About nuking the asteroid, yes it would cause a massive rock to break up into tiny pieces; however, a lot of it would burn up , and even if a lot of the pieces hit, the damage it would cause would be massive, but it wouldnt wipe out all life. Now if that massive asteroid hits the planet as a whole, all life would be gone. Correct me if I am wrong, but blowing it up would at least save some of the world, if we had no other choice.
True. A huge asteroid could disrupt seasons life and even potentially end humanity. If you nuke it into smaller pieces then that won't happen for sure.
It's my understanding that the astronauts who landed on the moon could see stars, but only if they stood in the shade of the lander and looked straight up.
I do know that when some/many people refer to the "dark side" of the moon they are mistakenly using that term to indicate permanent darkness as if being unable to see it equates to darkness. And yes, a more appropriate term is the 'far side', but strictly speaking the moon _does_ have a dark side, just as the Earth does, just as any body revolving around a star does. Any sphere can only have one side lit in a single star system and though that other, dark side, isn't permanent unless it is tidally locked to its parent star, half of its surface will be 'dark' at any time.
@@ronkali5365 The moon is always lit. One side of it is always facing the sun. Just because you can't see it from a particular vantage point doesn't mean sunlight isn't falling on the far side from where you are. There are only 2 times when it appears that the moon is 'never lit'. One is when during a total lunar eclipse the moon is completely covered by the Earth's shadow, although refraction of light through the Earth's atmosphere casts a red glow on the moon, so technically it's still lit. The only time the moon is completely 'unlit' is during a solar eclipse when the moon is directly in front of us and the lit side is opposite you the viewer, which is also the same as a new moon, with or without an eclipse. But I would add that even then, Earth shine reflects sunlight from the Earth's surface onto the moon which makes it dimly visible. But the moon is always lit, just because you are at a point where you can't see it does not mean it isn't lit. That doesn't happen. It is obvious.
True, at any given moment, the Moon does have a bright side and a dark side in the sense that one half of the surface of the Moon is sunlit while the other half is not, but I think that many people mistakenly think that these regions are unchanging, that any given point on the Moon will either always be bright or dark. In fact, most places* on the surface of the Moon experience a day night cycle, analogous to that experienced by most places* on Earth, but with a diurnal cycle of about 29.5 days rather than the 24 hours diurnal cycle experienced (at most places) on Earth. * The exception is those places quite close to the poles.
We must be swift as the coursing river (Be a man) With all the force of a great typhoon (Be a man) With all the strength of a raging fire Mysterious as the dark side of the moon
Astronauts float in space because there is no gravity." In reality, there is gravity in space, but the sensation of weightlessness experienced by astronauts is due to being in freefall around the Earth. Astronauts aboard the International Space Station (ISS) are constantly falling towards the Earth but moving horizontally fast enough to keep missing it.
All who works in NASA, also knows, EARTH IS A CLOSED SYSTEM, NOBODY CANNOT LEAVE EARTH, THERE IS NOWHERE TO GO. They all know it, yet willingly deceive. + they are in the masonry club.
I went to school between 80s and 90s at Thornton Academy in Maine. And we knew and were taught about the planets in our solar system with Rings Jupiter and Neptune were part of the 3 pack.
Nuking a asteriod before it enters the atmosphere should definitely be considered a good idea if the calculations are right cuz it will help the asteroid to split into smaller parts and and friction in the atmosphere takes care thereafter
Technically it's compressive forces heating up the air, not friction, that causes objects falling to earth to heat up and break apart. But yeah, this would have to be assessed on a case by case basis. One big chunk large enough to destroy all life on Earth, vs many smaller chunks none of which by themselves would destroy life...
Say you get an asteroid 100 miles across. You blow it up into 20 asteroids all 5 miles across then each of those is a planet killer. Able to end all life on Earth. Or nearly all. Combined they would take out all life bigger than bacteria. Even as smaller chunks. Even 100 asteroids 1 mile across would devastate the planet completely.
I heard about the dark side of the moon, and I guess everyone heard the same thing: it's called dark side, because we never see it from the earth. This video is pointless.
The EPA and other branches of the federal government have way overstepped. Like When the EPA passed a rule for all diesel engines to burn def. 90% of that def comes in 2.5 gal jugs. MILLIONS OF PLASTIC JUGS. That wouldn't otherwise be needed.
The astronauts didn't see any stars because there were in the freaking day. It's like trying to see any star here on earth during daytime. If there were on the night site of the moon then they would easily see all the stars, but then they wouldn't be able to see the ground very good.
It was actually quite informative, however I take issue with the video's title. Saying "Lies" implies that someone deliberately wasn't telling the truth, and it is an emotionally charged, super click-baity word to use. So don't do it. Say "myths", or "misconceptions", or anything else for that matter.
You're right on both fronts. OH WOW!!! Lies... oh I gotta watch this video. Even those creators who make sensible videos fall victim to these tactics. But what can ya do? It gets them the results they want.
I take issue with the use of the number 13. I'm only able to count 12 "lies" in this video. Perhaps the title itself is the 13th lie. But if that were the case then it wouldn't be a lie that there were 13 lies. My brain hurts.
I do not know that I necessarily completely agree with your assessment of the Supreme Courts ruling on the epa. Wasn't that ruling in regard to the epa's overreach concerning landowners use of their private property where the court ruled that the epa overstepped their authority?
Nuking an asteroid would just dissipate the energy over a wider area, much of it in the atmosphere. So its energy is either spent mostly smashing the ground, or spent heating the atmosphere.
