Hey Isaac. I went hard on the channel during covid. Thank you for being there. I took a break for a couple of years. Just want to say I think your narration skills were always amazing but I immediately heard growth in your speech. Congratulations Sir.
As a hang gliding enthusiast, I must admit that without gravity, one's forward motion would be negligible. Also rising air currents would be non-existent.
Gonna be honest. I've been watching your videos for years. You are definitely the type of person that I would welcome to a fireside beer with friends in the backyard. All of our conversations end up with looking up at stars and wondering.
Everyone always gives me the good jokes after the episode comes out, I wish I had a time machine to read them while I was drafting. :) Admittedly there are probably better reasons to mess with causality
Listened to this yesterday on Nebula. A deep and informative look at a topic that seems relatively straightforward upon first inspection. The number of things affected by gravity and how they scale with slight increases or decreases is astounding. Certainly a very complex thing to measure when it comes to life emerging and spreading. Fantastic work, Isaac.
"I speak from pure logic. If I let go of a hammer on a planet that has a positive gravity, I need not see it fall to know that it has in fact fallen." - Spock.
Except in star trek the hammer could be ancient Clark tech with anti gravity or teleport through a wormhole or create time dilation or send you in a simulated brain fugue where you perceived the hammer floating upwards
You've made an increasingly strong case that there are no complex aliens--with caveats. But if there are any others at all, it is interesting to think that we will only meet them after we've both expanded into cluster spanning sentient ecoystems. How wise or unwise might we both be by that time?
That's hard to measure. My own personal beliefs are that there are certain behavioral patterns that are endemic to humanity. No matter how transhuman or posthuman we become, there would still be traces of our imperfect humanity. Its kinda like when people say, "History doesn't exactly repeat itself, but it sure does rhymes." I think if humanity does colonize space, they would have mostly wisened up, but they would still fear the unknown of aliens.
1:00 - or what if what we really mean is "Where are the other life forms that behave exactly like our imagination of who we are and think we'll become in the future?" What if most of the premise of the Fermi paradox is just our imposition of the concept of humanity onto a galaxy that might be composed of alien intelligences that are all completely different from us, and from each other? What if there are millions of such races just in this galactic arm, but we're the only ones that see technology as a means of communication between races, if we're the only ones with the concept of civilisation in the first place?
We have evidence that our way of communication works, and would be obvious for any civilization that reaches a certain level of technological advancement, so that's what we look for. It happened once, so it should be able to happen twice, and given enough time (and there's been a lot of time) it will happen an infinite number of times. There may be other forms of civilization and technology for communication that work, but if we knew what they were we'd be trying to use it already. The Fermi paradox assumes humans aren't unique among potential life, and assuming that's not correct is basically saying "imagine a civilization you couldn't even imagine". We don't look for those because we can't. We look for signs of a type of civilization that we know for a fact have popped up at least once
@@ainmosni22 In other words, we're looking in a mirror. My point exactly. Except evidence for something because it happened to us is not evidence it will happen to any other group of beings.
At first the idea of using lasers to put a rogue planet in a close call or even collision course to a dense object to allow aliens in it to beat gravity out of it sounded too brute. But then I recalled that if brute force isn't working, you're not using enough of it.
Always excellent. When it comes to any topic that involves contemplating life, intelligent life, and technology, I find the game Jenga an excellent reality check. To me, in so far as any theory that mimics how the universe behaves has about as much to do with 'reality' as any model (ie: very little) I tend to take a literalist view. We require 'interpretations' of QFT because we are not cogitatively suited to understand it, not because any 'special behaviour' is implied or needed. Likewise 'gravity' is the odd 'force' out because it is not a force in the strictest sense at all - merely our experience of the interaction between 'mass' and space-time as Einstein showed.* *not that we have any grasp of what 'mass' really is, or even if it is really a single 'thing', beyond our experience of it. Likewise, while much shakier ground, I tend to take the view that we are functionally alone in the universe as we have found absolutely no evidence for any kind of life elsewhere. I say "functionally" alone as that could mean anything from 'there really is nobody else', through mundane reasons why we can't be aware of our likely rare cousins, to the consequences of our perception of 'reality' being what we make of it ultimately implying life from different places may be so unrelated that we can't recognise each other. ie: To illustrate the notion imperfectly; If my experience of 'reality' is akin to a creature flying about a dark cave with the aid of echo-location but no sight, while living on the floor are creatures that can see but not hear. We may each search for 'other life' endlessly, never aware that 'other life' is literally within reach. It doesn't have to be that 'severe'. Many seem to think that maths is a universal language, so even if we have nothing else in common we can use that and the fundamental constants as a basis of communication. But that implies that Maths is somehow fundamental, when actually we may have made it up or at the very least what we call Maths is only tied to our perception. ie: Going back to the cave; if the creature on the floor waves it's hands about and accidentally feels the flying creature how does that help? Even assuming both recognise that 'contact' for what it is they still have no shared frame of reference - the 'maths' for the ground creature being sight, and that for the flying creature 'sound'. What if even 'touch' means differing things to each..? Oh, I'm rambling again.
It does need to be pointed out that as energy rises with the square of velocity, doubling the orbital velocity increases the energy needed to reach that speed four-fold
6:00 in "Dragon's Egg" and its sequel, the space elevator was not made of solid material. It was a fountain of rings, launched using gravito-magnetic effects which they have access to because matter is hyper dense. Stuff that is dense even to them is fictional "monopole stabilized black hole dust". You've discussed similar elevators yourself, where launched rings can then lift things magnetically.
