Phrases on TH-cam that get me excited: Vsauce: "...or is it?" Lock Picking Lawyer: "we'll get the pick Bosnian Bill and I made" Matt Parker: "so I put it in a spreadsheet"
I think you should redo the calculation, properly incorporating the correct circumference of the earth as determined by you and Hannah Fry a couple videos back.
Oh yeah. Matt! Have you seen the success of the yt channel trying to do everything needed to make a cell phone starting from scratch? You should totally derive all these measurements of the Earth and space and everything from your own actual measurements in random tall buildings on days with usual British visibility and so on, and homemade tools, and see how you do compared to Eratosthenes, 17th century geometers, and, you know, NASA.
Can we be sure the pressure measuring device on the "Limiting Factor" is as precise as Matt's astrolabe/protractor thingy? Perhaps next time the "Limiting Factor" does a dive they can do their pressure measurements by the size of a balloon tied to the outside of the hull next to an externally mounted camera. Now the question is what fluid is best to fill the balloon?
Um, dangerous. Exploritory. Romantic (but that's rather dangerous, but dangerous is reletively safe). Boring (when the ship isn't part of the plot). Exciting. Exciting only to the newbie. Annnnnd comedic. So, maybe five and a half?
British pound notes are now made of polymer (plastic) and they have a mass of the stated 0.45 ish grams. It was a lbs vs £ joke, but not very funny. Guess it was a Parker joke.
@@michaelcartmell7428 Really? A pound (weight) is somewhere in the neighborbood of 0.45 kg, so I figured that's what he meant. It seems his mistake was really saying a pound of plastic instead of a plastic pound.
You missed the 35 meters at the beginning that they descended before started taking measurements. That fixes your -35 meters final, and also gets you closer to the official number.
6:25 Interestingly, thought I'd look up how the league was defined originally, as it's not something I've understood before, and turns out it was first (roughly) defined as "the distance a person can walk in an hour", so saying you can walk 11km (1.96 leagues) in 2h, is surprisingly close to the original rough definition.
On similar lines, I think an acre was originally defined as the amount of land that a single person could scythe in a day. So if you had five acres to scythe, you'd automatically know you'd need one person for five days, or five people for one day.
Very interesting! While it is arbitrary, that is a surprisingly useful definition. In the Lord if the Rings book and/or some of the other books by Tolkien, he often describes distances using some nowadays rather obscure units of measurement. Among them were definitely leagues, chains, miles (still quite common) and I think I've also read furlongs and paces there.
On the topic of mountains being "closer to space" around 29:00, I'm not sure the point Matt was making is correct. "Space" is most properly defined by being above the atmosphere (the various heights that get used are estimates of an average height). But the atmosphere is likely to be higher over the equator than over the poles, for exactly the same reason that the sea bulges around the equator. So a near-equatorial mountain may actually have *more* atmosphere over it than one that is closer to the poles. The more proper measurement for what Matt was describing is "furthest from the center of the earth".
I'd guess that the atmosphere is actually thicker (but slightly less dense) at the atmosphere due to the extra heat. Just a hunch though, thermo+fluid dynamics in a rotating reference frame is something I've very much avoided looking too much into.
I've seen people repeating that "interesting fact" about equatorial mountains, and at some point decided to see where it comes from. I believe it's from a misleading article, which doesn't have its terminology consistent even within itself. Actually reading about atmosphere thickness I was surprised to see that it is actually several times thicker above the equator than the poles, and that depends on temperature more than anything else. This thickness I believe is referring to how tall are the layers of the atmosphere, like the troposphere (mostly troposphere) and the others, roughy where one layer ends and another begins is determined by their properties and phenomena, that occur there, mostly... temperature? So that may explain why it depends on temperature. The thing is, especially higher up, there are no clearly defined borders, other than ones that are based on just height above sea level, not the atmosphere itself. Which brought me back to the first concern I had about that interesting fact, "isn't both the outer space and the mountains measured from sea level?". And they in fact are. Karman line (100 km) is the boundary between atmosphere and outer space. Just because there is so little atmosphere there, an arbitrary number was just picked. No matter the Earth bulging out on the equator, the defined space bulges with it, and the troposphere even more so.
Dr John Bull (the murdered supergun/spacegun guy 😱 ) has done all the hard work for you, and a lot of his work has been published online 😉 tons of stuff about height above sea level for a gun style launch and for a rocket style, he was interested in both, and frankly as far as ballistics go he was a absolute genius 👀
I'm afraid it all comes down to definitions. "Space" could be defined as a distance from center of mass of our planet, because orbital stuff works like that. It would make more sense. But in layman literature it is defined as something above mean sea level. Scott Manley has a super in depth video on basically "the definition of who went to space". A great watch.
Surface gravity anomaly is a cool bit of geology, even if it doesn't matter too much to the depth calc - the geology under your feet isn't just one density, even in the mantle (oceanic crust has a pretty consistent density which goes up with age). The mantle's pretty mixed up in terms of rock type, chemistry, and temperature so density variations
College Physics Professor: "Here's your final examine. Given p pressure, find the depth h within a body of water with density rho, salinity %o, and Temperature T. You will begin when they launch the submarine and you have until they reach the bottom of the sea bed." Parker: "No sweat, I'm good under pressure!"
Gravity actually increases as you go down. For a perfectly homogenous object, yes, the gravity would go down linearly as you descend into it, but in the case of the Earth, the core is quite a lot denser than the mantle and crust, so getting closer to the core more than makes up for being under part of the mantle and crust. Highest gravity is at the core-mantle boundary then it goes down.
> Limiting Factor I love when smart science people are Iain M. Banks fans and name things after his ships. Except for *that one* , obviously; only actually smart people count.
Does that mean the underground has a station at the bottom of the Mariana trench? If so, which zone is it in? And, of course, do not forget to _Mind the Gap_ !
you don't?? I agree they are far to tilted, but bottom to top is the only way to draw them, otherwise you end up moving back along the page to draw the curly bits.
