My biggest pet peeve when it comes to the "vacuum of space" is when people believe that it sucks, that it will pull on you no matter what, when the truth is that the pressure inside your ship pushes instead. The Expanse demonstrated it correctly by blocking a hole in the hull with a binder. Alien Resurrection did it incorrectly but having the alien sucked inside out through a hole the size of its finger. And because of this lie that's spread through pop culture, there are so many people who think you get sucked out into space.
Remember subbing your channel when you only had around 50 subs and now your pushing the 2000 mark! I'm studying physics in university and I think your videos are very educational and accurate so keep up the good work!
The question of what is "space" goes a lot deeper into the nature of space time. Is space something that is defined by the existence of time, natural laws etc? And what about dark matter and energy (assuming these concepts prove to be correct)? Is that part of the "vacuum"? So many questions...
Going by the first definition: Vacuum slit by a lance slicing through air emitting a shrill note. In classical physics: photon at 'c' in the vacuum of space along a spiral path in free space, with emission of transverse sine electromagnetic waves of the particular 🎨 color.
Isn't any particular volume of outer space filled with the photons from all the stars' light passing through it at any moment? Thus isn't space filled with energy?
So if I was in space and had a tube with two pistons face to face in the middle of it, would I be able to withdraw the pistons without resistance or would the emerging space in the middle of the pistons become more of a vaccum than outer space?
"gasses tend to fill up all available space ..." Do we know for sure what drives expansion of gasses in vacuum (or in general into a lower pressure areas)? I mean, all I can think of is that the Brawn motion causes fluid molecules to hit each other and thus push each other. While the fluid is contained in solid boundaries (ones that can't be pushed by the fluid molecules) all of this Brawn 'billiard' stays inside the container. But in open space vacuum I assume the outer particles after a collision with inner ones, are more likely to head away, leaving the next layer of molecules more likely to ricochet away of the higher pressure areas etc... If that's the only reason then if we could measure (precisely enough) the rate of expansion we should be able to see the outer layers of the fluid expanding faster than the inner ones (because outer ones when kicked away are very unlikely to ever return back, while the inner ones are still very likely to hit neighbor molecules and initially just pass the "expansion momentum" ... kinda like Newton's cradle ... just so the outside ball never gets back), wouldn't we? I mean we're used to think that lower pressure sucks stuff out, but there really isn't anything to do the ... sucking, right? :)
I am not too sure about this video. According to Wikipedia, the observable universe has a radius of 46.6 billion light years and contains about 10^53 kg of matter. One light year is about 9.5×10^15m- so that is a radius of roughly 4.4×10^24m and a volume of roughly 2.73×10^80m So that means a density of 0.366×10^-27kg/m If that matter were all Hydrogen, which has 6×10^26 atoms per kg, that would give us around 0.2 atoms per m3. So if my horrible calculations are any guide (and I'm very likely to have made an error), space is a vacuum mostly because the amount of matter in the observable universe is negligible.
Finally I got the number: 5-10 prot\cm3. Thanks a lot, Nick! For comparison: the interstellar plasma (ISP) has 0.1 elem.part\cm3 density. Now, CRAZY idea. Approaching the Sun, comets has a contrail - NOT because Sun warm up of their frozen gases, but the density of matter after Jupiter orbit gets so great that it grinding a comet's surface! And Oort Cloud doesn't exist, dude...
The one thing I'd really like to do is run the Michelson-Morley experiment on the outside of the ISS and determine if the speed of light along the direction of the orbit was the same as the speed at right angles to it. Now by rights both should be the same, but if they weren't it would open up a whole new field of study. The point is that every time it has been run it has been close to the bulk mass of the Earth. I know what should happen, but I'd feel more comfortable about special relativity if somebody had actually tried it.
I suspect the results will be the same. The things is, we have so many other observations of light (on Earth and from space) that it's probably not worth their time. If they had extra time and wanted to do it, I would be interested in the results though.
So would I. It's because it looks certain that actually checking might be a good idea. I'm reminded of Rutherford's discovery of the atomic nucleus, "As if I had fired a six-inch shell at tissue paper and obtained a rebound."
Please reply Nick: Can't we find a way to send fossil and radioactive energy wastes outside the orbit of the earth ? Isn't might be a possible and effective solution for the pollution ?
