I want to take someone like Anton out to see the stars and sit down and share knowledge. Many people now days thinks that’s a stupid activity to do. Anton is literally a wonderful person.
Joža Gulikoža, man... I hope your trolling. But just Incase, Anton is one of the most knowledgeable people on TH-cam. Sure a large part of his videos are theory’s (based on facts), but that makes it even more interesting to me. I’d love to see how these theory’s turn out in a few years! Even if it was all a lie, he still makes great content, that I can’t find anywhere else.
Joža Gulikoža dude are you joking what are you expecting, him to go venus and lick surface to say yea venus is composed of your missing brain cells? Stop this ancient era way of thinking. I bet you also think Earth is flat. Some people meant to be the plumbers some people meant to be engineers there is nothing wrong in being silent, just don't try to throw shit on your superiors.
I love that Anton appreciates the beauty of Mercury. I do too. (I like the theory that it is a remnant of a gas giant that wandered too close to the sun, and only the core remains. That’s fun to think about.)
[6:03] "The Earth's tidal bulge leading the Moon and gradually accelerating it causing it to gradually recede away from Earth". Presumably if the Moon was in a retrograde orbit around the Earth, the Moon would gradually decelerate and gradually spiral into the Earth. Presumably this tidal bulge happens on gas giants too and could be one of the reasons why we don't see to many moons in retrograde orbit. Not to mention the objects being kicked in or out due to other orbital interactions.
I think it's only possible for captured moons to have retrograde orbits; for a moon like ours which was created through a collision all of the rock which was thrown off the earth to make it would have a prograde orbit, so it would too.
@@RobertGriffith9 yes there is a strong bias to pro-grade systems due to the net angular momentum of the accretion disk and planetary spin. My point was merely about the exceptions.
Would love to learn more about the upper atmosphere of Venus. Venus is one of my favorite objects to look at with my telescope. I honestly feel that if any of these places in our on solar system is harboring life it is gonna be venution atmosphere. But I can’t say that and not mention Europa... Thanks for the shows I truly enjoy them all!!!
Well, there is said that there are viruses or bacteria, I'm not quite sure that could float a few dozend kilometers above Venus' surface, Anton told this in one of his videos. A hot Venus can't be defined as dead?
Good video with a explanation in layman's terms, товариш. The one thing that I have been unable to understand, since I noticed it going on a few videos back, is how someone so polite and informative has a seemingly dedicated group of ~ a dozen or so people who come to each and every video to give them all a thumbs down.
@@gravitonthongs1363 In short, they're a bunch of buttholes. Amazing how many people post comments averaging one error in spelling, grammar, basic knowledge and logic per word.
Why is there a dislike? What is to dislike? How high are your standards that "Hello Wonderful Person" isn't enough for you? Scientists asks questions. Idiots do too but odds are the question is "Huh?"
8:32 "This Hill sphere around the planet Earth is roughly around 1.5 km in radius..." - LOL Anton :-D I know, shit happens sometimes:-D Your error is just 6 orders of magnitude out.
Anton , your English is getting ‘better ‘ ! Vocabulary and pronunciation ! But I did so Like the strong accent ! Have been a big fan of astronomy all my long life ! Thanks for all the fascinating information!
@Sammy Smith microscopic life isn't really life thriving though is it. There might be some bacteria on some tiny asteroid floating in the void, rejected from its system, but, whilst scientifically interesting, it's not exactly planet of the aliens is it.
Just to clarify there are some mistakes in the information passed through this vídeo: not 1,5 km and not one fifth of the radius where the moon is currently..
Manuel Sacha the drink is named after a bomber aircraft. B52’s were long range heavy bombers, the most damaging weapon we had until icbms with multiple warheads.
Your videos are some of the best on TH-cam and extremely informative an easy-to-follow. I thank you for the knowledge and the entertainment. I can't watch real long ones usually past 10 minutes that's just because I get kind of bored easy sometimes but it's nothing against your videos every one of my watched I liked. Thanks again. PS I've also always wanted to know why the Moon is slowly moving away from Earth. This is the first video I've ever seen explain that and it makes total sense thank you so much. I always thought the gravity of the Moon and the Earth especially if the moon used to be a lot closer it would stay either locked or come closer to the Earth but this makes sense now. Again awesome thank you
I'm sorry but there are a lot of mistakes in the information passed through this vídeo: not 1,5 km, not one fifth of the radius where the moon is currently and orbits of Fobos and Deimos are not correctly explained.
@@xc1971pp still like the videos and out of curiosity what is the current information on the two moons of Mars. I really am not being sarcastic I want to know they look just like captures or debris that was knocked off the planet when something else hit it and I think he said that. I'm not an astronomer so I don't know whether he's right and wrong on a lot of things but I did catch the one you're talking about the 1.5 km. there's a hundred people on the form that mentioned that I knew it was just a typo and in so to speak when he said it.I'm sure if I was going to get nitpicky there are a lot of things but the average guy like me I really like the videos.anyway take care of yourself I would really like to know what the current theory is on those two moons please
Could it be possible that Venus' moon could've crashed into it, thereby causing its odd rotation and hostile environment? Oh thats exactly what you said lol
I haven't seen the whole video yet but I was going to say yeah that definitely wouldn't help LOL. That would kick so much crap up into the atmosphere and heat the planet's surface up so much I can't think of a better way to lose an ocean
Venus is thought to have had deep oceans way back in time. Maybe the heavy tidal effect quickly pushed a moon away from orbit. But hey, that doesn’t explain the slow retrograde rotation.
Not allowed to say it, the political correct thing is to say that Venus was destroyed by a runaway greenhouse effect due to co2. Realistic explanations arent welcome.