Fun fact! to 'To fathom something' comes from 'to fathom the deep' - the act of lowering a weight on a rope to see how deep the ocean at a given point is (1 fathom = 6 feet). So when you 'can't fathom something'? this is where it comes from - you are unable to reach the deepest knowledge - to understand a thing.
Have to say, wasn't expecting to see Lord British when I clicked the video. I met him before, in sort of an embarrassing way, at the W Hotel in San Francisco, when I mistook him for someone else who I had been talking to before I went to the bathroom. In my defense, it was sort of dark and the other guy had a similar hair color and style and goatee.
I had to check real quick to make sure I hadn't accidentally clicked on some other random video by accident. I was not expecting to see Lord British either.
@@Vasharan Nah, looks quite a bit different. No hair for one. Though he was there, maybe, I think. Not sure. It was for the Ultima X: Odyssey unveiling, which was after they both left Origin. The guy I was talking to was some producer or another or something like that. I forget. Nearly 20 years ago. Also there was an open bar on EA's dime. Contributing factor. Shame they cancelled it, was a lot like WoW and slated to come out around the same time.
Or see it as a wormhole problem, taking a step to the east and now having completed the west bound trip, taking one step to the west, having completed the eastern journey. Having folded the starting and ending points over each other!
I'm a software engineer that works on deep sea robots, so this video is near and dear to my heart. I also have a styrofoam cup that I've drawn on it so that part was great :)
8 million pieces of plastic pollution find their way into our ocean daily. - so... 30M Pounds isnt much really, thats like 3-4 days of pounds that get dumped into the ocean. its a nice thing to do, but will it do anything? i dont think so... which is sad tbf.
@@haxkztasy Mark Rober specified about half the money will go into reducing the source of pollution. Can't say exactly the plan is, but the initiative understands the problem.
Honestly I take this just as much as I hated Team Trees. It reaks of ignorant people who WANT to do something good but don't actually understand how to do it, so it becomes a stupid fundraising gimmick for something that sounds wonderful but ultimately isn't a very efficient use of resources.
Slight mistake in the original integration. By ignoring the constant of integration, you're effectively saying that P=0 at h=0. But that's not true, you have 1 bar of atmospheric pressure, or about 101 000 Pa. Indeed, without mentioning this, confounding factor 7 (local changes in atmospheric pressure from stuff like weather) doesn't make sense.
I'm sure someone has pointed this out already, but looking at the top comments I didn't catch it so I'm going to point it out (again). "closest to space" is a different definition from "furthest away from the center of the Earth", so while the mountain in Ecuador is the furthest point from the center of the Earth, the Everest is still closest to space because the most common definition of space (the Karman Line) is defined in terms of sea level, and that is because it is an approximation of where the atmosphere ends and the atmosphere, much like the sea, "bulges out" along with everything else.
Its not very different from most liquids, glycerine is less compressible, petrol is more compressible, but not by large factors. It is much more compressible than mercury though...
For the first seven minutes I was thinking of my absolute favorite line from Futurama, and how I was going to find that clip after your video, and then there it was.
Small correction - at 2:13, the Mariana Trench is slightly East of Guam/the mariana islands, not to the west. In fact, the Mariana islands and Guam are actually just seafloor that was pushed so high up by the pacific plate getting pushed down (how the Mariana Trench formed) that the bottom of the ocean became islands! Edit: It seems I was wrong about their origin, my bad. While the plate itself is sea floor, the islands are all volcanos that sprouted up from the fresh new magma created by the melting pacific plate.
mariana islands are not seafloor. They are part of an volcanic arc that developed when the pacific plate subducted. They weren't pushed up. The volcanoes grew from the seafloor. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Izu%E2%80%93Bonin%E2%80%93Mariana_Arc
@@antontimeboy6094 Well most islands are formed by volcanism of some sort. Even the ones you wouldn't think - most continents even - can be traced back to volcanism millions or even billions of years ago.
As other fans of Um, Actually will already know, the title 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea refers to the horizontal distance they traveled, not the depth. If it referred to depth, that would measure through the earth and way out the opposite side, so the number would be too big to be used in that context. Perfectly fine usage of it here though, so well done
The analytical processes available to a group of research scientists providing an additional half a percent accuracy, and that that half a percent is deeply important to earth sciences. The fact that level of accuracy is worth pouring millions of dollars into. We live in a truly magical time.
Oh my goodness, that is quite a souvenir!! Good job, little Parker Square! Donated earlier on Mark Rober's video but had to also donate on yours. Nice work, as always. 🎉
@6:30 Exactly. That's why the earth is so relatively smooth and the layer of water is so relatively thin compared to the overall diameter. Vsauce demonstrated this brilliantly with what amounted to a thimble of water and a small globe. Eye-opening.
I loved that Futurama gag, nice video. For a ballpark figure in fluid mechanics we usually estimate 1 atm per 10 meters of water (engineering 101: g=10 and rho=1000)
I don’t think that part about Everest not being the closest point to space is right. Isn’t the limit of space defined by an altitude above sea level? So, the lower edge of space would also be an oblate spheroid, not a sphere that’s closer to the Earth at the equator and farther away at the poles. That peak in Ecuador may be the highest point as measured from the Earth’s center, but it’s not closer to space than Everest.
But that (arbitrary) altitude that defines the edge of space is/was chosen because of the density of the air. And the air density doesn't care that much about the oblateness of the earth, it's just a function of the distance from earth's center, right? So the "edge" of space should be a spherical shell around an oblate earth, which does give an advantage to mountains on the equator in terms of reaching into space.