The idea of nuking an asteroid is along two lines of thought - One to move its path of direction, or two, break it into smaller pieces that burn up in the atmosphere - However in both cases - one nuke is not enough, if you are going to nuke it then send like 5,000 nukes.
"Twinkle twinkle little star, How i wonder what you are, Flying above the world so high, This song is a big fat lie" Bro striaght up roasted the creators of this song 💀
Planetary ring systems, especially that of Saturn, would probably come closest, even though the individual particles are probably smaller than shown in Star Wars.
The asteroid one was just wrong. A bunch of smaller rocks would burn up in the atmosphere or detonate high up. The detonation or detonations could be sufficient to slow it down or deflect it so that it's velocity is not directed straight at Earth. While there are better options, nuking the asteroid does actually improve a situation from catastrophic to devastating (depending on size and trajectory). There is no blast wave in space. Nukes are not actually good in space like they are on earth because of the lack of atmosphere. You would need to do a direct hit, not "near" as this video implies. Did they do any research on this subject?
Yea the early 80's when I was in high school was when the "There are rings around Uranus" jokes started. Jupiter's rings were known about before that. Don't remember when Neptune's rings were discovered off hand. Guessing one of the Voyagers.
I got to give you credit for telling the truth about space. I promise you that 98% of the people watching this video weren't even close to ready to accept the truth, let alone willing to even accept it.
It scares me the fact that no one actually read the details of this case and the opinion. They just presume the scotus ruling will do harm because they like the EPA and consider them above reproach.
Love what if videos❤❤❤..Thanks for uploading what if videos today because today is my birthday and it makes my day wonderful thanks a lot..Love from melbourne🇦🇺
Isn't it easier to see stars from the moon during the lunar night? If you are on the sunny side, it would surely be as difficult as it is on the daytime side of earth.
There's no atmosphere on Moon so the light from the sun (and the reflected light from the Earth) doesn't get scattered. That's why the sky is dark in all the Moon Landing photos. When you look up at a blue sky on Earth what you are seeing is sunlight bouncing off water and dust in the atmosphere. There is a case to be made for building an observatory on the farside (the so called 'dark side') of the Moon though as the Moon would then block out all the electromagnetic interference our tech is generating here on Earth.
Depends how bright Earthlight is. If you were on lunar night but the Earth was there, it might wash out a bit what you can see. Best view would be from the far side of the moon (so, Earth not visible) during the lunar night.
I always thought it is called the Far Side on the moon. Also about crying in space, The Expanse book/tv series really covered its accuracy. It has an episode where they can't apply first aid to the wounded in space because there is no gravity
I've already known there's Rings on other planets in our solar system like Jupiter But these Rings are too small like invizible to seeing Rings here from Earth and other thing i've known you cant see China's great wall from space, that's a FACT. All others came as New information For me like there's no dark side of The moon and stars not twinkling. Btw did you guys heared there Have Been founded a spider from NASA space Station what's truly interesting. In this video ive liked clips from Dont Look up and The Passengers movies what are awesome scifi movies, i really like scifi movies and videos like this. Great Job what If, keep going you do greatest content in The universe. 🌌
The Nebula Xelatic that spans 40 Bi-Light years is able to be seen with a 12 dollar telescope from Dollar General, that is if you are standing on the planet Melmac on the Blamisck mountain range.
I don't know how I feel about the life of a fruit fly but they've send scads of poor animals into space and how dare they send a poor dog into space.😢💓🐕💓
Someone has to be that person... _If_ you wanna show off with 'facts', you could at least get them correct, otherwise you look foolish. Laika. The dog's name was Laika not Leika.
@@andrewstamford1988 There's always that fool who has to be a dik about correcting someone over a dog's name as if it requires one to be completely uncivil about it, to get their point across. Gross.
@@isabellind1292 And there is also that dik who has to try to be some kind of moron to make the completely useless statement you just made. Need I explain to the simple minded that you seem to be that the OP wanted to be a smart ass like you and state a 'fact' only to get it wrong! If you think that correcting someone who wants to state a 'fact' only to be wrong is being a dik then feel a need to crawl out from under your rock to express your outrage, you really need to get out more and stop dwelling in your own head as you have some serious issues I have neither the time nor inclination to go over with you. So as I am uncivil, allow me to offer this advice to you... shove that up your ass and think about it dingus!
3:02 What “force from the blast” exactly? In space there is no air, so no pressure wave and no ‘blast’. A nuke in space just shines like a little sun for half a minute…it does make heat of course, but the only blast is from the tiny bit of vaporised bomb casing.
5:07 Even so, if you travel at the speed of light - the time for you is the same. Your time for others is "stretched" or sped up by others for you - but your time for you is the same. So you won't age slowly - you will age the same, just slower for others, the same for yourself. And if it's been 5 years for someone - for you it's still just your second. Some other things must be found to slow down aging ;)
There is very little force from a nuclear blast in space, there's no atmosphere to superheat and expand explosively. It would generate a lot of thermal and other radiation, but that would have little effect on an asteroid's trajectory.
WhatIf *LIED* about the court & the EPA ruling. The court ruled that the EPA only had say over NAVIGATABLE water ways as spelled out in the law regarding the EPA, not *every single little seasonal wet patch and man-mad pond that led nowhere on the ground* that the EPA had claimed tyrannical dominion over at the expense of countless land owners. That was what that ruling was about - eliminating the EPA's naked, illegal power grab.
The epa got spanked because it was violating separation of power . It cannot enforce what is not in the law . And they were changing meanings of expanding meanings to do so thus creating new law . Executive branch agencies cannot write their own law . It is grossly unconstitutional and the judicial system checked it . Mad or not you saw exactly why the founders made 3 branches .