@@davidelliott5843 Haha I think it does tho! Without a moon the tidal effects were in the Sun's hands and having that much easily moved stuff with that much gravity behind it spelled disaster.
No, if Venus had a Moon, it's guessed that it spiraled close enough to Venus to pass through the Roche limit, and briefly form a ring system that would then slowly fall into the planet.
Anton, I know that this question it's not related to the video, but if the photons have no mass and travel at the speed of light, does that mean that, in their "perspective", the universe is still only about 300 thousand years old?
Well photons don't really experience time according to special relativity. So according to them, they get emitted and absorbed at the same time, with 0 time passed between those events. Thats quite scary to imagine
@@drew8443 Yeah, they don't experience time cause they travel at the speed of light, but the first ones were capable to "form", or to appear just 300 to 380 thousands years after the big bang when the universe became transparent.
Photons do not "experience" time in the sense that you're thinking. From what would be considered their perspective, a journey of billions of light years would seem instantaneous.
Interesting question, but I don't think it makes much sense. Anyway, what Rodoks42 is saying is true - photons don't really experience time - at least from their perspective. But it is impossible to get into the perspective of a photon, that's why I am saying that your question doesn't make much sense. No offense.
Another wonderful video, from a wonderful person. I love showing your videos to any of my friend's that have kids interested in space. You are my all time favorite channel on TH-cam. Even beating PBS Spacetime that comes in at number 2. One of my favorite parts of the day is when I can kick back, and learn what you have to teach me for the day. Keep up the amazing work Anton. I look forward to all the videos to come in the future. Stay safe wonderful person ❤❤❤
Just to clarify there are some mistakes in the information passed through this vídeo: not 1,5 km and not one fifth of the radius where the moon is currently..
I'm sorry but there are a lot of mistakes in the information passed through this vídeo: not 1,5 km, not one fifth of the radius where the moon is currently and orbits of Fobos and Deimos are not correctly explained.
Actually theres another way Moons can form around Planets. It’s the remaining Mass from a Forming Planet, like with Jupiter, Saturn and Uranus (and maybe Neptune with Triton).
Seems the more we look the more rare our planet really seems to be... Now the speed of planetary spin could be a major factor to holding onto a moon long enough to mix the oceans for life.
I'm going to go out on a limb and guess the answer before I watch this video, "Why Venus and Mercury No Longer Have Moons" = To close to the sun and its gravitational effects for moons to form orbits..? Love all your content Anton and you btw wonderful person :)
That's an interesting question. There's nothing significantly large between Earth and Mars. If the Moon were to establish a stable orbit, that orbit would be "clear", even though the Moon didn't clear it.
He says he "BELIEVES" .... Sorry, mistake. He says "THEY BELIEVE", Anton and his team os 'scientists'...trying to make people think there is some sort of unanimity of his hypothesis.
The moon is so big that it destabilises any asteroids that try to orbit it like 2006RH120 or 2020CD3. That's why Pluto's 4 smaller moons orbit far away and on near-circular orbits. Earth and the Moon are basically a binary planet.
Mercury looks everything like and could even pass for our own moon, so could it have been that Mercury was actually Venus’ moon and that some sort of unknown cosmic event in the distant past caused Venus to loose its gravitational hold of it which resulted in it drifting off and forming its own orbit around the sun?
Cause you gotta treat your moon right or she/he will leave. Maybe give him/her a nice ring. A romantic atmosphere works well. Don't joke about how, Uranus is so special. You know, just... express the gravity of how you can't be without him/her.
The Hill Sphere is *an approximation* of the L1 distance: L1 of the Earth/Sun system (from Earth) is 1,492,294.075 Km on average [1,467,327.015 Km at perihelion] L1 of Mercury/Sun (from Mercury) is 220,503.693 Km on average [175,161.497 Km at perihelion] . Just so everyone knows. ;)
Hello wonderful Anton, This was a great video! Thank you very much for creating it. I never even thought that there might be a reason why Mercury and Venus didn't have moons - believing it to just be an accident of history. Right now, run away global warming seems to be the predominant theory of why venus is so hot. It's nice to know there are alternate theories to puzzle our minds - just as Richard Feinman liked to think of 6 different ways of looking at each problem, I find alternatives fascinating. Thanks again for these wonderful videos!
Honestly that's kind of what I was thinking to that makes total sense. Imagine what would happen to our planet if the moon did the same thing. A moon crashing into the planet of any size would definitely cause an unbelievable amount of volcanism. Glad I'm not the only one that thinks that. Take care of yourself
Regarding the slow spin rates of Venus and Mercury, isn't it more probable that they formed through dust collimation, without any impacts from large external objects... Based on a bunch of finite element analyses I programmed (long long ago). Objects that form through dust collimation tend to have really long rotational periods. But objects formed through collisions of already large objects where the translational vectors had high inclinations, resulted in new larger objects with short rotational periods + excess mass ejected into a "slag corona" that eventually forms either one or two moons (depending on balance of mass distribution). I don't think you need the presupposition of a global ocean to slow Venus down - all you need is a lack of collisions since it's collimation from the stellar dust ring.