@@YourMJK It's complicated by the density of the air in cooler regions versus warmer regions. The increased solar radiance at the equator puffs up the atmosphere due to thermal expansion, and the cold temperatures near the poles causes the atmosphere to contract. This causes the height above sea level for the atmosphere at the equator to be several kilometers higher than the atmosphere at the poles. There is also more rotational velocity imparted to the air interacting with landmasses at the equator than at the poles. This causes air molecules to be accelerated into a higher (wider) track around the earth's equator.
@@YourMJK Absent any temperature differences and weather-induced pressure fluctuations, the isobar planes of the atmosphere should follow the shape of the geoid, since the atmosphere is, if averaged over sufficiently long timescales, pretty much in hydrostatic equilibrium. But yes, the pressure altitude of mountain peaks (or any other point on Earth) does vary with the seasons - but Everest is, from what I can tell, always the mountain with the highest pressure altitude.
@@YourMJK The air density will follow local gravity, and that certainly is affected by the oblateness of the earth. I *think* it all falls out so that to a first approximation space is a constant distance above sea level.
Using integration is a little silly if we assume the density and gravity are constant, since we can easily get the same formula by considering any cylinder with one base at your current depth D and the other at the surface, which has volume V = AD and density ρ and thus mass AρD. So the force of gravity at depth D is F = mg = AρDg, and the pressure is P = F/A = ρgD. You can even reason about it like this: pressure is the force per unit area. Each unit area has a mass of water above it equal to its depth times its linear density. So its weight is just that times g.
@16:10 you said gravity gets less as you get deeper well due to Gauss's law the mass of the stuff above you doesnt matter and because earth gets a lot denser as you go deeper the gravity gets stronger up to the transition of the outer core where its 10.7 m/s check out the PERM model for more details
@@dsdsspp7130 Gauss's law of Gravitation states that when youre inside a shell of matter the gravity pulls equally on you from all directions thus canceling out thus you dont feel any gravity
@@dsdsspp7130 Essentially, two factors are at play here. As you get closer to a massive object, the force of gravity increases since it is an inverse square law. If all of the mass of Earth was concentrated into one point, as can be safely approximated from any perspective outside the Earth, gravitational acceleration would grow noticeably as you descended through the ocean. However, as you descend through the ocean, there is also a growing amount of mass above you. You might expect this to pull "upwards" on you, but in actuality something a bit strange happens. I believe Newton first figured out that at any point inside a hollow sphere of even density, the gravitational pull of all the mass in the shell cancels out. This is the "Gauss's Law" that raptor4916 is referring to. That means that the ocean above you - along with all of the mass in that "shell" around the planet - no longer has a net gravitational pull on you. As a result, the amount of Earth that is pulling you downward is somewhat reduced. It turns out that due to the density of Earth, gravitational acceleration would be pretty uniform for the majority of a tunnel all the way through the planet - you get closer to the center of mass, but the amount of mass it represents decreases.
So neat to see this! I have so many fond memories of the Ultima games, so great to see Mr. Garriott doing well. Also very happy to see you are a part of teamseas, a great cause!
Thanks Matt! Just found the video, looking forward to testing some of the number sets. I found an interesting correlation with your depth deviation at roughly -35 as a mass density differential with salinity of 35 grams per kilogram per mass percent, was researching something different relative to mass density and realized there is a correlation.
15:59 sure about that? That assumes that the earth is a sphere with uniform density. But since the water is still less dense than the rocks below it and much less dense than the earths core, the gravity should (to some certain point) increase before it decreases again. So g is not a linear function.
I’d say there have been many more than 17 people go down to the bottom, however Richard is most likely the 17th person to go down, and then come back up :)
People must realize how grand the technology to build these capsules is. A pressure of 112.5 MPa is 2-3 times of the compressive strength of regular concrete (30-50 MPa) and would crunch in buckling most common unreinforced 25mm steel plates. Crazy!
evolution is an amazing feat, humans needed a lot of technology to reach this depth and there were some crabs minding their own business as if nothing happened, too bad even that place is being ruined by plastic
As an oceanographer, this is a fun video regardless 😁 The amount of plastic they'll be removing though is a drop in the ocean, about a tenth of a percent of what enters yearly. Therefore as well as donating, it would be helpful if people also pushed for legislative action too.
The real challenge is here is actually two fold. 1) Get humanity to stop producing these compounds, and 2) determie how to demolecturize these compounds to get them into a state that they can be truly recycled safely.
I specialized in hydrocarbon industry gas measurement. When we measured pressure, our basis of calibration was gravity. The most repeatable, provable measurement of pressure involved spinning fairly heavy brass discs (weights) atop a small, fully lubricated piston. We even had a Gauge Location Factor which adjusted, not for the location and elevation of whatever measurement you were making, but for the location of the deadweight tester at the start of your calibration chain. So the standards of pressure (or the lack thereof) are the standards of weight.
Congrats on 1M subs! I first subscribed to your channel before you started posting regularly as Standup Maths, and there is NO ONE more deserving named Steve Mould or otherwise. Well done mate!
Hey Matt... the t0 has a pressure of 3.58 bar..suggesting they may have started measurements at maybe 30 meters under the water..roughly equivalent to how far "off" your calculation was. not sure if this was taken into account but looking at the spreadsheet it does not appear that it was.
James Cameron is, in general, obsessed with ocean exploration. Rich people can make pretty significant discoveries in the deep ocean. Paul Allen, before his untimely death, found the USS Indianapolis.
Interesting. The typical specific gravity of seawater that we use in the naval architecture industry is 1.025. That might be a function of us assuming a higher temperature than oceanographers, since we only work with surface waters instead of colder water at depth. I think our definition is set at a temperature of 15 or 20C
More Iain M. Banks fans (not only me and Elon Musk): Limiting Factor is one of the ships in his Culture Universe. Another coincidental cultural reference: Karl (D=devil?) Wagner, that's the deep-blue guy with the tail in X-Men Apocalypse. Started watching this video, got distracted by another video about Björk. Then YT recommended a video with Annie Lennox and David Bowie rehearsing "Under pressure". Clever algorithm, that.