How does the Coriolis effect make a bullet fly to the right if the atmosphere is spinning with the earth? Yet why can I hover my drone for 25 minutes without moving and 25 minutes later my drone is still in my front yard? If the Earth were spinning, this would be impossible!
Yes it would same as the vacuum of space would suck our atmosphere if that was true or how do sats and ISS orbit earth more BS ..you'll laugh but if you go fast enough you will not need an engine because v/r/c+ c/r/ct v x 1087 over 33 will explain it ...I was joking about the formula because they have more lies about how things orbit..
Hi there, ForkinTheRoad, can I seriously ask if your question was serious or if you were trolling? Because if you knew how your drone actually works you'd realize how brilliantly ironic your question is. Your drone can stay stable in the air for a long time BECAUSE it makes use of the Coriolis Effect in one of its sensors to do this, lol. Let me explain. Drones use 6 axis stabilization (3 axis gyro and 3 axis accelerometer) and sometimes other sensors like image sensors (two image sensors paired together can create a 3D map of obstacles or even a person which it can follow), ultrasonic rangefinders (kind of like echolocation), as well as very precise GPS. The technology behind the gyro and accelerometer is pretty amazing. They're microelectronic components nowadays and they can all fit on a tiny board a few inches across. The gyro and the accelerometer are the most important things on your drone which allow it to stabilize itself not only against such insignificant effects like the Coriolis effect but also much more extreme effects like wind and rising and falling air currents or compensating for a load it might be carrying that's slightly off center, etc. The electronic gyro makes use of the Coriolis effect to detect rotation. That's what's so ironically funny about your conspiratorial tin-foil-hat question lol. This video shows how small these sensors really are and how exactly they work electronically inside (pretty cool and ingenious!). After watching the first part about the sensors themselves skip again to the 7:35 mark in the video and you can see it in action. The guy moves the board and rotates it along all axes and the computer creates a 3D rendering which accurately maps the movement in real time. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-eqZgxR6eRjo.html Don't be so quick to jump onto the flat earth or whatever other bullshit stupid conspiracy theory of the day. People who believe in that fucking nonsense aren't that smart. Because they aren't smart enough to understand simple concepts or at least understand and comprehend the basics, they jump to the flimsiest and most inaccurate conclusions which don't stand up to any kind of scientific rigor. Once you learn critical thinking skills you'll be amazed at how good your bullshit detector is AND you'll be amazed at all the knowledge that will be opened up to you. You'll gain TRUE knowledge about how things work and what's really going on behind the scenes of everything. It's like you've been blindfolded your whole life and suddenly you have the blindfold torn away. Don't be fooled by conspiracy nuts. Their brains aren't developed enough to grasp simple scientific concepts so they equate everything they don't understand with magic and the impossible, hence the, "you're all being deceived!" trope. But what's sadly ironic is that THEY are the only ones who actively deceive and delude themselves.
Doesn't the point where you get into ''space'' has something to do with the temperature here on earth? Like as with the speed of sound it will be reached faster when it is really cold. Maybe space will be a little bit further away when it is cold? It would explain the auroralights you know.
Theres always a quantum field in it's ground state in any point in universe,there's no such thing as absolute emptiness anywhere in the universe even if we remove all the air,molecules,atoms,elementary particles (fermions and bosons) right?
So if space is filled with stuff (allegedly, there's the fabric of space to?), what should we really call it? "An area with slightly less stuff than the area 'next' to it"?
"OUTER SPACE" That was most epic thing I've ever seen in your videos. Haha, loved it. I would like to build an earth-like atmosphere in the space (if this makes any sense XD).
We don't really navigate in space, we pre-plan the trip. With the exception of very minor adjustments, once we launch something, it's at the whim of inertia and gravity.
Little mistake.....the text says 5 to 10 protons per cm^3 yet you said meters.....it alarmed my ears because the proton count went up when you changed the example units to inches....how could less space have more? Good thing I read the text. Physics is still the winner 🤙
Oh yeah!? What about Spaceball One, which Dark Helmet transformed into a giant maid holding a vacuum, and sucked all the air out of Druidia? Checkmate.
Something iv been curious about my whole life If you put a portal on earth the size of a plane window and a portal in space how strong would the suction be Like how far away from the portal would you have to be for it to be safe??
I'm assuming for quite a while in human terms... after the big bang there wasn't really an outer space as we know it now but a lot of stuff everywhere. Once the first stars started to form can we assume the universe still wouldn't have what we think of as outer space? Or did star formation only happen once stuff was really spread out?