What do you think happens when a meteor enters the Earth's atmosphere and breaks apart into a lot of pieces? Like the one over Russia several years ago. It breaks apart, and the pieces fall to Earth. Most small, but there may be some large pieces. As for seeing the Great Wall of China from Space, that depends on what you consider to be in Space, how far out.
I dunno. I see a lot of things with Google Satellite view. I've spied on North Korea!! They have a lot of 1) baseball fields, and 2) bright blue roof panels (which I can only assume is to deflect USA spy satellites. They built a new bridge over river into China.@@LaurentCassaro
Number 1 is not a surprise though, while for number 10, I knew that one since I was in 3rd grade. Now at 26, I'm still surprised that most people think they are twinkling.
This was a fun video and most things were 100% correct though there’s a few that could be explained more. 1. Yes black holes do “suck everything in” at least everything past its event horizon is gone and can’t leave due to its strong gravitational force. 2. Nuking an asteroid even if it doesn’t deflect the asteroid is still better than the alternative. The hope is that the smaller fragments would burn up on entry as most asteroids do. Of course the decision of what to do to a large asteroid on a collision course is complicated and depends on many different factors. 3. Yes you can see stars on the moon. The problem is both with how reflective the surface of the moon is with light and the sun’s brightness. But this is only during lunar day. If you were to stay on the moon for lunar night which lasts 14 earth days, the stars would be very visible and sharp due to the lack of atmosphere. 4. Yes while special relativity does play a role, general relativity was also a theory proposed by Einstein that states gravity also plays a role in time dilation. Astronauts are further away from the surface of the earth so there’d be time dilation. But yeah over 340 days the time dilation is only milliseconds as seen with Scott and Mark Kelly.
I'm not too worried about inhaling Martian dust, not because of the fact that I'll probably never step foot on Mars, but because Mars obviously doesn't have a breathable atmosphere so it's not like I'd be attempting to breathe in anything without a helmet on.
You can see stars in the sky at night, from the earth through miles high blanket and cover of air, but you cannot see any stars in outer space. Which of these could possibly be true ?
That is not true. The absence of light pollution is a must, though. On the side of the moon that is lit by the sun, our eyes are so oversaturated by it that the much fainter stars stand no chance of being seen by us, so the sky appears pitch black. As soon as you move to the dark side of the moon, without any light pollution AND no interference of an atmosphere, the faint light of the stars has no competition, and as soon as your eyes have adapted you’ll be blown away by a srarfilled sky like nothing seen on earth.
@@Godbluffer The shimmering stars are what adorn and deck the night sky and make it beautiful. Why is a James Webb telescope, built at such great expense if not to study the stars, never to study the vastness of empty space. Much of voyagers instruments are switched off and not in operation during it's journey through interstellar space, which is the most of the time.
Again can't see this 🌌 unless you are far away from light pollution. On moon the ☀, 🌍 and 🎑 are too bright to see stars like that. Get on the far side then you'd see it perfectly.
@@darkmatter1152 So during the moons day the stars will not be visible but during the moons night they will be. Its day and night must be of different duration to that earth. If its gravity is a fifth people's weight should also be a fifth. If you weigh 80 kilos on earth, then on the moon that would be only 16 kilos.
4:04 Or "simply" land on the night side of the Moon to see the stars ;) Another myth: that nebulae are more visible when you get closer to them. Sorry to burst your bubble, but haha, nope! :)
A pulsar doesn't emit in the visible light range. Also, given that it's the collapsed core of a supergiant star that went supernova, it's more akin to a black hole than a star.
but wait, shockweaves are the air knocked and pushed from the explotion right ? si if you blast a nuke in space, there will be no shockweave, exept from the explotion itself, sou we would actualy need to nuke the asteroid to make it move, or i've i missed somthing ?
Isn't that collision still just a hypothesis? The Giant-Impact Hypothesis? In the video it's being told like this was a fact. Or has it been confirmed?
very likely - due to the material the moon is made out of - however there are still other ideas put forward that can answer that as well(the easiest, they formed at same time from same material orbiting the Sun, but there is more to support the impact, and creation of the moon after the Earth - a lot more). so still not enough to say concrete 100% but very likely.
"Reflect upon the Past. Embrace your Present. Orchestrate our Futures." --Artemis (DD3) 🐲✨🐲✨🐲✨ "Before I start, I must see my end. Destination known, my mind’s journey now begins. Upon my chariot, heart and soul’s fate revealed. In time, all points converge, hope’s strength re-steeled. But to earn final peace at the universe's endless refrain, We must see all in nothingness... Before we start again." 🐲✨🐲✨🐲✨ --Diamond Dragons (series)
I love seeing you in your videos. Your voice is so unique that I can recognise it straight away. I am addicted to you. I meant your content. Time dilation isn’t the same as fixed time. Seconds, minutes, hours, days, weeks, months and years measure real time. In my perception, time can go slowly or quickly, but the real time or biological time is fixed. I won’t stop my aging time on the space. Time goes slower for the outside observer, but the calendar doesn’t deny the real time. I can fantasy that my friend who lives on earth and I live in a black hole. It seems to my friend, I have lived thousand of years there, but the reality is I can’t change my biological time. The life expectancy is around one century for humans. If I were on space my entire life, I won’t live longer than a century , despite time dilation. For me, it is just a perception of time. For me, time goes quickly or slowly, however, I can’t beat the real time measured by hours, days, weeks, years, centuries and so on. That would be nice. I want to live one millennium. I have the perfect solution for you- Go to space to slow your age process. Let’s stop the time, shall we?