That is kinda funny, i was following the Viscovo stuff through that documentary series they released, and saw that plastic bag on the bottom of the ocean. I saw Richard, but i hadn't found your channel yet at that time, so it is funny to see it coming full circle here.
Lol I didn't even notice, I never turn up the quality on videos and they always default to 480p for me. This was only slightly worse, and I clearly couldn't tell.
Can I just say how much I, as a They/Them user myself, absolutely adore the fact that Matt uses the singular they when referring to people? It really just warms my heart.
Phrases on TH-cam that get me excited:
Vsauce: "...or is it?"
Lock Picking Lawyer: "we'll get the pick Bosnian Bill and I made"
Matt Parker: "so I put it in a spreadsheet"
I see you're a man of refined taste too
SmarterEveryDay: "laminar flow"
Chubby Emu: "emia, meaning presence in blood"
Those are exciting phrases, I decided
"FULL BRIDGE RECTIFIER !!!!"
Not Just Bikes: "But I'll cover that more in a Future Video"
I think you should redo the calculation, properly incorporating the correct circumference of the earth as determined by you and Hannah Fry a couple videos back.
Lol
It's the Parker circumference!
Oh yeah. Matt! Have you seen the success of the yt channel trying to do everything needed to make a cell phone starting from scratch? You should totally derive all these measurements of the Earth and space and everything from your own actual measurements in random tall buildings on days with usual British visibility and so on, and homemade tools, and see how you do compared to Eratosthenes, 17th century geometers, and, you know, NASA.
You can then publish the Parker Tables of universal constants.
Can we be sure the pressure measuring device on the "Limiting Factor" is as precise as Matt's astrolabe/protractor thingy? Perhaps next time the "Limiting Factor" does a dive they can do their pressure measurements by the size of a balloon tied to the outside of the hull next to an externally mounted camera. Now the question is what fluid is best to fill the balloon?
The 'how many atmospheres can the ship withstand?' line is one of my favorite jokes in Futurama.
Well, it's a space ship; so I'd say anywhere between zero and one.
Um, dangerous. Exploritory. Romantic (but that's rather dangerous, but dangerous is reletively safe). Boring (when the ship isn't part of the plot). Exciting. Exciting only to the newbie. Annnnnd comedic. So, maybe five and a half?
and I was thinking "cue Futurama quote" right before it actually came ...
@@frankharr9466 111111111111
I was really hoping he was gonna say "Well, it's a spaceship; so I'd say anywhere between negative one and one."
31:28 "a pound of plastic is 0.4536 grams." A bit of a Parker conversion there - he gave it a go, even if it didn't turn out quite right.
Parker conversion, lol
Thats the parker square way
British pound notes are now made of polymer (plastic) and they have a mass of the stated 0.45 ish grams. It was a lbs vs £ joke, but not very funny. Guess it was a Parker joke.
Michael Cartmell I thought it was funny :(
@@michaelcartmell7428 Really? A pound (weight) is somewhere in the neighborbood of 0.45 kg, so I figured that's what he meant. It seems his mistake was really saying a pound of plastic instead of a plastic pound.
You missed the 35 meters at the beginning that they descended before started taking measurements. That fixes your -35 meters final, and also gets you closer to the official number.
Matt has reached a new depth. All these equations and not a pi in sight.
g ≈ π² -ish
The centrifugal force from the rotation of the Earth might have been factored into the value of g that he used, but pi was in there somewhere.
@@Hiltok that is a ''parker pi square'' if I've ever seen one xD
@@Hiltok I think you mean g≈(τ^2)/4
a depth of 3477 pi meters, in fact
6:25 Interestingly, thought I'd look up how the league was defined originally, as it's not something I've understood before, and turns out it was first (roughly) defined as "the distance a person can walk in an hour", so saying you can walk 11km (1.96 leagues) in 2h, is surprisingly close to the original rough definition.
It just went full circle. Nice.
I guess humans are quite consistent then ?
On similar lines, I think an acre was originally defined as the amount of land that a single person could scythe in a day. So if you had five acres to scythe, you'd automatically know you'd need one person for five days, or five people for one day.
@@kayvee256 or 2 and a half people for 2 days
Very interesting! While it is arbitrary, that is a surprisingly useful definition.
In the Lord if the Rings book and/or some of the other books by Tolkien, he often describes distances using some nowadays rather obscure units of measurement.
Among them were definitely leagues, chains, miles (still quite common) and I think I've also read furlongs and paces there.
On the topic of mountains being "closer to space" around 29:00, I'm not sure the point Matt was making is correct. "Space" is most properly defined by being above the atmosphere (the various heights that get used are estimates of an average height). But the atmosphere is likely to be higher over the equator than over the poles, for exactly the same reason that the sea bulges around the equator. So a near-equatorial mountain may actually have *more* atmosphere over it than one that is closer to the poles. The more proper measurement for what Matt was describing is "furthest from the center of the earth".
I'd guess that the atmosphere is actually thicker (but slightly less dense) at the atmosphere due to the extra heat. Just a hunch though, thermo+fluid dynamics in a rotating reference frame is something I've very much avoided looking too much into.
I've seen people repeating that "interesting fact" about equatorial mountains, and at some point decided to see where it comes from. I believe it's from a misleading article, which doesn't have its terminology consistent even within itself.
Actually reading about atmosphere thickness I was surprised to see that it is actually several times thicker above the equator than the poles, and that depends on temperature more than anything else. This thickness I believe is referring to how tall are the layers of the atmosphere, like the troposphere (mostly troposphere) and the others, roughy where one layer ends and another begins is determined by their properties and phenomena, that occur there, mostly... temperature? So that may explain why it depends on temperature. The thing is, especially higher up, there are no clearly defined borders, other than ones that are based on just height above sea level, not the atmosphere itself.