The theory of why Venus slowly rotates clockwise. Most solar system planets, except Uranus as well, rotate anticlockwise looking at their north pole). Relates to the inertia of the proto-planetary disk of the solar system, which also the majority of the planets orbit anticlockwise looking from the north pole of the sun (which also rotates anticlockwise). Rather than a global ocean slowing down the spin of Venus (which would not make it spin in the opposite direction), a theory that a very early protoplanetary Jupiter was not fixed into it's orbit and moved in a more random orbit than where it currently settled to. In this process it came close to and disrupted the orbit of Venus, a near collision, causing it to change rotational direction. The near-collision interaction with Uranus was even more violent, causing the rotational axis of Uranus to keel over as well as to change to counter-rotation. Earth was affected as well. Not by direct interaction with Jupiter, but the random orbit interactions of Jupiter caused another Mars-size planetary body, Theia, to directly collide with the Earth, forming our moon.
Conservation of energy tells us perpetual motion is impossible. All moons and satelites will eventually crash into the central object if not lost or acted upon by outer force. Right?
Anton, do you believe that Luna is what was left over from the Earth’s original accretion disc; or do you think it’s possible that, as some astronomers have hypothesized, Luna was produced when Earth collided with its sister planet “Theia,” ejecting large amounts of rocky material into Earth’s orbit that eventually coalesced into a moon? I’ve always found the “Theia” hypothesis intriguing, but have wondered what *hard evidence* exists that Earth ever actually had a sister planet.
@@will2see I believe Tymko is asking of the Moon of Earth, also called Luna, is, in fact, largely a remnant of Theia, the protoplanet that may have impacted Earth to create the Earth-Luna System.
Yes, and of Earth, it's a mix, both are. The Moon is a lot of Earth too. The Earth also had to have rings around it for millions of years which would have been a sight to see.
Thanks for explaining the moon deficit around our two inner planets. I thought it was something like that as far as proximity to the sun, but understanding the tidal effect is very cool. My hope is that we will find binary planets in the habitable zone. They may be tidally locked to each other but not to the star. If I have that right.
Venus would be a very good candidate for creating an artificial moon/huge space station around. First, it would give us a reason to actually build those floating cloud cities in its atmosphere. Second, it would give us a destination to put all that carbon that we sequester out of it's atmosphere as we use it to build all sorts of carbon-based materials. Third, if there is a disaster on it, better there than above the Earth.
I'm sorry but there are a lot of mistakes in the information passed through this vídeo: not 1,5 km, not one fifth of the radius where the moon is currently and orbits of Fobos and Deimos are not correctly explained.
I think that if Venus has a (proper) moon larger then a few hundreds of meters, we would have already seen it a long time ago. The maximum elongation of Venus is about 45° so searching the surroundings up to 1 million km of Venus can't be a problem. But it could have a few co-orbitals as Earth has. Regarding Mercury, its hypothetical moon would probably undergo a tidal break up before colliding with Mercury, so we should probably look for crater chain(s) - catena(e). And even if the hypothetical moon was unusually rigid, the crater would probably be slightly elongated. Of course, it all depends on how large was the hypothetical moon we are talking about.
It wasn't always at the correct distance nor will it always be, so perhaps the question is why are we here at a time the moon is perfectly placed to give total eclipses.
I am a little disappointed that Anton didn't account for Venus rotating clockwise as a factor or explain how that could contribute to Venus no longer having a moon.
Interestingly, Mars and Mercury have basically the same surface gravity, even though Mars is larger and more massive than Mercury. That's because Mercury is extremely dense. There's not much of it, but what there is is a lot closer to you if you're standing on its surface.
Speculative science fiction idea, two minutes into watching this video: Mercury and Venus are the result of an interplanetary colission where the exposed metallic core of one is now known as Mercury and whose ejecta condensed into the planet that we now call Venus.
What if Mercury used to be a moon of Venus until the sun caused a slingshot effect due to increased distancing from Venus and pretty much turned Mercury into a planet from a satellite?
What about the theory that Mercury was once the moon of Venus ? The size of which slowed the rotational velocity of Venus, finally reversing the rotation when it broke loose.
Excellent presentation, very informative. Much to think about ,as I have considered the walkabout of Jupiter to our sun and back may have also played a role in displacing moons. Ancient stories hint at Earth possibly having 2 moons at some time...--..___>.--..___.-->..--__-..
For Mercury to have tidal interaction with Mercury are you suggesting that Mercury once was covered with oceans? Why are most of the craters on our moon and on Mercury circular implying that most impacts were normal to the surface, seems improbable.
@Anton Could it be that the photos we have of Venus, below that dense atmosphere, were taken while a very low tide was on that moment, and it looked dry and desert, and any liquid high tide was on the other side of the planet, and we just missed it? A bit like an even extreme version of that water planet orbiting Gargantuan in Interstellar?
1. Thank you for answering a question I have wondered about since I was in the third grade! (Not sarcasm.) 2. Doesn't the earth actually have around eight Phobos-like moons? 3. Aren't the Moon and Charon more like binary planets? And wouldn't a search for exoplanets with life probably require the existence of a binary planet system like Earth/Moon or Pluto/Charon? (They don't seem to be that rare in our own solar system, so I would guess that they are pretty common everywhere.)
Theory: maybe mercury could have been a moon to venus, because mercury is so small and venus is kind of big, but it slowly drifted away from venus until they were far enough apart for mercury to be considered a planet.