I don't see how this could be a filter. A rocky planet in the habitable zone is just as likely to have lower gravity as high. And with lower gravity - even if just a few percent less - space flight would be much easier. And the argument involving super earths isn't a well informed one. The fact we've seen so many super earths has far more to do with the limitations of detecting smaller ones, than that they are actually less common.
Don't forget that there are higher-pressure forms of ice as well. If you get a deep enough ocean, the bottom will be almost entirely covered in higher-order ice and then there's nearly nothing in terms of minerals getting into the ocean, leaving it nearly pure (and sterile) water. Depending on the thickness of that ice and its' bulk properties, even volcanic activity might not reliably get through it.
When discussing relativistic speeds, could you please touch on the effects of increasing mass and how that might affect the function of the ship and even the chemistry of lifeforms on the ship. Thank you.
I think it would make for a cool story to have an aquatic race reaching out of the oceans, seeing haze above... the atmosphere would be their first obstacle to space.
Isaac. Whats your thoughts on math being inherent or man made? The answer seems simple because things were there to count before we were, but there appears to be no clear consensus within the scientific community.
First of all, love your videos, please continue making good content! I gotta know, what is your accent exactly? I don't recognize it from any country, but I have a cousin who's is mostly deaf and that's the closest comparison I have. Is that what it is or am I dumb? Please educate me
6:25 it would be possible to catch a ride on Star quake emissions or perhaps if you magnetized yourself enough you could traverse magnetic field lines since particles routinely escape a neutron star on those crazy potent magnetic fields
Since you mentioned dragons egg can you help me with a issue I had with it? Since the organisms on the neutron star are subject to many days per second they seem to live and go about their business much more quickly than we do. However being that close to massive gravity wouldn't there time go more slowly than ours? Is it just not as pronounced? So the fact they consider many days as a second for us it is more significant and outweighs the slowing from gravity? Or an oversight by the author?
If their relative time was a tenth of our time speed, but they operate metabolically as fast as the walking proteins in our cells, then they would still be so far ahead of us like depicted in the story.
I kind of get what you're saying not 100% sure how much faster proteins metabolize but I get the jist of it. AI actually helped. Normal neutron star would be above 73% so for every second for me .73 seconds on the star. Maximum theoretical dilation 1.3% every hour for me = 1.9 minutes on star. However proteins metabolize thousands to millions of times faster than me. So take 1% of a million x and you're still going 10,000 times as fast. 10,000 seconds is like 3 hours so when the person moved so they could see him move for her move they would have said there for three or four hours every second. I guess the stuff makes a lot more sense thinking back on what I remember from the story wasn't like 8 hours of future generations or something like that? Anyway I was just thinking out loud and figured I'd spew it into this comment. There has to have been something more of a waste of your time that you read today than this.
Larry Niven mentioned the idea of intelligent life forms on a neutron star shifting the star's magnetic axis off it's rotational axis, converting it into a pulsar and getting into space by surfing up the pulsar beam.
Would a difference in Gravity change the fundamental way atoms and alike interact with each other? An unimaginable reality where different physical phenomena play out and the structure of matter is different. Thank you for the calming mood and the vast knowledge you share
almost make ya wonder if it's possible to train in High Gravity worlds at birth without the worries of Skeletal Structure breaking apart from the High G's alone. this could be the awesome front for a sci-fi style of superhumans.
30:35 You skimmed a really good point but I am not even sure you realized it. Increased gravity would create the heat necessary for tectonics on smaller worlds, but will not make that world loose the heat any slower. It may also make the rock enough more dense as to meaningfully increase the thermal conductivity on earth sized worlds. So, the time overlap between having a magnetic field and surface temperatures conducive to life would be much reduced.
Genius, I love these shows. Is anyone theorizing on how the UAP's work? No visible thrust or control surfaces. I have some ideas. I'd like to hear others. science doesn't answer everything yet. So we have to be wrong on at least a thing or two. Anyone know good places these things are being seriously discussed? Suggestions?
Has there been a fermi paradox video regarding intelligence appearing too early prior to having oil or sufficient natural resources. Or maybe the natural resources are used up prior to space exploration?
I was never able to recall the story I read about life on a neutron star I wouldn't say I thought of it often even on any kind of a regular basis but from time to time
A heavy planet having excessive volcanos could be a good thing for life if its covered in oceans. Providing tremendous amounts of materials and metal to disove into the ocean. Giving life a better shot.
Or, how about being covered in oceans (earth) and having a volcanic neighbor with a lower escape velocity (mars) to send that material? I think that may increase the chances even more, and given the anthropic principle I’m of the mind that we’d first have to find a reason to rule out mars playing a (weak) role in abiogenesis and our default thinking should be that mars was essential.
How well could one launch a rocket from a balloon, or pair of balloons, or "air raft"? The former assumes a suspended rocket with the strap point being near the balance point, but not on that point. (gas bag/blimp with rocket at angle) A pair would probably need something pulling the balloons apart or a brace. That last assumes a platform lifted by balloon or blimp. Any of these would ease rocketry concerns in a deep gravity well. -=-=- So, the initial idea of floating semi-aquatic brontos would be less likely to translate to space-going via rocket.
Perhaps there are more than just the four forces of the universe? Forces we don't interact with. There is matter that we don't interact with. Maybe we can use these forces indirectly to counter the four forces thus anti gravity & anti inertia. Blend it with quantum portation and trans form our atoms into the other force states and the generally theory of relativity isn't a thing.