Which brought me back to the first concern I had about that interesting fact, "isn't both the outer space and the mountains measured from sea level?". And they in fact are. Karman line (100 km) is the boundary between atmosphere and outer space. Just because there is so little atmosphere there, an arbitrary number was just picked. No matter the Earth bulging out on the equator, the defined space bulges with it, and the troposphere even more so.
Thanks for making me not have to write pretty much that exact comment
Dr John Bull (the murdered supergun/spacegun guy 😱 ) has done all the hard work for you, and a lot of his work has been published online 😉 tons of stuff about height above sea level for a gun style launch and for a rocket style, he was interested in both, and frankly as far as ballistics go he was a absolute genius 👀
I'm afraid it all comes down to definitions.
"Space" could be defined as a distance from center of mass of our planet, because orbital stuff works like that. It would make more sense. But in layman literature it is defined as something above mean sea level.
Scott Manley has a super in depth video on basically "the definition of who went to space". A great watch.
Getting this in my recommendations I assumed it was a recent video that just happened to be timely because of the Titan. Nope, it’s an older video
How thoughtful of youtube to recommend this right after the Titanic submersible disaster...😭
"Pressure pushing down on me
Pressing down on you" - lol
No man ask for
Brings a building down...
And the deadpan delivery!
*dun dun dun du du dun dun*
8:45
I love that Queen reference.
Fabulous! But don't forget David Bowie!
And a Specials reference at 7:51
The DSV is yellow for a reason
Surface gravity anomaly is a cool bit of geology, even if it doesn't matter too much to the depth calc - the geology under your feet isn't just one density, even in the mantle (oceanic crust has a pretty consistent density which goes up with age). The mantle's pretty mixed up in terms of rock type, chemistry, and temperature so density variations
Carl Sagan and Neil DeGrasse Tyson gave us the "Spaceship of the Imagination". Matt Parker gives us the "DSV Unrealistic" What a wonderful world!
i can think of a ceo that should have watched this video
College Physics Professor: "Here's your final examine. Given p pressure, find the depth h within a body of water with density rho, salinity %o, and Temperature T. You will begin when they launch the submarine and you have until they reach the bottom of the sea bed."
Parker: "No sweat, I'm good under pressure!"
I SEA what you did there!
🤦♀️🤪🤣 Good ones!
"You may not use a spreadsheet." 😥
Gravity actually increases as you go down.
For a perfectly homogenous object, yes, the gravity would go down linearly as you descend into it, but in the case of the Earth, the core is quite a lot denser than the mantle and crust, so getting closer to the core more than makes up for being under part of the mantle and crust. Highest gravity is at the core-mantle boundary then it goes down.
Nice.
> Limiting Factor
I love when smart science people are Iain M. Banks fans and name things after his ships.
Except for *that one* , obviously; only actually smart people count.
Realistically, that viewing window is no bigger than my *actual* thumb nail. No worries mate, you’ll be fine. 🧐
You watching this on a flip phone or what
@@rodriguez7282 You just have small hands.
More room for the maths, more gooder
You watching this on a 3" screen?
at over 1000 atmospheres, what kind of construction does a viewing window need to be i wonder...
"Over 49,000 stairs, the equivalent of a 15 storey building!" -The Tube, probably
Or 120.29 football fields (American football)
Does that mean the underground has a station at the bottom of the Mariana trench? If so, which zone is it in?
And, of course, do not forget to _Mind the Gap_ !
11:38 - Matt drawing his integral symbols bottom-to-top makes me very anxious.
Bottom to top is the only way. Otherwise, you have to write right-to-left.
you don't?? I agree they are far to tilted, but bottom to top is the only way to draw them, otherwise you end up moving back along the page to draw the curly bits.
Bottom-to-top is the only way I've ever seen it done in all my physics classes.
Fun fact! to 'To fathom something' comes from 'to fathom the deep' - the act of lowering a weight on a rope to see how deep the ocean at a given point is (1 fathom = 6 feet). So when you 'can't fathom something'? this is where it comes from - you are unable to reach the deepest knowledge - to understand a thing.
Have to say, wasn't expecting to see Lord British when I clicked the video. I met him before, in sort of an embarrassing way, at the W Hotel in San Francisco, when I mistook him for someone else who I had been talking to before I went to the bathroom. In my defense, it was sort of dark and the other guy had a similar hair color and style and goatee.
I had to check real quick to make sure I hadn't accidentally clicked on some other random video by accident. I was not expecting to see Lord British either.
Turns out the guy before the bathroom was Blackthorn.
@@Vasharan Nah, looks quite a bit different. No hair for one. Though he was there, maybe, I think. Not sure. It was for the Ultima X: Odyssey unveiling, which was after they both left Origin. The guy I was talking to was some producer or another or something like that. I forget. Nearly 20 years ago. Also there was an open bar on EA's dime. Contributing factor. Shame they cancelled it, was a lot like WoW and slated to come out around the same time.
The "DSV Limiting Factor", love the Culture reference.
I wonder how many folks will get it?
I hope the answer is "loads"
Richard Garriott, no way! Lord British, the legend himself, my game design hero. Crazy crossover for you Matt, I'm stunned.
I was thinking "Hey, another guy with that name". But seeing him again at the end and judging his age, it really seems to be him.
Well, it's not like there's a bunch of other Richard Garriotts that have been to space, though, are there?
An absolute shame that the dive unit is not called "The Shamino"
After going as much as he could high and low, north and south, Garriott should go as far as possible east and west.
Or see it as a wormhole problem, taking a step to the east and now having completed the west bound trip, taking one step to the west, having completed the eastern journey. Having folded the starting and ending points over each other!
I'm a software engineer that works on deep sea robots, so this video is near and dear to my heart. I also have a styrofoam cup that I've drawn on it so that part was great :)
If anything I love seeing how various channels are trying to shoehorn Team Seas into their normal content and it's amuzing and for a good cause.