Most of this is accurate, except the fact that stars DO actually twinkle, if you see a twinkling star, it means that the star is dying, however with earth being so many light years away, most of the stars we see are actually already dead and have been for hundreds if not thousands of years, it just takes so long for their light to hit us that we perceive them to still be up there. But stars do twinkle before they die/ super nova, so to say that that’s a lie and it’s just the gasses in the earths atmosphere that makes them appear that way is not 100% true.
Now think about the lapse of time between two supernovae that can be seen from Earth. Oh wait, even easier, think how much time a supernova lasts. So, yes, if you see a star twinkle, it's because of the atmosphere. Only because of the atmosphere.
Well... most of the stars we see (at least with the naked eye) are within a few hundred to a few thousand light years away. Beyond that and they're too faint to see. Typical stars live for billions of years, or hundreds of thousands to millions for supergiants. Pretty much all of the stars we can see (with the possible exception of Betelgeuse) are still alive and shining brightly. Most of the stars seen in the universe through powerful telescopes, sure. They've probably mostly died and been replaced with later generation stars by now, and it would be hundreds of millions to billions of years gone, not hundreds to thousands. Hundreds to thousands of years is practically nothing in a universal sense; heck, it's practically nothing in a geological sense. But when we're talking about stars twinkling, that's naked eye visible stars; so yeah, it's due to the atmosphere, not stars dying.
Of course the moon has a dark side, it's just not a static side. Whichever side is currently facing away from the sun is dark! During a new moon, the dark side lines up with the near side, and during the full moon the dark side matches up with the far side.
It is incorrect to assume that you can see a light show from world cities with just the naked eye while orbiting Earth. All those fancy videos and images are created by adjusting light sensitivity or camera exposure.
The problem is that the EPA is a regulatory committee, not a legislative branch of government. It's a little intellectually dishonest to portray the SCOTUS ruling as a "bad thing" when all it did was uphold the fact that the EPA is, and has been overstepping it bounds. If you want to regulate and legislate "climate change", it needs to be done at the congressional level.
About nuking the asteroid, yes it would cause a massive rock to break up into tiny pieces; however, a lot of it would burn up , and even if a lot of the pieces hit, the damage it would cause would be massive, but it wouldnt wipe out all life. Now if that massive asteroid hits the planet as a whole, all life would be gone. Correct me if I am wrong, but blowing it up would at least save some of the world, if we had no other choice.
Depends on how close it was when it went boom 💥. Best to destroy it from 🎑 distance at very least or farther out.
Nice idea for a separate what if episode.
True. A huge asteroid could disrupt seasons life and even potentially end humanity. If you nuke it into smaller pieces then that won't happen for sure.
It's my understanding that the astronauts who landed on the moon could see stars, but only if they stood in the shade of the lander and looked straight up.
I always envisioned a grappling tug boat... Just to move it laterally. Why worry about slowing it down?
I do know that when some/many people refer to the "dark side" of the moon they are mistakenly using that term to indicate permanent darkness as if being unable to see it equates to darkness.
And yes, a more appropriate term is the 'far side', but strictly speaking the moon _does_ have a dark side, just as the Earth does, just as any body revolving around a star does.
Any sphere can only have one side lit in a single star system and though that other, dark side, isn't permanent unless it is tidally locked to its parent star, half of its surface will be 'dark' at any time.
Then explain to us why at times the moon is never lit..since the claim is the sun lights the moon
@@ronkali5365 The moon is always lit. One side of it is always facing the sun. Just because you can't see it from a particular vantage point doesn't mean sunlight isn't falling on the far side from where you are.
There are only 2 times when it appears that the moon is 'never lit'. One is when during a total lunar eclipse the moon is completely covered by the Earth's shadow, although refraction of light through the Earth's atmosphere casts a red glow on the moon, so technically it's still lit.
The only time the moon is completely 'unlit' is during a solar eclipse when the moon is directly in front of us and the lit side is opposite you the viewer, which is also the same as a new moon, with or without an eclipse. But I would add that even then, Earth shine reflects sunlight from the Earth's surface onto the moon which makes it dimly visible.
But the moon is always lit, just because you are at a point where you can't see it does not mean it isn't lit. That doesn't happen. It is obvious.
True, at any given moment, the Moon does have a bright side and a dark side in the sense that one half of the surface of the Moon is sunlit while the other half is not, but I think that many people mistakenly think that these regions are unchanging, that any given point on the Moon will either always be bright or dark. In fact, most places* on the surface of the Moon experience a day night cycle, analogous to that experienced by most places* on Earth, but with a diurnal cycle of about 29.5 days rather than the 24 hours diurnal cycle experienced (at most places) on Earth.
* The exception is those places quite close to the poles.
@@brettschmidt5929 Exactly.
It's like how very often the term 'theory' is confused.
But I would not like for the term dark side to be a taboo word.
We must be swift as the coursing river
(Be a man)
With all the force of a great typhoon
(Be a man)
With all the strength of a raging fire
Mysterious as the dark side of the moon
In the words of a famous 90s cartoon character..."Space...it's really, really, really, really...Big" 😂
In the words of famous 90s cartoon characters...
"Pinky, are you pondering what I'm pondering?"
"I think so, Brain, but chickens don't have lips."
that is the truest thing that any cartoon has and will ever say.
"Billions and billions of stars in our galaxy. Made up of all this cosmic stuff".
Earth has rings now with all the satellites that orbit
Astronauts float in space because there is no gravity."
In reality, there is gravity in space, but the sensation of weightlessness experienced by astronauts is due to being in freefall around the Earth. Astronauts aboard the International Space Station (ISS) are constantly falling towards the Earth but moving horizontally fast enough to keep missing it.