You are correct that it took a long time there to be anything remotely like an "outer space." Space didn't even become transparent for about 400,000 years. However, star formation was _MUCH_ later. By the time that happened, particle density was pretty low (on average).
Possibilities: 1. Somebody clicked dislike by mistake 2. Videos can get embedded all over the internet, for example on message boards or articles. If somebody doesn't like that a video got embedded in what they're looking at, they sometimes give it thumbs down, maybe without even looking at the content. 3. Bots can click things randomly (or as designed, if somebody wants to just thumbs down things) and if it's registered to RU-vid it can also thumbs down. But either way, it doesn't have any actual meaning to anyone other than the video creator; RU-vid doesn't change how it's displayed or the pay or anything else based on the thumbs down (supposedly). You shouldn't care.
I studied that solar system like any other system was a cloud of gas then pressure increased and then fusion started. But if surrounding that gas cloud was vacuum then why it doesn't expanded? And why that cloud stayed there?
Negative what? Negative pressure? No, at least not absolute pressure. The problem is though, when the pressure starts getting ridiculously low, it's best to stop discussing things in terms of pressure.
I have a good question for you what happens when the sun explodes and rips apart planet Earth and all the oxygen and gas particles are released into space and on the One off chance that all that oxygen is not recycled and is untouched and escapes all magnetic fields and gravitational fields into open space what happens to it expands expands in the vacuum of space what comes of it why are you ask this question is could it result in dark energy or dark matter because it has a positive and negative could it in someway results in the material or Adams molecules connecting with each other because they do surface tension connecting to each other calls this affect multiplied by all the planets throughout history getting destroyed the result in do universe expanding ????
There's a common misconception that it's mostly human skin. It's not: that mainly ends up in the bath or shower. Two thirds of the dust in your house comes from outside, as dirt tracked in on your feet, and airborne particles like pollen and soot.
Let us just say dark matter is something that you could not see. But is holding all together to the great attractor. Then I would say that the dark matter is just a part of the great attractor itself. “Something” is holding on the visible matter and drags into the great attractor.
Hmm...5:08:13... It seem's so common...Some very well known sequence... You were dividing by zero on second January of 2003 year? Nah, it's just coincidence.
Indirectly, yes. By measuring the behavior of galactic superclusters, we can get an idea of how much "dark energy" there. A lot of astrophysicists feel that dark energy and vacuum energy are the same thing. It's debated.
I would build nothing in the outer space so that I can travel faster than light with it because in one episode you said that nothing can go faster than light. Fast Fast!
If I could build anything in space? A ladder. So I can place a weight So I can hang cables So I can pull up containers So I can build a geocentric space station So I can go to other plants and then stars. But for now. A ladder will do. I was lucky enough to see the first man on the moon on tv. Even with all of its static and B&W crt snow. It was the the most exciting, beautiful, proudest and inspiring moments of my life by far. Except when I married my wife and help her deliver my two beautiful children. I would like to build the ladder so they can hang the weight.
think the easiest way to visualise is as follows... A vacuum is not a real thing it does not exist. What we have instead is nothing. Essentially the earth is surrounded by nothing. Humans, animals and sea creature are actually in space. Then imagine plastic balls to represent atoms and molecules. The balls are attracted the earth by gravity until they are so high you can t see the top...but each ball is still in space. The ones at the bottom are being crushed by the ones at the top. The point is, there is no vacuum. The fish and animals are moving/swimming in outer space. They have instead instead adapted to moving around in lots of heavy molecules attracted by earths gravity; like children playing in lots of plastic balls in a play area. The plastic balls don't get sucked up. Hope this helps some to understand i.e. Vacuum is not real. It is a human term that describes an evacuated area, for example: underneath some plastic balls. It requires energy to do this.
Space is filled with electromagnetic radiation. photons, electrons, alpha particles... I'd like to see the development of a technology that would turn all electromagnetic radiation into thrust such that a spaceship's hull could absorb energy from all directions and focus a coherent beam of energy in a single direction. this could potentially accelerate a mass to near light speed, and if pointed at a superluminal galaxy, possibly "beyond". Alcubierre's warp drive requires compressing space in front and expanding space behind the space ship and the thing that seems to inflate space is the presence of energy, so suck it in one direction, and blow it out the other. oh my god did I just say that?