8 million pieces of plastic pollution find their way into our ocean daily. - so... 30M Pounds isnt much really, thats like 3-4 days of pounds that get dumped into the ocean.
its a nice thing to do, but will it do anything? i dont think so... which is sad tbf.
@@haxkztasy Mark Rober specified about half the money will go into reducing the source of pollution. Can't say exactly the plan is, but the initiative understands the problem.
@Kelvin Ok, and not doing this charity is somehow better?
Honestly I take this just as much as I hated Team Trees. It reaks of ignorant people who WANT to do something good but don't actually understand how to do it, so it becomes a stupid fundraising gimmick for something that sounds wonderful but ultimately isn't a very efficient use of resources.
I remember being really entertained by the whole TeamTrees thing. It felt like such a big web of connections. I'm glad TH-cam is back for round 2.
Slight mistake in the original integration. By ignoring the constant of integration, you're effectively saying that P=0 at h=0. But that's not true, you have 1 bar of atmospheric pressure, or about 101 000 Pa. Indeed, without mentioning this, confounding factor 7 (local changes in atmospheric pressure from stuff like weather) doesn't make sense.
It depends if the pressure sensor was absolute and relative, and what its tare point is. It makes sense to tare it at 1atm absolute.
I'm sure someone has pointed this out already, but looking at the top comments I didn't catch it so I'm going to point it out (again). "closest to space" is a different definition from "furthest away from the center of the Earth", so while the mountain in Ecuador is the furthest point from the center of the Earth, the Everest is still closest to space because the most common definition of space (the Karman Line) is defined in terms of sea level, and that is because it is an approximation of where the atmosphere ends and the atmosphere, much like the sea, "bulges out" along with everything else.
The fact that the density of water at challenger deep is only 5% greater than at the surface is a true testament to the incompressibility of water!
Its not very different from most liquids, glycerine is less compressible, petrol is more compressible, but not by large factors. It is much more compressible than mercury though...
For the first seven minutes I was thinking of my absolute favorite line from Futurama, and how I was going to find that clip after your video, and then there it was.
1:13 - dude, that artist is amazing. Do they accept commissions?
😂
Matt, you could have named you submersible "Integrating Factor"
Given the genesis of the ‘Limiting Factor’ name, I’d be more partial to Matt choosing the name ‘Mistake not..’
Yeah I was soo expecting this joke at 8:35
He's got the sopp award, space, ocean, and pole to pole
But who will be the first person to achieve the coveted SOPP-EGOT?
Small correction - at 2:13, the Mariana Trench is slightly East of Guam/the mariana islands, not to the west. In fact, the Mariana islands and Guam are actually just seafloor that was pushed so high up by the pacific plate getting pushed down (how the Mariana Trench formed) that the bottom of the ocean became islands!
Edit: It seems I was wrong about their origin, my bad. While the plate itself is sea floor, the islands are all volcanos that sprouted up from the fresh new magma created by the melting pacific plate.
Hm that sounds impressive, but then again, how else could islands be formed 🤔
mariana islands are not seafloor. They are part of an volcanic arc that developed when the pacific plate subducted. They weren't pushed up. The volcanoes grew from the seafloor. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Izu%E2%80%93Bonin%E2%80%93Mariana_Arc
@@icedragon4008Ah my bad, you're right. I'd heard differently from it, but it seems I had heard wrong. Thanks for the correction to my correction!
@@antontimeboy6094 Well most islands are formed by volcanism of some sort. Even the ones you wouldn't think - most continents even - can be traced back to volcanism millions or even billions of years ago.
Makes you want to name a sub "Duction"...
I never could have imagined seeing Lord British on a Stand Up Maths video. I love you, Matt. You absolute lad, you.
As other fans of Um, Actually will already know, the title 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea refers to the horizontal distance they traveled, not the depth. If it referred to depth, that would measure through the earth and way out the opposite side, so the number would be too big to be used in that context. Perfectly fine usage of it here though, so well done
The analytical processes available to a group of research scientists providing an additional half a percent accuracy, and that that half a percent is deeply important to earth sciences. The fact that level of accuracy is worth pouring millions of dollars into. We live in a truly magical time.
Oh my goodness, that is quite a souvenir!! Good job, little Parker Square! Donated earlier on Mark Rober's video but had to also donate on yours. Nice work, as always. 🎉
Wasn't a human that made it first? GG Plastic.
@6:30 Exactly. That's why the earth is so relatively smooth and the layer of water is so relatively thin compared to the overall diameter. Vsauce demonstrated this brilliantly with what amounted to a thimble of water and a small globe. Eye-opening.
5:00 Yeah but how deep is that in smoots? I don't understand all these other nonsense measurements, what the heck is a 'meter'? Sounds sus.
One smoot is 1.7018 meters. So that's a smidge over 6,400 smoots deep.
@@Zuraneve Is that an avoirdupois smidge or a troy smidge though?
@@MarkTillotson Neither! It's a metric smidge, of course. Ten smidges make a smidgeroo, after all.
@@Zuraneve How does a smidgen translate to a smidge again? I forgot.
@@CODENAMEDERPY 10 smidgens equal a smidge. 10 smidges equal a smidgeroo.
I loved that Futurama gag, nice video.
For a ballpark figure in fluid mechanics we usually estimate 1 atm per 10 meters of water (engineering 101: g=10 and rho=1000)
That's certainly close enough, given that the speed of light is 1 :)
If you released an air bubble at that depth, would it rise or sink?
I don’t think that part about Everest not being the closest point to space is right. Isn’t the limit of space defined by an altitude above sea level? So, the lower edge of space would also be an oblate spheroid, not a sphere that’s closer to the Earth at the equator and farther away at the poles. That peak in Ecuador may be the highest point as measured from the Earth’s center, but it’s not closer to space than Everest.