Ohhh we need a video of this explanation, i wanna see it in action.
@@motodro1d621😂😂😂
Comming in
Prove it by going there & showing us
We are also 'falling' into the black hole in the middle of our galaxy, but we are also moving horizontally, at litteral km/seconds, its insane
Really? That's something new for me.
I love this channel, it serves my childhood curiosities totally. Please keep uploading more and more content….all the best team WhatIf
All who works in NASA, also knows, EARTH IS A CLOSED SYSTEM, NOBODY CANNOT LEAVE EARTH, THERE IS NOWHERE TO GO. They all know it, yet willingly deceive.
+ they are in the masonry club.
I went to school between 80s and 90s at Thornton Academy in Maine. And we knew and were taught about the planets in our solar system with Rings Jupiter and Neptune were part of the 3 pack.
Back then did Uranus have rings?
"In space no one can hear you scream. You scream, I scream, we all scream for ice scream."
---Albert Einstein
Sounds legit
😔
IF a tree falls in a forest and no one is there to hear it, does it make a sound?
@@aspenrebel Yes lmao
"Up above the world so high , this rhyme is a big fat lie" got me😂
Same w/the cow! I've yet to see one jumping over the moon!🐄🌙
Nuking a asteriod before it enters the atmosphere should definitely be considered a good idea if the calculations are right cuz it will help the asteroid to split into smaller parts and and friction in the atmosphere takes care thereafter
Technically it's compressive forces heating up the air, not friction, that causes objects falling to earth to heat up and break apart.
But yeah, this would have to be assessed on a case by case basis. One big chunk large enough to destroy all life on Earth, vs many smaller chunks none of which by themselves would destroy life...
Say you get an asteroid 100 miles across. You blow it up into 20 asteroids all 5 miles across then each of those is a planet killer. Able to end all life on Earth. Or nearly all. Combined they would take out all life bigger than bacteria. Even as smaller chunks. Even 100 asteroids 1 mile across would devastate the planet completely.
Depends on the size. You can turn it to complete dust, the rock with enough nukes.
That's a new type of video I've never seen from you guys! It is actually a great idea just keep up the good work, love ya!❤
Didn't know about the dark side of the moon though and the stars twinkling. Nice video. Informative and entertaining.
It's called the far side.
You didn’t watch transformers Dark of The Moon?
That is not thinking scientifically
I heard about the dark side of the moon, and I guess everyone heard the same thing: it's called dark side, because we never see it from the earth. This video is pointless.
Dang I for real thought, I was gonna grow 2 inches taller if I went to space, but I'm still gonna be 5 foot 4 💀
Hey brother,
how can I help you,
my dear friend?
L, Skill issue.
@@AWarriorFromNatureRead
The EPA and other branches of the federal government have way overstepped. Like When the EPA passed a rule for all diesel engines to burn def. 90% of that def comes in 2.5 gal jugs. MILLIONS OF PLASTIC JUGS. That wouldn't otherwise be needed.
The astronauts didn't see any stars because there were in the freaking day. It's like trying to see any star here on earth during daytime. If there were on the night site of the moon then they would easily see all the stars, but then they wouldn't be able to see the ground very good.
It was actually quite informative, however I take issue with the video's title.
Saying "Lies" implies that someone deliberately wasn't telling the truth, and it is an emotionally charged, super click-baity word to use.
So don't do it. Say "myths", or "misconceptions", or anything else for that matter.
You're right on both fronts.
OH WOW!!! Lies... oh I gotta watch this video.
Even those creators who make sensible videos fall victim to these tactics. But what can ya do? It gets them the results they want.
I take issue with the use of the number 13. I'm only able to count 12 "lies" in this video. Perhaps the title itself is the 13th lie. But if that were the case then it wouldn't be a lie that there were 13 lies. My brain hurts.
I do not know that I necessarily completely agree with your assessment of the Supreme Courts ruling on the epa. Wasn't that ruling in regard to the epa's overreach concerning landowners use of their private property where the court ruled that the epa overstepped their authority?
Great to see the face behind the voice, such a cool dude, such a cool channel
Nuking an asteroid would just dissipate the energy over a wider area, much of it in the atmosphere. So its energy is either spent mostly smashing the ground, or spent heating the atmosphere.
The idea of nuking an asteroid is along two lines of thought - One to move its path of direction, or two, break it into smaller pieces that burn up in the atmosphere - However in both cases - one nuke is not enough, if you are going to nuke it then send like 5,000 nukes.
Bro makes me want to be an astrophysicist 😅
We want more videos like this. 😊
"Twinkle twinkle little star,
How i wonder what you are,
Flying above the world so high,
This song is a big fat lie"
Bro striaght up roasted the creators of this song 💀
First time I seen u!! Man I love when a voice goes with a face!!! I love it voice lol ur awesome and I love ur videos please don't stop!!!!
Actually given the size of space. There MUST be some star wars style saturated astroid belts. :) MYTH BUSTED
Planetary ring systems, especially that of Saturn, would probably come closest, even though the individual particles are probably smaller than shown in Star Wars.
The asteroid one was just wrong. A bunch of smaller rocks would burn up in the atmosphere or detonate high up. The detonation or detonations could be sufficient to slow it down or deflect it so that it's velocity is not directed straight at Earth. While there are better options, nuking the asteroid does actually improve a situation from catastrophic to devastating (depending on size and trajectory).
There is no blast wave in space. Nukes are not actually good in space like they are on earth because of the lack of atmosphere. You would need to do a direct hit, not "near" as this video implies. Did they do any research on this subject?
so uranus has a large ring around it? cool.