Its a cool idea and forces we and other things were aware of dont interact with is absolutely possible and would be somewhat equivalent to parralell universes basically since they could overlap in space and have no indication even if their properties were identical to all our forces with the caveat that they only interact with each other and not any of our 4 fundamental forces. That said, the thing that is a bit more dubious is whether the eexistence of such forces could counter gravity. Not wholly dubious mind you. In a sense the utilization of the existing forces counters gravity via the release of energy from creating or breaking strong nuclear force bonds so it's not inconceivable that some small negligible normal fundamental force in its baseline state would in a different minimum beside its local minimum exhibit much stronger properties thay over rode gravity or generated effects akin to unlimited energy though probably actually not... I believe while it's not actually a force, though I could be wrong, that there's a couple theoretical partial and space time reactions that posit something to this effect, though, they exist within forces that do effect us, and past I heard such processes result in the universe cascading into the new minimum from the point of first minimum reduction at the speed of light destroying literally everything, so not entirely sure that example is what we want to use. Cant remember if thats the big rip or if I'm conflating another process? Anyway fun stuff.
Hey Isaac I’m wondering if elements of a heavier mass like supernova explosions making elements 114 and 115 and it’s bending spacetime and causing more gravity. Is anything like that possible? I think we just need to get the math right and change the constant because they are not finding anything else.
Gravitational wave detection meets particle accelerator. If you do the math the Gravitational wave detection part would be big. Gravity and dark energy detection. The smoothness/lumpiness of the universe, CMB relic also points to smoothness as eell as a few other things. Particle decays into photons and quantum and gravitational foam. The work done or the weight of the universe. Black holes evaporating showing one lower limit for white holes. The universe another cutoff regime or limit. 12.5 light year diamiter as a black hole with error bars. Quantum being part of degenerate planckian. But for multiverse theories and quantum part alone one needs to consider universe pair production or deposit ring in wich we would be one of the spikes/universes in a ring from natural cutoffs. One path using gravity to destroy a type of black hole 12.5 light years in diameter. That variant gives a medium to go FTL in up to a point. 17:45 Gravitational mapping of the earths crust and deposits. Keep up the good work and thoughts.
IF 2 universes 'collided/intersected' what would be the forces that mediated which 'leaked' into the other? Is it number of forces (think universe with our 4-5, vs one with 50)? Or is it simpler: is gravity or cosmological constant (equivs) multi-universal? Would the universe that prefers enthalpy leak into the universe (like ours) that is entropic? Or vice-versa?
The problem with this is that you would need not only a theory for a metaverse that would allow for differing laws of physics, but also a mechanism explaining why the metaphysics translate differently in different universes. Since we currently have neither, the entire idea is an exercise in "mathturbation"(as critics of string theory have so bluntly put it) and so the results can be pretty much whatever you want.
@@angrymokyuu9475 I don't disagree with 99% of what you're saying... BUT metaverse multiverse (or parallel 'dimensions'). Metaphysics = more philosophical then scientific (IE diff thoughts in Hermeticism, Gnosticism (IE 'demiurge' origins). SORRY ...but while it may be 'mathturbation', nothing in known physics of our universe implies that there would be 'grander physics' (that mediate a multiverse OR the 'space between universes). There is 100% NO NEED to explain differences in physics, or why if the physics (or particles moved between universes) they'd behave differently. The current concept is that 1) We don't know how to test for/against a Multiverse theory AND 2) We don't have evidence that our universe is currently interacting w/ another universe If one exists (IE NO 'native' phenomenon to verify the theory by saying "look at this in the telescope"). POINT: Without knowing whether 'anything in our universe' would be the same in another universe...the cautious (and scientific) approach is to assume 'no guarantee'. IE w/o verify even 1 particle exists in 1 other universe: assume you don't know anything about it until you 'discover' it via a fresh set of hypothesizes + experimentation verification. ...Thus the reason why a good scientist thinks about wild possibilities for another universe: its what they should be doing. WHAT IF it was 1bil times denser, bcuz gravity equiv and other mediating forces were equally weaker? Maybe no gravity equiv. If no fermions/bosons, simply sending a probe (or manned craft) into it = instant death...simply from change in density.
@@djdrack4681 For multiple universes to interact, there must be a container for them to coexist in(the multiverse) - just like how galaxies are able to interact because they share the same universe. And if that container exists, it must have its own set of rules. My word choice aside, if two universes with different sets of physics exist in a single multiverse, it must hold this multiverse's laws must be general to allow for both. And if it allows for both, there must be a mechanism for the more general rules to manifest as one set of physics or the other. If you're creating an arbitrary universe without those generalized rules or that mechanism, you're just playing with the math. The result might be a fun thought experiment, but that's all it can ever be.
@@angrymokyuu9475 Again. Not being critical of your idea: I in fact agree. The 'multiverse container' would prob have general laws...and some translating into the universes = logical extension... But I'm hesitant to fall into a camp about force/physics mediation being anisotropic (in such a container) when verdict isn't out that unobservable universe would be anisotropic (generally uniform, constants/forces don't fluctuate or change from one region to another). My reasons are that our very early universe itself (in Big Bang Theory) would break such things, even if only for a time. Gravity, Chand. Limit, Strong/Weak Nuclear Forces, Electromagneticism (whether mixed like an electroweak etc)...Theory can account for some of them emerging (IE didn't exist, but THEN conditions change to favor their existence, like chemical reaction being driven forward). Inflation Theory is bad. Like "fill in blanks to avoid issue" bad. Chances it could be wrong increase every month as we slowly see further back to earliest galaxies. The moment we can see past reionization (and into supposed Inflation Epoch) = Its dead, or re-written). Without putting in such theory, its hard to explain universe not collapsing back into one big singularity: and it doesn't take into account CP Violation or Baryogenesis Or Leptogenesis. In far future, the forces are going to break down (again, they aren't 'eternal'). Whereas heat = a catalyst, space (entropy) = an inhibitor. As we get space its inhibiting not just chemical reactions but the very physics/forces underpinning them...YET ENTROPY = drives fate of the universe). Proton decay or not; it'll eventually prevent gravity and strong nuclear forces...prob weak. maybe electromagnetism. SO If our universe began w/o our current physics/forces, and is fated to 'end' in an eternity w/o them...Why presume there would be analogs to them in other universes (a variant of anthropic principle, sort of)? The multiverse container could have its own general forces/physics...but should those be assumed to be eternal? Or ephemeral, and only temporary, just like ones of our universe? Bcuz if the later were possible: what happens when the multiverse container 'loses' its forces (and physics breaks down)? Could it be just like in our far distant future it'll be freefloating electrons and protons (too far to ever interact) that the universes in the container move so far apart to never interact? Thus the 'grander level of reality' could be 'dead' before all the universes? Again, the point is that 'assumptions' are bad in science; it narrows (expected) possibilities via preconceptions...Better to narrow via experimental verifications/observations.