Yeah after taking a class covering orbital dynamics I have suspected that Venus's hellscape environment around 750 million years ago since the conditions on Venus with a dense atmosphere and it would simultaneously be a natural cause for the global resurfacing of which there is some tentative evidence it might not have been completely uniform like you would expect from a collision with a large massive body. After all the tidal interactions slowing the planet as the Sun robs Venus of its rotational momentum and the moon's orbital angular momentum would be transferred to the planet to compensate for the loss of rotational angular momentum it would sort of create conditions where you could have a moon last for billions of years slowly decaying. In that scenario a massive moon smashing back into the surface could both vaporize any oceans and re-volatilize sequestered carbon within the planets crust into the atmosphere also the heat injection into the planets upper interior could break down the thermal gradient which according to MHD dynamo theory could have been responsible for shutting of the planets magnetosphere in combination with the planets then tidally locked year. In that sense ~750 Ma seems like a realistic timescale. Plus there is some overlapping of error bars that could be compatible with around ~720 Ma when Earth underwent a fairly extreme global cooling event of which the cause is not conclusively known. Using the observed precedent of Kepler/Tess/other telescope transit dimming observations and the fairly convincing evidence of the Ordovician Meteor event with a dated major impact in the asteroid belt there is a nonzero chance that such a moon impact with Venus could have played a driving role in the Cryogenian snowball Earth event which set the stage for the emergence of complex multicellular life on Earth.
I was wearing the Wonderful Person T-shirt ..... And because of that I got My ass kicked ..... Something about the shirt AND the color of My skin ..... When I said "Our skin is EXACTLY THE SAME COLOR !!" She hit Me again ......
I saw recently that Mercury was between mars and Earth at one point and was clobbered breaking away most of its rock layers. Apparrently Mercury is just what is left of a core of a rocky planet.
I think Anton misspoke when he said that Heliosphere is one-fifth or the radius of the orbit of the moon. That wouldn't make sense. I think he meant that it is five times (ie. 1.5 million km, not 1.5km as he said). Also, isn't the heliosphere not do to with the gravitational effect of the sun, rather it is defined by the extent to which its plasma reaches out around itself?
I want to take someone like Anton out to see the stars and sit down and share knowledge. Many people now days thinks that’s a stupid activity to do. Anton is literally a wonderful person.
No, it's not a stupid activity at all.
I wonder if there's anywhere in South Korea that you can do it well?
That's because many people nowadays are stupid.
yea me 2, mate me 2 especially a girl i would be happy till end of my days.
@@gregorianeg5311 No girlfriend for you ever in your life sorry.
Anton: proving every day that there are still wonderful people in the world.
dude itz a marketing thing.....
@Joža Gulikoža how do u know he doesn't mean it from the bottom
Joža Gulikoža, man... I hope your trolling. But just Incase, Anton is one of the most knowledgeable people on TH-cam. Sure a large part of his videos are theory’s (based on facts), but that makes it even more interesting to me. I’d love to see how these theory’s turn out in a few years! Even if it was all a lie, he still makes great content, that I can’t find anywhere else.
Joža Gulikoža dude are you joking what are you expecting, him to go venus and lick surface to say yea venus is composed of your missing brain cells? Stop this ancient era way of thinking. I bet you also think Earth is flat. Some people meant to be the plumbers some people meant to be engineers there is nothing wrong in being silent, just don't try to throw shit on your superiors.
Joža Gulikoža do you think the same of all astronomical science?
Hello wonderful person yourself. Thanks for being here.
Greetings from Winona Minnesota
oh ground zero...hang on there guys and keep up your voice against pigs and racist fukrs..this is how change happen..by rising up
Thanks
8:34 Anton you said Earth's hill sphere is 1.5 km. I think you meant 1.5 million km. xD
that is why the moon seems so close at times
And it's five times the radius of the moon, not one fifth :P
*moons distance
@@fozziebear584 Yeah 5 times is way closer than one fifth xD
@@sns8420 Yes. Make sense when the Moon is only 360 - 400 meters away. Hahaha xD
Loved "It could be you." Thank you for inspiring young STEM aficionados. We need all we can get!
I love that Anton appreciates the beauty of Mercury. I do too. (I like the theory that it is a remnant of a gas giant that wandered too close to the sun, and only the core remains. That’s fun to think about.)
pink hot acid boots ...but how many moonlets in its ergosphere?
[6:03] "The Earth's tidal bulge leading the Moon and gradually accelerating it causing it to gradually recede away from Earth".
Presumably if the Moon was in a retrograde orbit around the Earth, the Moon would gradually decelerate and gradually spiral into the Earth. Presumably this tidal bulge happens on gas giants too and could be one of the reasons why we don't see to many moons in retrograde orbit. Not to mention the objects being kicked in or out due to other orbital interactions.
I think it's only possible for captured moons to have retrograde orbits; for a moon like ours which was created through a collision all of the rock which was thrown off the earth to make it would have a prograde orbit, so it would too.
@@RobertGriffith9 yes there is a strong bias to pro-grade systems due to the net angular momentum of the accretion disk and planetary spin. My point was merely about the exceptions.
I'm enjoying my " Wonderful Person" t-shirt. I'm glad I bought one.
Would love to learn more about the upper atmosphere of Venus. Venus is one of my favorite objects to look at with my telescope. I honestly feel that if any of these places in our on solar system is harboring life it is gonna be venution atmosphere. But I can’t say that and not mention Europa... Thanks for the shows I truly enjoy them all!!!
Well, there is said that there are viruses or bacteria, I'm not quite sure that could float a few dozend kilometers above Venus' surface, Anton told this in one of his videos. A hot Venus can't be defined as dead?
Hello Anton you made 2 minor mistakes Collision impact probably impact crater what you meant and hill sphere 1.5 km you meant 1.5 million
yeah I was kinda scared when he said 1.5 km LMAO, rip astronauts
Another mistake at 2:10- Phobos and Deimos orbit in opposite directions
@Peter Breis No, it's "Hill sphere". Look it up.
@@avishalom2000lm No. They both have prograde orbits.
And 1/5th the radius of the Moon's orbit, when he meant 5 times ...
I love this channel. Thanks from Texas.