I already knew that Jupiter, Uranus and Neptune has their own sets of rings
Yea the early 80's when I was in high school was when the "There are rings around Uranus" jokes started. Jupiter's rings were known about before that. Don't remember when Neptune's rings were discovered off hand. Guessing one of the Voyagers.
myanus
@@JedForge Neptune's rings were discovered very quickly from Voyager 2's pictures that it took during its 1989 flyby.
Did you know that Saturn now has 145 moons?
@@aspenrebel *Mind blown*
When I see these from WHAT IF I NEVER HESITATE TO CLICK... As I'm always very Delighted to learn about🙌
I got to give you credit for telling the truth about space. I promise you that 98% of the people watching this video weren't even close to ready to accept the truth, let alone willing to even accept it.
First time to see this guy that has answered most of my questions.
It scares me the fact that no one actually read the details of this case and the opinion. They just presume the scotus ruling will do harm because they like the EPA and consider them above reproach.
Lost interest in the video after his EPA comment.
@@chrisandersen3752 Yep. I stopped listening and just moved onto the comments.
Love what if videos❤❤❤..Thanks for uploading what if videos today because today is my birthday and it makes my day wonderful thanks a lot..Love from melbourne🇦🇺
@@Ninjacool36781 thanks bro🥰
Happy birthday!
Isn't it easier to see stars from the moon during the lunar night? If you are on the sunny side, it would surely be as difficult as it is on the daytime side of earth.
There's no atmosphere on Moon so the light from the sun (and the reflected light from the Earth) doesn't get scattered. That's why the sky is dark in all the Moon Landing photos. When you look up at a blue sky on Earth what you are seeing is sunlight bouncing off water and dust in the atmosphere. There is a case to be made for building an observatory on the farside (the so called 'dark side') of the Moon though as the Moon would then block out all the electromagnetic interference our tech is generating here on Earth.
Yes, it would be easier because there's no atmosphere to perturb the light.
Depends how bright Earthlight is. If you were on lunar night but the Earth was there, it might wash out a bit what you can see. Best view would be from the far side of the moon (so, Earth not visible) during the lunar night.
What if, you were told lies about space?
Those were some interesting facts😮
U make great videos. Keep up the good work👍
I always thought it is called the Far Side on the moon. Also about crying in space, The Expanse book/tv series really covered its accuracy. It has an episode where they can't apply first aid to the wounded in space because there is no gravity
Thank you for the valuable informations 🙏
I've already known there's Rings on other planets in our solar system like Jupiter But these Rings are too small like invizible to seeing Rings here from Earth and other thing i've known you cant see China's great wall from space, that's a FACT. All others came as New information For me like there's no dark side of The moon and stars not twinkling. Btw did you guys heared there Have Been founded a spider from NASA space Station what's truly interesting. In this video ive liked clips from Dont Look up and The Passengers movies what are awesome scifi movies, i really like scifi movies and videos like this. Great Job what If, keep going you do greatest content in The universe. 🌌
The Nebula Xelatic that spans 40 Bi-Light years is able to be seen with a 12 dollar telescope from Dollar General, that is if you are standing on the planet Melmac on the Blamisck mountain range.
Another Fact: The first living creatures sent to Space were Fruit Flies and not the dog,
-Leika- Laika.
I don't know how I feel about the life of a fruit fly but they've send scads of poor animals into space and how dare they send a poor dog into space.😢💓🐕💓
@@isabellind1292 science experiments are always performed on animals before humans. They did the same too. 😢
Someone has to be that person...
_If_ you wanna show off with 'facts', you could at least get them correct, otherwise you look foolish.
Laika.
The dog's name was Laika not Leika.
@@andrewstamford1988 There's always that fool who has to be a dik about correcting someone over a dog's name as if it requires one to be completely uncivil about it, to get their point across. Gross.
@@isabellind1292 And there is also that dik who has to try to be some kind of moron to make the completely useless statement you just made. Need I explain to the simple minded that you seem to be that the OP wanted to be a smart ass like you and state a 'fact' only to get it wrong!
If you think that correcting someone who wants to state a 'fact' only to be wrong is being a dik then feel a need to crawl out from under your rock to express your outrage, you really need to get out more and stop dwelling in your own head as you have some serious issues I have neither the time nor inclination to go over with you. So as I am uncivil, allow me to offer this advice to you... shove that up your ass and think about it dingus!
3:02 What “force from the blast” exactly? In space there is no air, so no pressure wave and no ‘blast’. A nuke in space just shines like a little sun for half a minute…it does make heat of course, but the only blast is from the tiny bit of vaporised bomb casing.
Would a nuclear bomb near an asteroid rly change its trajectory since there is no air is there a blastwave then ?🤔
The heat from the bomb turns some of the material on the asteroid into gas and it pushes it off course
@@hotsui7374 There is also the pressure of the radiation.
No. Shockwave can't happen no resistance or medium.
5:07 Even so, if you travel at the speed of light - the time for you is the same. Your time for others is "stretched" or sped up by others for you - but your time for you is the same. So you won't age slowly - you will age the same, just slower for others, the same for yourself. And if it's been 5 years for someone - for you it's still just your second. Some other things must be found to slow down aging ;)
There is very little force from a nuclear blast in space, there's no atmosphere to superheat and expand explosively. It would generate a lot of thermal and other radiation, but that would have little effect on an asteroid's trajectory.
Those are really wonderful!
WhatIf *LIED* about the court & the EPA ruling.