would gelatinous-style blobs be better suited to live on a high gravity world? just crawling and creeping across the surface and into the cracks and crevices of their homeworld - with or without intelligence? they would still need a (hydraulic) mechanism in their cells and bodies to counter the gravitational pull but wouldn´t have trouble with bone becoming too thick and too heavy and still breaking from the slightest pressure.
An universe with 10x gravity will have life on bodies that have 1/10th of the useful gravity in our universe i.e. moons, dwarf planets. With even higher gravity asteroids might become candidates.
You mention "grabbing a drink and a snack" before watching your videos. That is misleading. My experience is, I need to grab a calculator and science reference books before watching your videos. That is so I can keep up with you. I still have to pause the video many times to absorb your content. I see why you pitch Brilliant. A person would need something like that appreciate your presented material.
Stellar remnants - Couldn't you slowly stellar life the neutron star by beaming matter into orbit, assuming you find some source of effective infinite energy, reducing the star down to the point you could leave?
You know, I never considered this type of life before, some sort of quantum life. It would be an interesting fermi paradox solution if you could actually create quantum life that could even survive on a neutron star. Why expand out if you could create a civilization so small that the entire Earth could fit on a piece of human hair?
Baryonic Matter may be moving in time, one way, and Dark Matter traveling it the other way, in time. I suspect the matter we see is moving into the future, and dark matter is moving into the past. There may be more Baryonic Matter in the future, while there will be less Dark Matter in the future. Contrariwise, in the past, the opposite may happen. We know nothing about time or space or gravity, apart from our own Anthropic Measurement. Those three thing need more though. Richard Feynman may have been right
The astroid belt can house 400 quintillion people and doesn’t have a gravity well issue. We could slowly move the O’Neil cylinders closer to earth over time. All stars probably have asteroids. So we don’t need exoplanet’s.
Hey Isaac. I went hard on the channel during covid. Thank you for being there. I took a break for a couple of years. Just want to say I think your narration skills were always amazing but I immediately heard growth in your speech. Congratulations Sir.
Thank you!! Got my coffee ready
Perfect!
Oh gravity, you always keep me grounded!
Gravity tends to keep almost everyone down to earth most of the time.
But not bonded.
well grounded content!
As a hang gliding enthusiast, I must admit that without gravity, one's forward motion would be negligible. Also rising air currents would be non-existent.
Since you become a father your number of dad jokes increased exponentially
How do you know it's a dad joke?
It becomes apparent.
Or; it goes out for smokes and never comes home.
I made a dad joke, a rather clean one, and it got censored. First amendment!
I mentioned the first amendment and it got shadowbanned
This is the way 💁♂️
The puns must flow.
Gravity: It's not just a good idea, It's the Law!
Anarchy, it's not The Law, it's just a good idea!
Gonna be honest. I've been watching your videos for years. You are definitely the type of person that I would welcome to a fireside beer with friends in the backyard. All of our conversations end up with looking up at stars and wondering.
The weight of it all.
Everyone always gives me the good jokes after the episode comes out, I wish I had a time machine to read them while I was drafting. :) Admittedly there are probably better reasons to mess with causality
@@isaacarthurSFIA That's because more people are thinking of the topic after the video is posted than before the video is posted
@@ScienceD9000 cause and effect and how retrocausality does not work...
Listened to this yesterday on Nebula.
A deep and informative look at a topic that seems relatively straightforward upon first inspection.
The number of things affected by gravity and how they scale with slight increases or decreases is astounding. Certainly a very complex thing to measure when it comes to life emerging and spreading.
Fantastic work, Isaac.
You know its gonna be a good morning when I see Isaac Arthur releasing a vid. Love your content, mate. Cheers from MI!
That is a very interesting Fermi Paradox filter that I hadn't thought about!
After an opening joke like that, exactly like the animation showed I too would throw myself out the airlock.
If you started in orbit, you are probably still in orbit.
@@jsbrads1 Even out the airlock, I cannot escape the dad jokes. 🥲
"I speak from pure logic. If I let go of a hammer on a planet that has a positive gravity, I need not see it fall to know that it has in fact fallen." - Spock.
and some might not need to see it fall to feel the hammer hitting their foot
True 60s screenwriter prose
@@808bigisland Though Nimoy always had magnificent deliveries too
Except in star trek the hammer could be ancient Clark tech with anti gravity or teleport through a wormhole or create time dilation or send you in a simulated brain fugue where you perceived the hammer floating upwards
@ agree
Why did none of the electromagnetic spectrum invite gravity to the big party? Because gravity is such a downer! 😂
2:56 "Earth is already the densest planet in our solar system" Given some of the people I've encountered, I believe it. Talk about dense! 😝
2:02 - - fuel to payload ratio
2:06 - - air to drag through
You've made an increasingly strong case that there are no complex aliens--with caveats. But if there are any others at all, it is interesting to think that we will only meet them after we've both expanded into cluster spanning sentient ecoystems.