Good video with a explanation in layman's terms, товариш. The one thing that I have been unable to understand, since I noticed it going on a few videos back, is how someone so polite and informative has a seemingly dedicated group of ~ a dozen or so people who come to each and every video to give them all a thumbs down.
Unfortunately there is no shortage of trolls, science deniers or xenophobic haters trying to spread their misery to wonderful people.
@@gravitonthongs1363 In short, they're a bunch of buttholes.
Amazing how many people post comments averaging one error in spelling, grammar, basic knowledge and logic per word.
Why is there a dislike? What is to dislike? How high are your standards that "Hello Wonderful Person" isn't enough for you? Scientists asks questions. Idiots do too but odds are the question is "Huh?"
Just angry people with a really boring life or so I think xD Have a wonderful day, wonderful person!
@@kj12351 Thank you! You too wonderful person!
8:32 "This Hill sphere around the planet Earth is roughly around 1.5 km in radius..." - LOL Anton :-D I know, shit happens sometimes:-D Your error is just 6 orders of magnitude out.
Yeah, Luna is still inside Terra's Hill sphere.
6 orders of magnitude. This made me laugh xD. Thx
Maybe he meant "1.5 gigameters?"
I came to the comments just for this.
It can't be out in six orders of magnitude because Anton says that distance is one fifth of the distance where the moon is currently located.
Anton , your English is getting ‘better ‘ ! Vocabulary and pronunciation ! But I did so Like the strong accent ! Have been a big fan of astronomy all my long life ! Thanks for all the fascinating information!
Yeah, but Mars doesn't have moons. It has potatoes. 😊
@pink hot acid boots you're thinking of snickers
and it needs moms 😳
Mars is the bad luck planet.
@Sammy Smith microscopic life isn't really life thriving though is it. There might be some bacteria on some tiny asteroid floating in the void, rejected from its system, but, whilst scientifically interesting, it's not exactly planet of the aliens is it.
Phobos and Demos are pretty obviously captured asteroids. Of the inner planets, it's our moon that's the anomaly.
Really, very well explained, easy to understand reasons why slow spinning planets orbiting close to the sun do not have moons.
Thank you Anton
Just to clarify there are some mistakes in the information passed through this vídeo: not 1,5 km and not one fifth of the radius where the moon is currently..
Thanks wonderful Anton! Really enjoy your videos!
When the first probe went past Mercury in the 1960s a Pentagon general said of the first images "That looks like a B52 drop on 'Nam". (Vietnam).
Manuel Sacha the drink is named after a bomber aircraft. B52’s were long range heavy bombers, the most damaging weapon we had until icbms with multiple warheads.
and "Narn" would be a race in Babylon 5, which were asteroid bombed in a war. So even that would fit.
Your videos are some of the best on TH-cam and extremely informative an easy-to-follow. I thank you for the knowledge and the entertainment. I can't watch real long ones usually past 10 minutes that's just because I get kind of bored easy sometimes but it's nothing against your videos every one of my watched I liked. Thanks again. PS I've also always wanted to know why the Moon is slowly moving away from Earth. This is the first video I've ever seen explain that and it makes total sense thank you so much. I always thought the gravity of the Moon and the Earth especially if the moon used to be a lot closer it would stay either locked or come closer to the Earth but this makes sense now. Again awesome thank you
I'm sorry but there are a lot of mistakes in the information passed through this vídeo: not 1,5 km, not one fifth of the radius where the moon is currently and orbits of Fobos and Deimos are not correctly explained.
@@xc1971pp still like the videos and out of curiosity what is the current information on the two moons of Mars. I really am not being sarcastic I want to know they look just like captures or debris that was knocked off the planet when something else hit it and I think he said that. I'm not an astronomer so I don't know whether he's right and wrong on a lot of things but I did catch the one you're talking about the 1.5 km. there's a hundred people on the form that mentioned that I knew it was just a typo and in so to speak when he said it.I'm sure if I was going to get nitpicky there are a lot of things but the average guy like me I really like the videos.anyway take care of yourself I would really like to know what the current theory is on those two moons please
Could it be possible that Venus' moon could've crashed into it, thereby causing its odd rotation and hostile environment?
Oh thats exactly what you said lol
I haven't seen the whole video yet but I was going to say yeah that definitely wouldn't help LOL. That would kick so much crap up into the atmosphere and heat the planet's surface up so much I can't think of a better way to lose an ocean
Venus is thought to have had deep oceans way back in time. Maybe the heavy tidal effect quickly pushed a moon away from orbit. But hey, that doesn’t explain the slow retrograde rotation.
Not allowed to say it, the political correct thing is to say that Venus was destroyed by a runaway greenhouse effect due to co2. Realistic explanations arent welcome.
@@davidelliott5843 Haha I think it does tho! Without a moon the tidal effects were in the Sun's hands and having that much easily moved stuff with that much gravity behind it spelled disaster.
No, if Venus had a Moon, it's guessed that it spiraled close enough to Venus to pass through the Roche limit, and briefly form a ring system that would then slowly fall into the planet.
Anton, I know that this question it's not related to the video, but if the photons have no mass and travel at the speed of light, does that mean that, in their "perspective", the universe is still only about 300 thousand years old?
Well photons don't really experience time according to special relativity. So according to them, they get emitted and absorbed at the same time, with 0 time passed between those events. Thats quite scary to imagine
@@drew8443 Yeah, they don't experience time cause they travel at the speed of light, but the first ones were capable to "form", or to appear just 300 to 380 thousands years after the big bang when the universe became transparent.
Photons do not "experience" time in the sense that you're thinking. From what would be considered their perspective, a journey of billions of light years would seem instantaneous.