The court ruled that the EPA only had say over NAVIGATABLE water ways as spelled out in the law regarding the EPA, not *every single little seasonal wet patch and man-mad pond that led nowhere on the ground* that the EPA had claimed tyrannical dominion over at the expense of countless land owners. That was what that ruling was about - eliminating the EPA's naked, illegal power grab.
False
The epa got spanked because it was violating separation of power . It cannot enforce what is not in the law . And they were changing meanings of expanding meanings to do so thus creating new law . Executive branch agencies cannot write their own law . It is grossly unconstitutional and the judicial system checked it . Mad or not you saw exactly why the founders made 3 branches .
OH MY GOD….
I never knew when you’re in the moon you can see a giant IF 😦
"What If" most reasonably people don't know this already.
Thanks for that news about EPA.
What do you think happens when a meteor enters the Earth's atmosphere and breaks apart into a lot of pieces? Like the one over Russia several years ago. It breaks apart, and the pieces fall to Earth. Most small, but there may be some large pieces. As for seeing the Great Wall of China from Space, that depends on what you consider to be in Space, how far out.
You won't see something that is less than 10 meters (30 ft) wide even from a plane flying at high altitud.
I dunno. I see a lot of things with Google Satellite view. I've spied on North Korea!! They have a lot of 1) baseball fields, and 2) bright blue roof panels (which I can only assume is to deflect USA spy satellites. They built a new bridge over river into China.@@LaurentCassaro
Number 1 is not a surprise though, while for number 10, I knew that one since I was in 3rd grade. Now at 26, I'm still surprised that most people think they are twinkling.
best video ever
This was a fun video and most things were 100% correct though there’s a few that could be explained more.
1. Yes black holes do “suck everything in” at least everything past its event horizon is gone and can’t leave due to its strong gravitational force.
2. Nuking an asteroid even if it doesn’t deflect the asteroid is still better than the alternative. The hope is that the smaller fragments would burn up on entry as most asteroids do. Of course the decision of what to do to a large asteroid on a collision course is complicated and depends on many different factors.
3. Yes you can see stars on the moon. The problem is both with how reflective the surface of the moon is with light and the sun’s brightness. But this is only during lunar day. If you were to stay on the moon for lunar night which lasts 14 earth days, the stars would be very visible and sharp due to the lack of atmosphere.
4. Yes while special relativity does play a role, general relativity was also a theory proposed by Einstein that states gravity also plays a role in time dilation. Astronauts are further away from the surface of the earth so there’d be time dilation. But yeah over 340 days the time dilation is only milliseconds as seen with Scott and Mark Kelly.
You totally misrepresented the SCOTUS ruling. The EPA, like all agencies, have assumed too much authority that they have not been granted by congress.
I'm not too worried about inhaling Martian dust, not because of the fact that I'll probably never step foot on Mars, but because Mars obviously doesn't have a breathable atmosphere so it's not like I'd be attempting to breathe in anything without a helmet on.
And a pressure suit to boot.
You can see stars in the sky at night, from the earth through miles high blanket and cover of air, but you cannot see any stars in outer space. Which of these could possibly be true ?
That is not true. The absence of light pollution is a must, though. On the side of the moon that is lit by the sun, our eyes are so oversaturated by it that the much fainter stars stand no chance of being seen by us, so the sky appears pitch black. As soon as you move to the dark side of the moon, without any light pollution AND no interference of an atmosphere, the faint light of the stars has no competition, and as soon as your eyes have adapted you’ll be blown away by a srarfilled sky like nothing seen on earth.
@@Godbluffer The shimmering stars are what adorn and deck the night sky and make it beautiful. Why is a James Webb telescope, built at such great expense if not to study the stars, never to study the vastness of empty space. Much of voyagers instruments are switched off and not in operation during it's journey through interstellar space, which is the most of the time.
Again can't see this 🌌 unless you are far away from light pollution. On moon the ☀, 🌍 and 🎑 are too bright to see stars like that. Get on the far side then you'd see it perfectly.
@@sundareshvenugopal6575JWST is 1 million miles from 🌍 and an infared 🔭.
@@darkmatter1152 So during the moons day the stars will not be visible but during the moons night they will be. Its day and night must be of different duration to that earth. If its gravity is a fifth people's weight should also be a fifth. If you weigh 80 kilos on earth, then on the moon that would be only 16 kilos.
4:04 Or "simply" land on the night side of the Moon to see the stars ;)
Another myth: that nebulae are more visible when you get closer to them. Sorry to burst your bubble, but haha, nope! :)
Just curious, what was the movie/show with the girl helping the guy escape the black hole, only to be pulled in herself?
Yeah, I was born in the eighties and was taught the 4 planets with rings.
What is music in the first one and the last one lie?! I NEED THIS SO MUCH!
a pulsar star could be said to twinkle as it steadily gets brighter and dimmer.
A pulsar doesn't emit in the visible light range.
Also, given that it's the collapsed core of a supergiant star that went supernova, it's more akin to a black hole than a star.
We actually knew about those rings when Ingo Swam remote viewed them about a year prior to Voyager
A nuclear explosion in Space is impossible. The environmental elements in Space would not support such an event to occur, or even to initiate it.
do a video of what is a state of emergency is declared on the state of New York
I enjoyed this one 👏
I thought the reason for a starlets view from the moon was a lack of atmosphere to breakdown the light.... or is it the reflectivity.... or both???
but wait, shockweaves are the air knocked and pushed from the explotion right ?
si if you blast a nuke in space, there will be no shockweave, exept from the explotion itself, sou we would actualy need to nuke the asteroid to make it move, or i've i missed somthing ?
i was told no one can hear you in space, but i now know, sound can be detected through radiowaves
Isn't that collision still just a hypothesis? The Giant-Impact Hypothesis?