How wise or unwise might we both be by that time?
That's hard to measure. My own personal beliefs are that there are certain behavioral patterns that are endemic to humanity. No matter how transhuman or posthuman we become, there would still be traces of our imperfect humanity. Its kinda like when people say, "History doesn't exactly repeat itself, but it sure does rhymes." I think if humanity does colonize space, they would have mostly wisened up, but they would still fear the unknown of aliens.
Even though gravity is the weakest of all the forces, I find it the most attractive.
Time is Sight, Gravity is Desire.
What was, will be. What will be, was.
A joke popular among the other planets in our solar system:
Earth is stupid.
Why?
Because it's the densest planet in the system!
To quote The Tick, "Gravity is a harsh mistress."
Thanks for the vid!!
1:00 - or what if what we really mean is "Where are the other life forms that behave exactly like our imagination of who we are and think we'll become in the future?" What if most of the premise of the Fermi paradox is just our imposition of the concept of humanity onto a galaxy that might be composed of alien intelligences that are all completely different from us, and from each other? What if there are millions of such races just in this galactic arm, but we're the only ones that see technology as a means of communication between races, if we're the only ones with the concept of civilisation in the first place?
We have evidence that our way of communication works, and would be obvious for any civilization that reaches a certain level of technological advancement, so that's what we look for. It happened once, so it should be able to happen twice, and given enough time (and there's been a lot of time) it will happen an infinite number of times.
There may be other forms of civilization and technology for communication that work, but if we knew what they were we'd be trying to use it already.
The Fermi paradox assumes humans aren't unique among potential life, and assuming that's not correct is basically saying "imagine a civilization you couldn't even imagine". We don't look for those because we can't. We look for signs of a type of civilization that we know for a fact have popped up at least once
@@ainmosni22 In other words, we're looking in a mirror. My point exactly. Except evidence for something because it happened to us is not evidence it will happen to any other group of beings.
At first the idea of using lasers to put a rogue planet in a close call or even collision course to a dense object to allow aliens in it to beat gravity out of it sounded too brute. But then I recalled that if brute force isn't working, you're not using enough of it.
Leave it to Arthur to drop a video on such a weighty subject as gravity.
now i understand the gravity of the situation...
Always excellent. When it comes to any topic that involves contemplating life, intelligent life, and technology, I find the game Jenga an excellent reality check.
To me, in so far as any theory that mimics how the universe behaves has about as much to do with 'reality' as any model (ie: very little) I tend to take a literalist view. We require 'interpretations' of QFT because we are not cogitatively suited to understand it, not because any 'special behaviour' is implied or needed. Likewise 'gravity' is the odd 'force' out because it is not a force in the strictest sense at all - merely our experience of the interaction between 'mass' and space-time as Einstein showed.*
*not that we have any grasp of what 'mass' really is, or even if it is really a single 'thing', beyond our experience of it.
Likewise, while much shakier ground, I tend to take the view that we are functionally alone in the universe as we have found absolutely no evidence for any kind of life elsewhere.
I say "functionally" alone as that could mean anything from 'there really is nobody else', through mundane reasons why we can't be aware of our likely rare cousins, to the consequences of our perception of 'reality' being what we make of it ultimately implying life from different places may be so unrelated that we can't recognise each other.
ie: To illustrate the notion imperfectly; If my experience of 'reality' is akin to a creature flying about a dark cave with the aid of echo-location but no sight, while living on the floor are creatures that can see but not hear. We may each search for 'other life' endlessly, never aware that 'other life' is literally within reach.
It doesn't have to be that 'severe'. Many seem to think that maths is a universal language, so even if we have nothing else in common we can use that and the fundamental constants as a basis of communication. But that implies that Maths is somehow fundamental, when actually we may have made it up or at the very least what we call Maths is only tied to our perception.
ie: Going back to the cave; if the creature on the floor waves it's hands about and accidentally feels the flying creature how does that help? Even assuming both recognise that 'contact' for what it is they still have no shared frame of reference - the 'maths' for the ground creature being sight, and that for the flying creature 'sound'. What if even 'touch' means differing things to each..?
Oh, I'm rambling again.
It does need to be pointed out that as energy rises with the square of velocity, doubling the orbital velocity increases the energy needed to reach that speed four-fold
In early, thanks Isaac!
Right on time for bed, and with a dad joke to boot! 😂 Thanks again man.
A physicist would never say that being fat is less attractive.
I see what you did there 😂
Perfect timing, just loaded a bowl
Same. Enjoy!
Oof
An I just rolled a J
Oh boi you’re goin for a wild ride 🤣
FIRE IN THE HOLE!
Baxter's Manifold series (especially book 1) is great!
6:00 in "Dragon's Egg" and its sequel, the space elevator was not made of solid material.
It was a fountain of rings, launched using gravito-magnetic effects which they have access to because matter is hyper dense. Stuff that is dense even to them is fictional "monopole stabilized black hole dust". You've discussed similar elevators yourself, where launched rings can then lift things magnetically.
I don't see how this could be a filter. A rocky planet in the habitable zone is just as likely to have lower gravity as high. And with lower gravity - even if just a few percent less - space flight would be much easier.
And the argument involving super earths isn't a well informed one. The fact we've seen so many super earths has far more to do with the limitations of detecting smaller ones, than that they are actually less common.
