together, with just the two segment boundaries to mess up refraction, is enough of a benefit?
Stuff needs to be aligned at the nano-meter level so nothing about it is going to be 'simple.' The JWST's design is fairly 'simple' what made it so expensive was cutting down the weight to almost nothing. So for example their sun-shield needed a special clean room because it was made from super-thin material but if they'd made it from thicker material it'd be a lot cheaper.
After the first stars (gen 3) got into existence, wasn't there a very long time until these collected together in galaxies so there should be a time we might be able to see no galaxies but only free floating stars?
@@jackdowling4606 Pop-3 stars have never been directly observed. A pop-3 star has to be made from pure hydrogen-helium with no 'pollution' by heavy elements.
How much gravitational assist can be gained from the sun? I thought that the speed gain from slingshotting around the planets was from their orbital motion. From our perspective isn't the Sun stationary so it seems like there's no assist to be gained?
You are correct. Calling it a slingshot was propably just a slip up. But firing the engines closer to the Sun will give an extra boost, so getting as close to the Sun as possible makes sense if you want to maximise your speed.
If everything is moving away from us where we are, would it be doing so if we were somewhere else? Everywhere else? Kinda stretches the finite mind doesn't it.
did you hear about the recent study that did find a distant galaxy surrounded by non-ionized gas? they said they could see it because it was in a recently made ionized area in the beginning of re-ionization.....there is a video on youtube about it i can't remember who did it but a science communicator
4:30 This has always befuddled me. Does the universe cycle through opaque and clear? Is there a future opaque stage? Big Bang -plasma (visible), Neutral(opaque), ionized(visible), neutral (opaque), reionized (visible-now)
So in reference to "Nameless" quesion to Fraser, I have often wondered why there has not been a discussion on the proven origin of the universe, namely of creation? The earth is only about 6,000 years old, not some 4 billion, and the earth was made in 7 days by God, making man in 1 day on the 6th day (no evolution)
Would kinetic launch technology/mass drivers be an effective method of launching payloads into space from the surface of bodies with thin or non-existent atmospheres? Like an electromagnetic "cannon" that accelerates and launches payloads from the Moon, or Mars and its moons, into orbit.
yes. completely yes. though, i would be surprised if they were crew rated. a relatively large mass driver on the surface of the moon could theoretically launch payloads from the lunar surface to low earth orbit, or to the earths surface! pretty neat.
@@jackturner8472 I would not expect crew to be launched from these mass drivers, the forces would be too extreme. For unmanned payloads ranging from science spacecraft to cargo 'pods', it could work really well, especially if it has a short turnaround time.
If the entirety of the universe was the size of a grapefruit, was it a black hole? If so, do black holes have a critical mass? If not, what was it? Do black holes exert enough gravitational pull that they will coalesce near the end of the universe, or are they simply out there, slowly evaporating?
There's nobody in my mind who could explain the concept of a grapefruit universe and inflation better than Prof. Ed Copeland in the videos by Sixty Symbols. I recommend you watch them and enjoy the mind blowing details therein.
Except the problem with a grapefruit sized universe expanding to it's current size.... Is that we don't actually know how large the universe actually is so there is no way to determine it was ever the size of a grapefruit when compacted down.
@@logansmall5148 the entirety of the universe was never the size of a grapefruit. Grapefruit universe refers to the what the size of our currently observable universe was at end of the initial inflation. In reality it may well be much bigger. And we know it has to be bigger than what we see today, because more and more distant CMB photons continually reach us. If we stop seeing them, that is the limit. But I don't think we will live long enough to see such a limit if it exists.
@@swissbiggy Well, honestly, I’m speaking to you from a scientific perspective. I know the world sucks, but whether you believe it or not, this is the time when the world sucks the least. I’m 68, and I’m one of those people who’s always nostalgic for the past, thinking everything was better and nicer back then, but that’s exactly because I’m 68. It’s a paradox, but that’s the way it is.
You'll never be able to answer the question "where did everything come from". Even if someone believes in a 'creator', what or who made the creator, what is it made of, etc.. and then if you answer that, you'll get "where did the creators creator come from"... Etc.
so let me get this straight... we're looking for what WAS 21cm (radio when it started)... and it's now hugely redshifted... so that's going to be longer wavelengths.. given the redshift that would be kilometer wavelength telescopes?... i.e. VLF/ELF.... both earth and the galaxy are very noisy at those wavelengths, and you don't get to see much below 20MHz from earth due to the ionosphere, and to get any directivity you need a massive antenna arrangement, so I read this as a moon or L2 based radio scope that's measured in square kilometers, as a Radio R&D Enginner I'm professionally interested in what this is... please do you have any links?
Wire dipole antennas can be freakishly huge. Several wire dipoles in an array, either as a phased array or a Yagi-style directional array, could do this in free space. We have wires for anti-tank projectiles that can survive for a kilometer or more under the extreme stress of, y'know, being shot in a battlefield. Physical strength and deployment, at least from a robustness perspective, could allow for some extremely long dipoles.
I was born about ten thousand years ago. And there aint nothin in this world that i dont know. I saw peter, paul and moses singin' ring around the roses. And i can lick the guy what says it aint so.
QUESTION : why the sound is so poor on manned space missions? For example, recently there was the crew 9 mission. We had very good live videos, including the docking to the Space Station phase. But when you listen to the conversation between Earth and the Crew capsule, the sound is poorer than 1970s cheap talky-walkys. If there is the bandwith to transmit such videos, adding good, or even adequate sound, should be negligeable in terms of bandwith.
my guess: decent sound tech is too heavy, too big. Try making a video with the built in mic of a laptop. You'll hear some bad sh!t. The mic in this video, for example? Great and big. It could be flown to space, but it is not worth it. It is better to send 1 more meal and good enough (tiny) sound tech. also, interference from all the gizmos in space and in a control room? Maybe. Again, big badass sound tech would solve that. But they don't wanna record Mozart up there. They just wanna communicate and that does not justify the costs of some epic sound gear. HD and 4K video? Sure. It can come in handy when flight control needs to see something. F.e. cracks on a tank.
I believe a big part of the reason is the air pressure inside spacecraft are much less than 1 atmosphere meaning it is less dense and are a different mix than what we find at sea level on Earth.
@@istvansipos9940 That's really a nonsense argument. The microphone on a consumer camcorder or even the audio input on your phone is fine. Certainly better then a "1970s walky-talky." Chris Hatfield recorded some songs on the ISS. On Polaris Dawn they actually *recorded* one of the astronauts playing violin at high fidelity on Polaris dawn and then "uploaded" the video back to earth after the fact (ironically it was a copyrighted song so no one could play it on RU-vid, lol). There's obviously no problem recording high quality audio on the ISS or in the dragon capsule or whatever. I think the main issue is that they're still using some old analog system through TDRS or whatever. Probably they consider audio data mission critical high priority so they want to keep using the same rock-solid system they've always used, and if it's not broken don't fix it. Video is probably on some other lower priority channel. I'm sure it's possible to send back high quality audio along with the video but it's probably not a priority to build a second audio system.
@@istvansipos9940 I don't speak about a badass sound system. I speak of at least a 2 gram mike like the ones in a30 Euros webcam which have a incomparably better sound.