There are photons being created at all times (from Stars, for example). So... It really depends.
Interesting question, but I don't think it makes much sense. Anyway, what Rodoks42 is saying is true - photons don't really experience time - at least from their perspective. But it is impossible to get into the perspective of a photon, that's why I am saying that your question doesn't make much sense. No offense.
great stuff Anton!
Every so often Anton posts a video that goes beyond my knowledge base or my ability to follow. This was one of them.
Another wonderful video, from a wonderful person. I love showing your videos to any of my friend's that have kids interested in space. You are my all time favorite channel on TH-cam. Even beating PBS Spacetime that comes in at number 2. One of my favorite parts of the day is when I can kick back, and learn what you have to teach me for the day. Keep up the amazing work Anton. I look forward to all the videos to come in the future. Stay safe wonderful person ❤❤❤
Another great vid and well explained, thanks bro.
Just to clarify there are some mistakes in the information passed through this vídeo: not 1,5 km and not one fifth of the radius where the moon is currently..
Oooo! Anton the great. Master of mystery! You bring it
I'm sorry but there are a lot of mistakes in the information passed through this vídeo: not 1,5 km, not one fifth of the radius where the moon is currently and orbits of Fobos and Deimos are not correctly explained.
Actually theres another way Moons can form around Planets. It’s the remaining Mass from a Forming Planet, like with Jupiter, Saturn and Uranus (and maybe Neptune with Triton).
Triton is reteograde though. How might that have occurred?
@LuckyLucyHi That’s why I said “maybe”
Love watching your videos, Anton, and don't forget you're also a wonderful person.
Seems the more we look the more rare our planet really seems to be... Now the speed of planetary spin could be a major factor to holding onto a moon long enough to mix the oceans for life.
I'm going to go out on a limb and guess the answer before I watch this video, "Why Venus and Mercury No Longer Have Moons" = To close to the sun and its gravitational effects for moons to form orbits..?
Love all your content Anton and you btw wonderful person :)
Apparently not but its still a good guess
Love your channel! Glad I found you!
Best science teacher I ever had , and loved them all
Anton is not a science teacher ( although he let's you think that way and asks you to be paid like one through Patreon... ).
P P he used to be one
I tend to hate your bate click approach a lot, but this video was very good... "For all we know, it could be you..."
That's an interesting question. There's nothing significantly large between Earth and Mars. If the Moon were to establish a stable orbit, that orbit would be "clear", even though the Moon didn't clear it.
Wow, it could become Planet Moon!
Hill Sphere of the Earth is not 1.5 Km but 1.250.000 km. Which is 2.6 times the Moons distance.
He says he "BELIEVES" .... Sorry, mistake. He says "THEY BELIEVE", Anton and his team os 'scientists'...trying to make people think there is some sort of unanimity of his hypothesis.
TheElectricOrigins
There is ample unanimity when it correlates with the standard model. Unlike EU, Orbital Dynamics qualify as legitimate theory.
I always wondered , why the earth has only one moon ?
The moon is so big that it destabilises any asteroids that try to orbit it like 2006RH120 or 2020CD3.
That's why Pluto's 4 smaller moons orbit far away and on near-circular orbits. Earth and the Moon are basically a binary planet.
Search the three body problem ; )
@faster than tachyon Is this a reference or something?
@@YYHoe Moon doesn't want Earth seeing other moons xD
we actually have 4 moons.
So in my 30 years of life, Moon is now 1 meter further away than it was, when I was born. That's somehow sad
Yes it is ! I HOPE we will remediate that sadness in the future :)
My racing game in my picture had Plutos Revenge as its last track. One day I want to release it again but my job is in the way.
Mercury looks everything like and could even pass for our own moon, so could it have been that Mercury was actually Venus’ moon and that some sort of unknown cosmic event in the distant past caused Venus to loose its gravitational hold of it which resulted in it drifting off and forming its own orbit around the sun?
I hope so
and also, is it theoretically possible to turn mercury into a moon of Venus
Cause you gotta treat your moon right or she/he will leave.
Maybe give him/her a nice ring.
A romantic atmosphere works well.
Don't joke about how, Uranus is so special.
You know, just... express the gravity of how you can't be without him/her.
Other moons applied, but were turned away by our very jealous Moon. That’s why we only have one.
The Hill Sphere is *an approximation* of the L1 distance:
L1 of the Earth/Sun system (from Earth) is 1,492,294.075 Km on average [1,467,327.015 Km at perihelion]
L1 of Mercury/Sun (from Mercury) is 220,503.693 Km on average [175,161.497 Km at perihelion]
.
Just so everyone knows. ;)
My ex was named 'Luna' and she also left me for a bigger, more exciting entity..
Hello wonderful Anton,
This was a great video! Thank you very much for creating it. I never even thought that there might be a reason why Mercury and Venus didn't have moons - believing it to just be an accident of history. Right now, run away global warming seems to be the predominant theory of why venus is so hot. It's nice to know there are alternate theories to puzzle our minds - just as Richard Feinman liked to think of 6 different ways of looking at each problem, I find alternatives fascinating. Thanks again for these wonderful videos!
Great info as per usual
I’m a new subscriber. Great content.
My wife's bird simultaneously clicked on your video and liked it by walking on my phone 👍
@pink hot acid boots and the bird has an instgram account: pandora.loves.griffin
And welcome to Wadamey
I'm going to discover a moon around Venus and name it "Anton". And given Anton's history, it will probably collide with Earth one day...
That's basically impossible.