Thanks for the video
6:07 I love this idea :D
Yes, implausible, but I still really like it :D
Don't forget that there are higher-pressure forms of ice as well. If you get a deep enough ocean, the bottom will be almost entirely covered in higher-order ice and then there's nearly nothing in terms of minerals getting into the ocean, leaving it nearly pure (and sterile) water. Depending on the thickness of that ice and its' bulk properties, even volcanic activity might not reliably get through it.
When discussing relativistic speeds, could you please touch on the effects of increasing mass and how that might affect the function of the ship and even the chemistry of lifeforms on the ship. Thank you.
I wonder if organics can make radio wave. Electric ele could evolve a organ to communicate. Or is that impossible
See no reason why not.
I think it would make for a cool story to have an aquatic race reaching out of the oceans, seeing haze above... the atmosphere would be their first obstacle to space.
Isaac.
Whats your thoughts on math being inherent or man made?
The answer seems simple because things were there to count before we were, but there appears to be no clear consensus within the scientific community.
9:12 I thought I had a stroke
First of all, love your videos, please continue making good content!
I gotta know, what is your accent exactly? I don't recognize it from any country, but I have a cousin who's is mostly deaf and that's the closest comparison I have. Is that what it is or am I dumb? Please educate me
6:25 it would be possible to catch a ride on Star quake emissions or perhaps if you magnetized yourself enough you could traverse magnetic field lines since particles routinely escape a neutron star on those crazy potent magnetic fields
Since you mentioned dragons egg can you help me with a issue I had with it? Since the organisms on the neutron star are subject to many days per second they seem to live and go about their business much more quickly than we do. However being that close to massive gravity wouldn't there time go more slowly than ours?
Is it just not as pronounced? So the fact they consider many days as a second for us it is more significant and outweighs the slowing from gravity? Or an oversight by the author?
If their relative time was a tenth of our time speed, but they operate metabolically as fast as the walking proteins in our cells, then they would still be so far ahead of us like depicted in the story.
I kind of get what you're saying not 100% sure how much faster proteins metabolize but I get the jist of it.
AI actually helped. Normal neutron star would be above 73% so for every second for me .73 seconds on the star. Maximum theoretical dilation 1.3% every hour for me = 1.9 minutes on star. However proteins metabolize thousands to millions of times faster than me.
So take 1% of a million x and you're still going 10,000 times as fast. 10,000 seconds is like 3 hours so when the person moved so they could see him move for her move they would have said there for three or four hours every second. I guess the stuff makes a lot more sense thinking back on what I remember from the story wasn't like 8 hours of future generations or something like that? Anyway I was just thinking out loud and figured I'd spew it into this comment. There has to have been something more of a waste of your time that you read today than this.
Larry Niven mentioned the idea of intelligent life forms on a neutron star shifting the star's magnetic axis off it's rotational axis, converting it into a pulsar and getting into space by surfing up the pulsar beam.
Would a difference in Gravity change the fundamental way atoms and alike interact with each other?
An unimaginable reality where different physical phenomena play out and the structure of matter is different.
Thank you for the calming mood and the vast knowledge you share
Liked, commented and subscribed.
🌌🚀👏🏻⚡🥃🇿🇦
almost make ya wonder if it's possible to train in High Gravity worlds at birth without the worries of Skeletal Structure breaking apart from the High G's alone. this could be the awesome front for a sci-fi style of superhumans.
While “Red Giant” by Stellardrone may well be the very sound of the dawning of understanding, that rimshot was pure GOLD! 🤣
30:35 You skimmed a really good point but I am not even sure you realized it. Increased gravity would create the heat necessary for tectonics on smaller worlds, but will not make that world loose the heat any slower. It may also make the rock enough more dense as to meaningfully increase the thermal conductivity on earth sized worlds. So, the time overlap between having a magnetic field and surface temperatures conducive to life would be much reduced.
Genius, I love these shows. Is anyone theorizing on how the UAP's work? No visible thrust or control surfaces. I have some ideas. I'd like to hear others. science doesn't answer everything yet. So we have to be wrong on at least a thing or two. Anyone know good places these things are being seriously discussed? Suggestions?
Gravity's a real downer!
Has there been a fermi paradox video regarding intelligence appearing too early prior to having oil or sufficient natural resources. Or maybe the natural resources are used up prior to space exploration?
Why is SFIA better than gravity?
SFIA will never let or get you down.
I was never able to recall the story I read about life on a neutron star I wouldn't say I thought of it often even on any kind of a regular basis but from time to time
33:09 How did they do that lensing effect?
even so... there are people who ignore the meaning of " the things catch up with Gravity at the end... "
A heavy planet having excessive volcanos could be a good thing for life if its covered in oceans. Providing tremendous amounts of materials and metal to disove into the ocean. Giving life a better shot.
Or, how about being covered in oceans (earth) and having a volcanic neighbor with a lower escape velocity (mars) to send that material? I think that may increase the chances even more, and given the anthropic principle I’m of the mind that we’d first have to find a reason to rule out mars playing a (weak) role in abiogenesis and our default thinking should be that mars was essential.
So, nuclear chemistry on a neutron star is unrealistic but gravitational chemistry in another universe is ok?
I just read raft two weeks ago😮.
I'm reading "ring" now.
I'm feeling pressed to comment on this topic.
That our planet might have been too big for life like us were it not for that Theia strike is fascinating.
When the "let you down" and drum line hit... I thought we were about to be Rickrolled...
How well could one launch a rocket from a balloon, or pair of balloons, or "air raft"? The former assumes a suspended rocket with the strap point being near the balance point, but not on that point. (gas bag/blimp with rocket at angle) A pair would probably need something pulling the balloons apart or a brace. That last assumes a platform lifted by balloon or blimp.