But that (arbitrary) altitude that defines the edge of space is/was chosen because of the density of the air.
And the air density doesn't care that much about the oblateness of the earth, it's just a function of the distance from earth's center, right?
So the "edge" of space should be a spherical shell around an oblate earth, which does give an advantage to mountains on the equator in terms of reaching into space.
@@YourMJK It's complicated by the density of the air in cooler regions versus warmer regions. The increased solar radiance at the equator puffs up the atmosphere due to thermal expansion, and the cold temperatures near the poles causes the atmosphere to contract. This causes the height above sea level for the atmosphere at the equator to be several kilometers higher than the atmosphere at the poles.
There is also more rotational velocity imparted to the air interacting with landmasses at the equator than at the poles. This causes air molecules to be accelerated into a higher (wider) track around the earth's equator.
Either way... sounds like a great video.
@@YourMJK Absent any temperature differences and weather-induced pressure fluctuations, the isobar planes of the atmosphere should follow the shape of the geoid, since the atmosphere is, if averaged over sufficiently long timescales, pretty much in hydrostatic equilibrium.
But yes, the pressure altitude of mountain peaks (or any other point on Earth) does vary with the seasons - but Everest is, from what I can tell, always the mountain with the highest pressure altitude.
@@YourMJK The air density will follow local gravity, and that certainly is affected by the oblateness of the earth. I *think* it all falls out so that to a first approximation space is a constant distance above sea level.
Love the Futurama insert. Such a great show.
That styrofoam cup has been on more adventure than me.
I wonder if don Walsh said to Jacques Piccard: "Let's boldly go where no man has gone before" Onto which Piccard answered: "Make it so."
You forgot the constant of integration at 12:03. My lecturers would be furious.
It's a definite integral from 0 to D over h, so no constants I'm afraid.
Using integration is a little silly if we assume the density and gravity are constant, since we can easily get the same formula by considering any cylinder with one base at your current depth D and the other at the surface, which has volume V = AD and density ρ and thus mass AρD. So the force of gravity at depth D is F = mg = AρDg, and the pressure is P = F/A = ρgD.
You can even reason about it like this: pressure is the force per unit area. Each unit area has a mass of water above it equal to its depth times its linear density. So its weight is just that times g.
When you're a mathematician everything looks like calculus.
@16:10 you said gravity gets less as you get deeper well due to Gauss's law the mass of the stuff above you doesnt matter and because earth gets a lot denser as you go deeper the gravity gets stronger up to the transition of the outer core where its 10.7 m/s check out the PERM model for more details
Yes, I was thinking this as well. Thank you for writing my comment for me.
what does Gauss's law has to do with gravity? isn't gauss's law about electric flux?
also it does matter. stuff gets denser when you go down, but the amount of mass below you decreases as you go down.
@@dsdsspp7130 Gauss's law of Gravitation states that when youre inside a shell of matter the gravity pulls equally on you from all directions thus canceling out thus you dont feel any gravity
@@dsdsspp7130 Essentially, two factors are at play here. As you get closer to a massive object, the force of gravity increases since it is an inverse square law. If all of the mass of Earth was concentrated into one point, as can be safely approximated from any perspective outside the Earth, gravitational acceleration would grow noticeably as you descended through the ocean. However, as you descend through the ocean, there is also a growing amount of mass above you. You might expect this to pull "upwards" on you, but in actuality something a bit strange happens. I believe Newton first figured out that at any point inside a hollow sphere of even density, the gravitational pull of all the mass in the shell cancels out. This is the "Gauss's Law" that raptor4916 is referring to. That means that the ocean above you - along with all of the mass in that "shell" around the planet - no longer has a net gravitational pull on you. As a result, the amount of Earth that is pulling you downward is somewhat reduced. It turns out that due to the density of Earth, gravitational acceleration would be pretty uniform for the majority of a tunnel all the way through the planet - you get closer to the center of mass, but the amount of mass it represents decreases.
So neat to see this! I have so many fond memories of the Ultima games, so great to see Mr. Garriott doing well. Also very happy to see you are a part of teamseas, a great cause!
That Queen reference at 8:43 was awesome lmao
"Just over 19,998 leagues left to go!" has a nice ring to it.
I'm a simple man. I see Lord British, I thumbs up.
That Parker Square cup is the coolest object in the universe
“use maths to prove that this is the deepest math video ever”
Sun Tzu - the Art of Math
He used the maths to prove the maths.
Thanks Matt! Just found the video, looking forward to testing some of the number sets. I found an interesting correlation with your depth deviation at roughly -35 as a mass density differential with salinity of 35 grams per kilogram per mass percent, was researching something different relative to mass density and realized there is a correlation.
The Limiting Factor and Pressure Drop ships. Matt should have named his ship The Algebraist.
The MIS* Experiencing A Change In Gravitas (Well, Gravity) As We Get Deeper
* Matt's Imaginary Submersible (eccentric)
15:59 sure about that? That assumes that the earth is a sphere with uniform density. But since the water is still less dense than the rocks below it and much less dense than the earths core, the gravity should (to some certain point) increase before it decreases again. So g is not a linear function.
I’d say there have been many more than 17 people go down to the bottom, however Richard is most likely the 17th person to go down, and then come back up :)
People must realize how grand the technology to build these capsules is.
A pressure of 112.5 MPa is 2-3 times of the compressive strength of regular concrete (30-50 MPa) and would crunch in buckling most common unreinforced 25mm steel plates. Crazy!
Matt! How did you mash so much Rock 'n' Roll into this thing???
Nice uniform methods of estimating your geographic position are always satisfying.
Thank you, Matt, for that in-depth report.
I cracked up so much when you said you were going to do a DA. Not because it's a bad idea, but because of how you said it!