I like that idea as cool as this guy is I think he needs a moon named after him or something. That's a very good idea
Hey Anton, would you please make an episode on the Wolfram Physics Project? Many thanks.
My thinking about Venus was that there was an impact resulting in flood volcanism and degassing of the mantel changing the climate permanently.
Honestly that's kind of what I was thinking to that makes total sense. Imagine what would happen to our planet if the moon did the same thing. A moon crashing into the planet of any size would definitely cause an unbelievable amount of volcanism. Glad I'm not the only one that thinks that. Take care of yourself
Good video! Liked the topic and information was easy to understand. 👍🏻
New subscriber. Thank you.
Regarding the slow spin rates of Venus and Mercury, isn't it more probable that they formed through dust collimation, without any impacts from large external objects... Based on a bunch of finite element analyses I programmed (long long ago). Objects that form through dust collimation tend to have really long rotational periods. But objects formed through collisions of already large objects where the translational vectors had high inclinations, resulted in new larger objects with short rotational periods + excess mass ejected into a "slag corona" that eventually forms either one or two moons (depending on balance of mass distribution). I don't think you need the presupposition of a global ocean to slow Venus down - all you need is a lack of collisions since it's collimation from the stellar dust ring.
The theory of why Venus slowly rotates clockwise. Most solar system planets, except Uranus as well, rotate anticlockwise looking at their north pole). Relates to the inertia of the proto-planetary disk of the solar system, which also the majority of the planets orbit anticlockwise looking from the north pole of the sun (which also rotates anticlockwise). Rather than a global ocean slowing down the spin of Venus (which would not make it spin in the opposite direction), a theory that a very early protoplanetary Jupiter was not fixed into it's orbit and moved in a more random orbit than where it currently settled to. In this process it came close to and disrupted the orbit of Venus, a near collision, causing it to change rotational direction. The near-collision interaction with Uranus was even more violent, causing the rotational axis of Uranus to keel over as well as to change to counter-rotation. Earth was affected as well. Not by direct interaction with Jupiter, but the random orbit interactions of Jupiter caused another Mars-size planetary body, Theia, to directly collide with the Earth, forming our moon.
Nice presentation.
HEllo wonderful person.
Conservation of energy tells us perpetual motion is impossible. All moons and satelites will eventually crash into the central object if not lost or acted upon by outer force. Right?
There is such thing as orbital resonance equilibrium where no energy is transferred between body momentum’s.
Very informative and interesting video
In literature, Mercury was assigned to escort the nymph Larunda to the underworld. So we could name a Mercurian moon after her.
Anton, do you believe that Luna is what was left over from the Earth’s original accretion disc; or do you think it’s possible that, as some astronomers have hypothesized, Luna was produced when Earth collided with its sister planet “Theia,” ejecting large amounts of rocky material into Earth’s orbit that eventually coalesced into a moon? I’ve always found the “Theia” hypothesis intriguing, but have wondered what *hard evidence* exists that Earth ever actually had a sister planet.
Keep it going man, always killing it!
We have a reason why Venus' ocean disappeared: collision with its own moon. So, the Moon is Theia then? (or part of it)
"So, the Moon is Theia then?" - what do you mean?
@@will2see I believe Tymko is asking of the Moon of Earth, also called Luna, is, in fact, largely a remnant of Theia, the protoplanet that may have impacted Earth to create the Earth-Luna System.
Yes, and of Earth, it's a mix, both are. The Moon is a lot of Earth too. The Earth also had to have rings around it for millions of years which would have been a sight to see.
@@cadenrolland5250 And yet, Earth has had water since only shortly after the Theia collision, 'cause the oldest rocks have zircons.
What if mercury is the lost moon of venus..??
7:40 love the Grey alien face on Mercury 😍
Thanks for explaining the moon deficit around our two inner planets. I thought it was something like that as far as proximity to the sun, but understanding the tidal effect is very cool. My hope is that we will find binary planets in the habitable zone. They may be tidally locked to each other but not to the star. If I have that right.
Wouldn't it be cool if we could spin up Venus a bit faster and transplant Mercury as its moon?
@pink hot acid boots - A slight gravitational pull that is off center would effect it over thousands of years.
No, it wouldn't.
@@will2see - Yet it does with the Moon. I think you need to switch over to the Teletubbies channel now.
I'd say Caloris Basin is the impact site for the former moon.
I hit the like button every time before the video even starts because i know its gonna be good
Venus would be a very good candidate for creating an artificial moon/huge space station around.
First, it would give us a reason to actually build those floating cloud cities in its atmosphere.
Second, it would give us a destination to put all that carbon that we sequester out of it's atmosphere as we use it to build all sorts of carbon-based materials.
Third, if there is a disaster on it, better there than above the Earth.
At 8:06 you can observe a Mandelbrot
This was very informative anton thank you
I love your videos. Keep up the great work.
excellent. so informative and relevant! fills me with joy, thank you!
I'm sorry but there are a lot of mistakes in the information passed through this vídeo: not 1,5 km, not one fifth of the radius where the moon is currently and orbits of Fobos and Deimos are not correctly explained.
@@xc1971pp thanx for the intel!
Do Wonderful Alien T-Shirts and I'll buy one.
Anton can you do a video the satellites sent to phobos and the pictures taken. tyvm you are a wonderful person!!
I think that if Venus has a (proper) moon larger then a few hundreds of meters, we would have already seen it a long time ago. The maximum elongation of Venus is about 45° so searching the surroundings up to 1 million km of Venus can't be a problem. But it could have a few co-orbitals as Earth has.