Any of these would ease rocketry concerns in a deep gravity well.
-=-=-
So, the initial idea of floating semi-aquatic brontos would be less likely to translate to space-going via rocket.
We already launch rockets from airplanes(the Pegasus); launching from an airship wouldn't be much different.
I do prefer balloons over parachutes while playing KSP. Makes landing much easier and keeps the pointy end up
Perhaps there are more than just the four forces of the universe? Forces we don't interact with. There is matter that we don't interact with. Maybe we can use these forces indirectly to counter the four forces thus anti gravity & anti inertia. Blend it with quantum portation and trans form our atoms into the other force states and the generally theory of relativity isn't a thing.
Its a cool idea and forces we and other things were aware of dont interact with is absolutely possible and would be somewhat equivalent to parralell universes basically since they could overlap in space and have no indication even if their properties were identical to all our forces with the caveat that they only interact with each other and not any of our 4 fundamental forces.
That said, the thing that is a bit more dubious is whether the eexistence of such forces could counter gravity. Not wholly dubious mind you. In a sense the utilization of the existing forces counters gravity via the release of energy from creating or breaking strong nuclear force bonds so it's not inconceivable that some small negligible normal fundamental force in its baseline state would in a different minimum beside its local minimum exhibit much stronger properties thay over rode gravity or generated effects akin to unlimited energy though probably actually not...
I believe while it's not actually a force, though I could be wrong, that there's a couple theoretical partial and space time reactions that posit something to this effect, though, they exist within forces that do effect us, and past I heard such processes result in the universe cascading into the new minimum from the point of first minimum reduction at the speed of light destroying literally everything, so not entirely sure that example is what we want to use. Cant remember if thats the big rip or if I'm conflating another process? Anyway fun stuff.
A blessing and a curse with a very thin line between 😊 Gravity
Under 1 minute gang! Let's go!
Could you use electric repulsion to get away from neutron star?
May not be very efficient, we can’t use it to get off earth.
if the solar wind ejection velocities are higher near the poles, are the flares more pokey from there?
Drawing us back in, i see
Nice
Here I thought 'ground round' was something I put on the grill.
Boy have I been wrong about what it meant
Its about time we grasped the gravity of the situation.
Hey Isaac I’m wondering if elements of a heavier mass like supernova explosions making elements 114 and 115 and it’s bending spacetime and causing more gravity. Is anything like that possible? I think we just need to get the math right and change the constant because they are not finding anything else.
Clever apes lmao
Gravitational wave detection meets particle accelerator. If you do the math the Gravitational wave detection part would be big. Gravity and dark energy detection. The smoothness/lumpiness of the universe, CMB relic also points to smoothness as eell as a few other things. Particle decays into photons and quantum and gravitational foam. The work done or the weight of the universe. Black holes evaporating showing one lower limit for white holes. The universe another cutoff regime or limit. 12.5 light year diamiter as a black hole with error bars. Quantum being part of degenerate planckian. But for multiverse theories and quantum part alone one needs to consider universe pair production or deposit ring in wich we would be one of the spikes/universes in a ring from natural cutoffs. One path using gravity to destroy a type of black hole 12.5 light years in diameter. That variant gives a medium to go FTL in up to a point. 17:45 Gravitational mapping of the earths crust and deposits.
Keep up the good work and thoughts.
gravity is very attractive
Even people gravitate towards influence.
As above so below.
I want a antigravity pack, floating around would absolutely be my favorite method of travel 😂
Titan has low gravity, but it still has a thick atmosphere, even if other moons dont .
Perfect timing, just rolled a bowl
IF 2 universes 'collided/intersected' what would be the forces that mediated which 'leaked' into the other?
Is it number of forces (think universe with our 4-5, vs one with 50)?
Or is it simpler: is gravity or cosmological constant (equivs) multi-universal?
Would the universe that prefers enthalpy leak into the universe (like ours) that is entropic? Or vice-versa?
The problem with this is that you would need not only a theory for a metaverse that would allow for differing laws of physics, but also a mechanism explaining why the metaphysics translate differently in different universes. Since we currently have neither, the entire idea is an exercise in "mathturbation"(as critics of string theory have so bluntly put it) and so the results can be pretty much whatever you want.
@@angrymokyuu9475 I don't disagree with 99% of what you're saying...
BUT metaverse multiverse (or parallel 'dimensions'). Metaphysics = more philosophical then scientific (IE diff thoughts in Hermeticism, Gnosticism (IE 'demiurge' origins).
SORRY
...but while it may be 'mathturbation', nothing in known physics of our universe implies that there would be 'grander physics' (that mediate a multiverse OR the 'space between universes).
There is 100% NO NEED to explain differences in physics, or why if the physics (or particles moved between universes) they'd behave differently. The current concept is that 1) We don't know how to test for/against a Multiverse theory AND 2) We don't have evidence that our universe is currently interacting w/ another universe If one exists (IE NO 'native' phenomenon to verify the theory by saying "look at this in the telescope").
POINT:
Without knowing whether 'anything in our universe' would be the same in another universe...the cautious (and scientific) approach is to assume 'no guarantee'. IE w/o verify even 1 particle exists in 1 other universe: assume you don't know anything about it until you 'discover' it via a fresh set of hypothesizes + experimentation verification.
...Thus the reason why a good scientist thinks about wild possibilities for another universe: its what they should be doing.
WHAT IF it was 1bil times denser, bcuz gravity equiv and other mediating forces were equally weaker? Maybe no gravity equiv. If no fermions/bosons, simply sending a probe (or manned craft) into it = instant death...simply from change in density.