TH-cam does it's algorithm magic again. Well, at least it is one of my favourite Matts, and not some sigma-grindset bs.
19:35 - No, if you want to get pedantic, check the atmospheric pressure _every time_ you calculate your current depth.
Lol nice username
5:05 nice reference to the totally brilliant video about the genious of the imperial measurements (only length) video you did^^
evolution is an amazing feat, humans needed a lot of technology to reach this depth and there were some crabs minding their own business as if nothing happened, too bad even that place is being ruined by plastic
Agree, but watch what happens when that crab ascends and how many generations it took to reach that depth…
That Queen reference at 8:44 is golden :)
As an oceanographer, this is a fun video regardless 😁
The amount of plastic they'll be removing though is a drop in the ocean, about a tenth of a percent of what enters yearly. Therefore as well as donating, it would be helpful if people also pushed for legislative action too.
Yes, because if theres one thing that always helps its more govt action. No one ever resents that, or finds every possible loophole around that laws.
The real challenge is here is actually two fold. 1) Get humanity to stop producing these compounds, and 2) determie how to demolecturize these compounds to get them into a state that they can be truly recycled safely.
@@peterkelley6344 as i always say, just throw it a the sun (escape velocity is fine too, or any other point is space, but the sun is more fun)
Garriott and Vescovo answering questions was extremely pleasant and interesting to watch. I'd subscribe to a channel of that.
Anyone else recommended this video after the Titan implosion?
No
@@antiantiderivative the fact that you replied would imply “yes” :)
@@shinsooxx No
@@antiantiderivative I’ll take that as a “yes”! :)
@@shinsooxx No
12:01 Matt! You forgot the +C, you fell for the classic blunder! In this case the constant is the pressure one experiences at sealevel.
If the Earth was round the ocean would fall out the bottom. Thus proof it is a bowl.
Just because you were demoted to a dwarf planet doesn't mean you can spout lies about our glorious planet Earth!
Get back to the kuiper belt where you belong!
I specialized in hydrocarbon industry gas measurement. When we measured pressure, our basis of calibration was gravity. The most repeatable, provable measurement of pressure involved spinning fairly heavy brass discs (weights) atop a small, fully lubricated piston. We even had a Gauge Location Factor which adjusted, not for the location and elevation of whatever measurement you were making, but for the location of the deadweight tester at the start of your calibration chain. So the standards of pressure (or the lack thereof) are the standards of weight.
How much LSD would one need to make the highest math video ever? I imagine that bar is already hard to take.
Love how you captured yourself writing the formulas!!!
Watching this after the Titan implosion makes certain bits so much more hilarious
I didn't even notice that this was related to the Team Seas project until you brought it up at the end! I donated earlier today :)
Congrats on 1M subs! I first subscribed to your channel before you started posting regularly as Standup Maths, and there is NO ONE more deserving named Steve Mould or otherwise. Well done mate!
Hey Matt... the t0 has a pressure of 3.58 bar..suggesting they may have started measurements at maybe 30 meters under the water..roughly equivalent to how far "off" your calculation was. not sure if this was taken into account but looking at the spreadsheet it does not appear that it was.
Nice Bowie-Mercury reference! That was my personalized ringtone for my last job.
James Cameron is, in general, obsessed with ocean exploration. Rich people can make pretty significant discoveries in the deep ocean. Paul Allen, before his untimely death, found the USS Indianapolis.
He's actually gathering new material for Avatar 2. Instead of going up into space, they'll be going down this time.
Interesting. The typical specific gravity of seawater that we use in the naval architecture industry is 1.025. That might be a function of us assuming a higher temperature than oceanographers, since we only work with surface waters instead of colder water at depth. I think our definition is set at a temperature of 15 or 20C
Thanks Matt. But how did they measure their official depth?
Exactly my question! You just blindly assume the official depth measurement is the absolute truth, without questioning how it was determined!
That’s my all-time favorite Futurama gag
what an amazing achievement: Matt Parker: the first person to collaborate with someone who has been to space, both poles and the Mariana trench
Soulja boy did it first
And if that's not worth a million subscribers, I don't know what is
A true Parker collaboration!
More Iain M. Banks fans (not only me and Elon Musk): Limiting Factor is one of the ships in his Culture Universe.
Another coincidental cultural reference: Karl (D=devil?) Wagner, that's the deep-blue guy with the tail in X-Men Apocalypse.
Started watching this video, got distracted by another video about Björk. Then YT recommended a video with Annie Lennox and David Bowie rehearsing "Under pressure". Clever algorithm, that.
The Parker square, going further than any maths has ever gone before!
We will go to the moon, not because it is easy, but so that we can put a Parker square on there! Like, right next to the American flag!
Also, produced the best computer RPG (and one of the best games) of all time (Ultima 7).
So, how was the depth of the vessel officially calculated/measured/determined?
Probably with a pressure transducer.
That is kinda funny, i was following the Viscovo stuff through that documentary series they released, and saw that plastic bag on the bottom of the ocean.
I saw Richard, but i hadn't found your channel yet at that time, so it is funny to see it coming full circle here.
idc im watching the whole thing in 360p
Lol I didn't even notice, I never turn up the quality on videos and they always default to 480p for me. This was only slightly worse, and I clearly couldn't tell.
Living dangerously!
@@fahrenheit2101 I deliberately turn down the quality so i can enjoy the pixelation and compression artifacts
This was a cornucopia of interesting math and compelling facts of nature. Thank you so much for pulling this all together.
Hearing "maths" in an American accent might be the scariest thing I've witnessed this month
Timestamp?
DSV limiting factor is definitely the name of a mind/culture ship
Can I just say how much I, as a They/Them user myself, absolutely adore the fact that Matt uses the singular they when referring to people? It really just warms my heart.
So here's something to consider: would Matt use "they" for a person who has explicitly listed their pronouns as gendered?
That Futurama space joke is one of the best in the whole series