Regarding Mercury, its hypothetical moon would probably undergo a tidal break up before colliding with Mercury, so we should probably look for crater chain(s) - catena(e). And even if the hypothetical moon was unusually rigid, the crater would probably be slightly elongated. Of course, it all depends on how large was the hypothetical moon we are talking about.
I wonder why we have a moon this large and why it is perfectly placed to give us total eclipses
Earths distance to sun fluctuates, so sometimes the moon is too small to cover the sun and sometimes it covers more than it needs to
Maybe God 🤷♂️? Who even knows
It wasn't always at the correct distance nor will it always be, so perhaps the question is why are we here at a time the moon is perfectly placed to give total eclipses.
Just random chance.
The moon is actually slowly moving away. Someday far in the future we won't have eclipses anymore.
I am a little disappointed that Anton didn't account for Venus rotating clockwise as a factor or explain how that could contribute to Venus no longer having a moon.
Interestingly, Mars and Mercury have basically the same surface gravity, even though Mars is larger and more massive than Mercury. That's because Mercury is extremely dense. There's not much of it, but what there is is a lot closer to you if you're standing on its surface.
I enjoyed this one a lot!
Speculative science fiction idea, two minutes into watching this video: Mercury and Venus are the result of an interplanetary colission where the exposed metallic core of one is now known as Mercury and whose ejecta condensed into the planet that we now call Venus.
Hurray Anton!!!
Two questions
1. Does Venus need a moon to generate a magnetic field?
2. If we could, would Venus be able to hold on to Mercury if we made its moon?
What if Mercury used to be a moon of Venus until the sun caused a slingshot effect due to increased distancing from Venus and pretty much turned Mercury into a planet from a satellite?
What about the theory that Mercury was once the moon of Venus ? The size of which slowed the rotational velocity of Venus, finally reversing the rotation when it broke loose.
Excellent presentation, very informative. Much to think about ,as I have considered the walkabout of Jupiter to our sun and back may have also played a role in displacing moons. Ancient stories hint at Earth possibly having 2 moons at some time...--..___>.--..___.-->..--__-..
Jupiter's walkabout is not the reason. Ancient stories?
Greetings from the BIG SKY. Knowing the Solar System is a good thing.
For Mercury to have tidal interaction with Mercury are you suggesting that Mercury once was covered with oceans? Why are most of the craters on our moon and on Mercury circular implying that most impacts were normal to the surface, seems improbable.
@Anton Could it be that the photos we have of Venus, below that dense atmosphere, were taken while a very low tide was on that moment, and it looked dry and desert, and any liquid high tide was on the other side of the planet, and we just missed it? A bit like an even extreme version of that water planet orbiting Gargantuan in Interstellar?
What I don’t understand is that how did mercury have previous moons while some of the moons in the solar system are slightly bigger than it
1. Thank you for answering a question I have wondered about since I was in the third grade! (Not sarcasm.)
2. Doesn't the earth actually have around eight Phobos-like moons?
3. Aren't the Moon and Charon more like binary planets? And wouldn't a search for exoplanets with life probably require the existence of a binary planet system like Earth/Moon or Pluto/Charon? (They don't seem to be that rare in our own solar system, so I would guess that they are pretty common everywhere.)
Theory: maybe mercury could have been a moon to venus, because mercury is so small and venus is kind of big, but it slowly drifted away from venus until they were far enough apart for mercury to be considered a planet.
Yeah after taking a class covering orbital dynamics I have suspected that Venus's hellscape environment around 750 million years ago since the conditions on Venus with a dense atmosphere and it would simultaneously be a natural cause for the global resurfacing of which there is some tentative evidence it might not have been completely uniform like you would expect from a collision with a large massive body. After all the tidal interactions slowing the planet as the Sun robs Venus of its rotational momentum and the moon's orbital angular momentum would be transferred to the planet to compensate for the loss of rotational angular momentum it would sort of create conditions where you could have a moon last for billions of years slowly decaying. In that scenario a massive moon smashing back into the surface could both vaporize any oceans and re-volatilize sequestered carbon within the planets crust into the atmosphere also the heat injection into the planets upper interior could break down the thermal gradient which according to MHD dynamo theory could have been responsible for shutting of the planets magnetosphere in combination with the planets then tidally locked year. In that sense ~750 Ma seems like a realistic timescale.
Plus there is some overlapping of error bars that could be compatible with around ~720 Ma when Earth underwent a fairly extreme global cooling event of which the cause is not conclusively known. Using the observed precedent of Kepler/Tess/other telescope transit dimming observations and the fairly convincing evidence of the Ordovician Meteor event with a dated major impact in the asteroid belt there is a nonzero chance that such a moon impact with Venus could have played a driving role in the Cryogenian snowball Earth event which set the stage for the emergence of complex multicellular life on Earth.
I was wearing the Wonderful Person T-shirt .....
And because of that I got My ass kicked .....
Something about the shirt AND the color of My skin .....
When I said "Our skin is EXACTLY THE SAME COLOR !!"
She hit Me again ......
I saw recently that Mercury was between mars and Earth at one point and was clobbered breaking away most of its rock layers. Apparrently Mercury is just what is left of a core of a rocky planet.
I’m surprised scientists haven’t postulated that Venus spins so slow because it used to have a moon that slowed it down.
Another good T-shirt would be, what da math, in a nutshell.
I think Anton misspoke when he said that Heliosphere is one-fifth or the radius of the orbit of the moon. That wouldn't make sense. I think he meant that it is five times (ie. 1.5 million km, not 1.5km as he said). Also, isn't the heliosphere not do to with the gravitational effect of the sun, rather it is defined by the extent to which its plasma reaches out around itself?
11:35 A bowling ball in Universe Sandbox lol