@@djdrack4681 For multiple universes to interact, there must be a container for them to coexist in(the multiverse) - just like how galaxies are able to interact because they share the same universe. And if that container exists, it must have its own set of rules.
My word choice aside, if two universes with different sets of physics exist in a single multiverse, it must hold this multiverse's laws must be general to allow for both. And if it allows for both, there must be a mechanism for the more general rules to manifest as one set of physics or the other.
If you're creating an arbitrary universe without those generalized rules or that mechanism, you're just playing with the math. The result might be a fun thought experiment, but that's all it can ever be.
@@angrymokyuu9475 Again. Not being critical of your idea: I in fact agree.
The 'multiverse container' would prob have general laws...and some translating into the universes = logical extension...
But I'm hesitant to fall into a camp about force/physics mediation being anisotropic (in such a container) when verdict isn't out that unobservable universe would be anisotropic (generally uniform, constants/forces don't fluctuate or change from one region to another).
My reasons are that our very early universe itself (in Big Bang Theory) would break such things, even if only for a time.
Gravity, Chand. Limit, Strong/Weak Nuclear Forces, Electromagneticism (whether mixed like an electroweak etc)...Theory can account for some of them emerging (IE didn't exist, but THEN conditions change to favor their existence, like chemical reaction being driven forward).
Inflation Theory is bad. Like "fill in blanks to avoid issue" bad. Chances it could be wrong increase every month as we slowly see further back to earliest galaxies. The moment we can see past reionization (and into supposed Inflation Epoch) = Its dead, or re-written).
Without putting in such theory, its hard to explain universe not collapsing back into one big singularity: and it doesn't take into account CP Violation or Baryogenesis Or Leptogenesis.
In far future, the forces are going to break down (again, they aren't 'eternal'). Whereas heat = a catalyst, space (entropy) = an inhibitor. As we get space its inhibiting not just chemical reactions but the very physics/forces underpinning them...YET ENTROPY = drives fate of the universe).
Proton decay or not; it'll eventually prevent gravity and strong nuclear forces...prob weak. maybe electromagnetism.
SO
If our universe began w/o our current physics/forces, and is fated to 'end' in an eternity w/o them...Why presume there would be analogs to them in other universes (a variant of anthropic principle, sort of)? The multiverse container could have its own general forces/physics...but should those be assumed to be eternal? Or ephemeral, and only temporary, just like ones of our universe?
Bcuz if the later were possible: what happens when the multiverse container 'loses' its forces (and physics breaks down)? Could it be just like in our far distant future it'll be freefloating electrons and protons (too far to ever interact) that the universes in the container move so far apart to never interact? Thus the 'grander level of reality' could be 'dead' before all the universes?
Again, the point is that 'assumptions' are bad in science; it narrows (expected) possibilities via preconceptions...Better to narrow via experimental verifications/observations.
would gelatinous-style blobs be better suited to live on a high gravity world? just crawling and creeping across the surface and into the cracks and crevices of their homeworld - with or without intelligence? they would still need a (hydraulic) mechanism in their cells and bodies to counter the gravitational pull but wouldn´t have trouble with bone becoming too thick and too heavy and still breaking from the slightest pressure.
if theres water, there is no problem
How can one not gravitate to such an attractive topic?😋
Only the Big Bang is truly first (probably)
Gravity is like taxes, keeps letting us down but it's very hard to escape it.
An universe with 10x gravity will have life on bodies that have 1/10th of the useful gravity in our universe i.e. moons, dwarf planets. With even higher gravity asteroids might become candidates.
If you can't use rockets why not build stairs from underwater? A stairway to heaven
You mention "grabbing a drink and a snack" before watching your videos. That is misleading. My experience is, I need to grab a calculator and science reference books before watching your videos. That is so I can keep up with you. I still have to pause the video many times to absorb your content. I see why you pitch Brilliant. A person would need something like that appreciate your presented material.
Ah the smell of gravity in the Fall.
Stellar remnants - Couldn't you slowly stellar life the neutron star by beaming matter into orbit, assuming you find some source of effective infinite energy, reducing the star down to the point you could leave?
You know, I never considered this type of life before, some sort of quantum life. It would be an interesting fermi paradox solution if you could actually create quantum life that could even survive on a neutron star. Why expand out if you could create a civilization so small that the entire Earth could fit on a piece of human hair?
The Nebula episodes still come to TH-cam after a year, right?
Baryonic Matter may be moving in time, one way, and Dark Matter traveling it the other way, in time. I suspect the matter we see is moving into the future, and dark matter is moving into the past. There may be more Baryonic Matter in the future, while there will be less Dark Matter in the future. Contrariwise, in the past, the opposite may happen. We know nothing about time or space or gravity, apart from our own Anthropic Measurement. Those three thing need more though. Richard Feynman may have been right
The Elcor Embassy would like to reach you about a culture exchange program
"Gravity is just sick for revenge, it's like the numbs' filled with chains.... Thanks Jim Carroll.
I thought it was common knowledge that inhabitants of neutron stars just surf the jets at the poles when they want to leave... :D
We can describe gravity well…but what gravity is…I still believe it’s emergent…
i'd like to think of gravity as more trustworthy, more that gravity will always bring you center :P
I gave you a like for the hoorible dad joke alone. :)
The astroid belt can house 400 quintillion people and doesn’t have a gravity well issue. We could slowly move the O’Neil cylinders closer to earth over time. All stars probably have asteroids. So we don’t need exoplanet’s.
gravity is in cahoots with the floor ~ the floor is best friend ~ will always be there for you 😅
👍