In the video it's being told like this was a fact. Or has it been confirmed?
very likely - due to the material the moon is made out of - however there are still other ideas put forward that can answer that as well(the easiest, they formed at same time from same material orbiting the Sun, but there is more to support the impact, and creation of the moon after the Earth - a lot more). so still not enough to say concrete 100% but very likely.
What was that movie you showed a scene of where the kids mother gets pulled into a black hole?
The guy who made the picture for the advertisement of this video knows nothing about film photography, or photography at all
But wouldn't diverting an asteroid come with a vast number of possible (devastating) effects?
Probably not as devastating as letting it hit.
"Reflect upon the Past.
Embrace your Present.
Orchestrate our Futures." --Artemis (DD3)
🐲✨🐲✨🐲✨
"Before I start, I must see my end.
Destination known, my mind’s journey now begins.
Upon my chariot, heart and soul’s fate revealed.
In time, all points converge, hope’s strength re-steeled.
But to earn final peace at the universe's endless refrain,
We must see all in nothingness...
Before we start again."
🐲✨🐲✨🐲✨
--Diamond Dragons (series)
Whoever thinks Saturn is the only planet with rings wasn't educated properly. I learned this in middle school...
Thank you for telling me what i already know
6:58. I caught that. Real smooth
So increased density slows time...seems simple enough
I was a child and did not believed that Chinese wall can be seen from space. Just because it is long doesn't make it visible from long distances.
miss your old podcasts
You should rename this video, "Lies About the Importance and Integrity of the EPA".
I love seeing you in your videos. Your voice is so unique that I can recognise it straight away. I am addicted to you. I meant your content. Time dilation isn’t the same as fixed time. Seconds, minutes, hours, days, weeks, months and years measure real time. In my perception, time can go slowly or quickly, but the real time or biological time is fixed. I won’t stop my aging time on the space. Time goes slower for the outside observer, but the calendar doesn’t deny the real time. I can fantasy that my friend who lives on earth and I live in a black hole. It seems to my friend, I have lived thousand of years there, but the reality is I can’t change my biological time. The life expectancy is around one century for humans. If I were on space my entire life, I won’t live longer than a century , despite time dilation. For me, it is just a perception of time. For me, time goes quickly or slowly, however, I can’t beat the real time measured by hours, days, weeks, years, centuries and so on. That would be nice. I want to live one millennium. I have the perfect solution for you- Go to space to slow your age process. Let’s stop the time, shall we?
The asteroid movie that's used, is that the new movie on Netflix with Adam Driver?
pretty sure setting off a nuke NEAR an asteroid won't do diddly squat, as there's no matter to carry the shockwave.
Most of this is accurate, except the fact that stars DO actually twinkle, if you see a twinkling star, it means that the star is dying, however with earth being so many light years away, most of the stars we see are actually already dead and have been for hundreds if not thousands of years, it just takes so long for their light to hit us that we perceive them to still be up there. But stars do twinkle before they die/ super nova, so to say that that’s a lie and it’s just the gasses in the earths atmosphere that makes them appear that way is not 100% true.
Now think about the lapse of time between two supernovae that can be seen from Earth.
Oh wait, even easier, think how much time a supernova lasts.
So, yes, if you see a star twinkle, it's because of the atmosphere. Only because of the atmosphere.
Well... most of the stars we see (at least with the naked eye) are within a few hundred to a few thousand light years away. Beyond that and they're too faint to see. Typical stars live for billions of years, or hundreds of thousands to millions for supergiants. Pretty much all of the stars we can see (with the possible exception of Betelgeuse) are still alive and shining brightly.
Most of the stars seen in the universe through powerful telescopes, sure. They've probably mostly died and been replaced with later generation stars by now, and it would be hundreds of millions to billions of years gone, not hundreds to thousands. Hundreds to thousands of years is practically nothing in a universal sense; heck, it's practically nothing in a geological sense.
But when we're talking about stars twinkling, that's naked eye visible stars; so yeah, it's due to the atmosphere, not stars dying.
Of course the moon has a dark side, it's just not a static side. Whichever side is currently facing away from the sun is dark! During a new moon, the dark side lines up with the near side, and during the full moon the dark side matches up with the far side.
I didn't know your video was actually cover for a bogus EPA commercial. Too bad.
Nuking Uranus is the most important thing to remember
Why would there be any force from a nuke "near" an asteroid???
A nuclear explosion produces a lot of force.
That's what I told my doctor when he suggested an OBYGYN...I said this is a black hole not even light can escape. He laughed for 5 minutes.
Can you please do a video on What if your body imploded in the ocean..
OceanGate meme… 💀💀💀
Hi what if your my favorite TH-camr I have watched all you videos over the years
It is incorrect to assume that you can see a light show from world cities with just the naked eye while orbiting Earth. All those fancy videos and images are created by adjusting light sensitivity or camera exposure.
7:04
Stars don't twinkle
The Moon does not shine.
Birds don't sing,
The wind doesn't blow.
The problem is that the EPA is a regulatory committee, not a legislative branch of government. It's a little intellectually dishonest to portray the SCOTUS ruling as a "bad thing" when all it did was uphold the fact that the EPA is, and has been overstepping it bounds. If you want to regulate and legislate "climate change", it needs to be done at the congressional level.
AT 2:45 MIN THE MAP LOOKED LIKE GTA5
Why is ur voice now so hyperbolic? It used to be so calm and relaxing.
tears not running down ur face is crazy.