All these people who say we should be fixing all problems on Earth before wasting time colonising space I ask; why are you wasting your time watching and commenting on youtube videos about space instead of working to fix Earth's problems?
A couple of things people rarely mention: 1. The money spent on space exploration (same as with pretty much everything else) doesn't _disappear._ It's paid to engineers, factory workers, etc.. As long as you're not buying everything from a separate market, that money will stimulate your local (national / continental) economy. 2. Limits on launch weight can be worked around by setting up a spaceship assembly plant in orbit, and sending components up one at a time (as is already done for the ISS), before sending it on its way to some other planet.
Brilliant talk, Mr Hervieu. Incredibly well presented, broad and deep in scope, and the opposite of patronising. I hope to hear more of your talks in the future, I imagine you will become a standout public speaker for astrophysics. Top work, mate.
I've been saying this for years whenever I hear talk of going to Mars - "Set up a Moon base first." If it cost a million bucks per kilogram landed on the Moon, imagine the price per kilogram landed on Mars! Actually, the difference in harshness of environment between Moon and Mars is minimal. Both are barren rocks wide open to space radiation and near vacuum.
Great talk, as always! Thank you, Royal Institution. I was born and grew up at the tail end of the space age/jet age, I remember the excitement around the first commercial supersonic flights (my country was briefly on the list of ones where the Concorde landed!) and hearing sonic booms overhead at military parades or near airbases before supersonic travel over land became very regulated, and all the children’s books in my library more-or-less promised a Moon base in my lifetime - in just a few years, in fact, certainly WELL before the year 2000 - as well as routine commercial lunar travel, permanent undersea exploration bases… people always talk about the flying cars, but that was the least of it. Your talks give me hope, it’s good to know at least some people and the organizations they represent are thinking about space exploration still, scouting for water on the moon, considering how to build semi-sunken radiation-proof Moon structures out of regolith, and so on. If traveling in space ever DOES become commonplace in my lifetime, sign me up!!! 🙂❤️🚀
I am a 1968 baby 🙂 and I agree. The crater he showed in the start contains so much water we do not need to search anywhere else. We crashed a very heavy used rocket structure into it, and examined the material from the impact. We found so much water that it exceeded many times what we expected 🤘and building a base in the dark of the crater solves radiation exposure. It is a perfect fit. We know the target now. We have our launch site 🤗
9:23 - Sigh. There is no "light side of the Moon". *All* "sides" of the Moon get lit. We only see the side of the Moon facing us, but the other side gets lit as well (except during the full moon phase, when the side facing us is fully lit and the rest is not).
He didn't mention the orbital issues with Moon vs Mars since the Moon is basically fixed distance whereas Mars has limits on realistic launch windows due to it orbiting the Sun whereas the Moon orbiting the Earth.
@@benbernanke7244 because the moon is tidally locked to the Earth, not the sun aka what he called the "light side of the moon" is the Earth facing side, as the moon rotates around Earth all parts of the Moon's surface face the sun at some point so there is no light side, just a side we do not see without spacecraft. Not sure what is arrogant about a science teacher who does his job though...
I just have one word, centrifugal bases. Just as we have simulated gravity using centrifugal force in space we can do the same on the surface of a lower gravity body. Think of a linked chain of modules on a rail arranged in a circle going round and round, as the speed picks up the individual modules lean inward and we would experience a centrifugal gravity effect towards the floor.
which implies a colony on a high speed bullet train that has to run 24/7 for years without anything going wrong and big problems on maintaining it. What ever could go wrong?
boy, I miss old Christmas lectures (very old ones) with boring title. these were fantastic. they were not very entertaining but filled with fundamental of scientific thoughts.
You won't have to miss them anymore, here they are - www.rigb.org/christmas-lectures/watch?p=2&video-type=series There's still a few series we're working on getting up, and another few that are missing, but it should be enough to get you started down a nostalgia path!
highly disagree... time 2:15 --- what has some god to do with anything and sentence after... do we really first colonize other planet, while we are not educated enough to be free(of religions, money, ..), healthy and so on.. there are still lot of people, who care only for money.. we should first solve some "Earth-like" - human problems... good luck with educating when you start your lecture with GOD :D
Just to get back to reality, at $1,000,000 per kilogram it would cost $113,000,000,000 to ship one cargo load of a Boeing 747-400F. The plane itself cost around $250,000,000.
You have a great passion and a gift for persuasive oration. I must interject however, that we could buy probably enough food to feed everyone in the world who's hungry for the money that would be invested in this program. And people looking back at Earth after spending all that money are not likely to think about lower people in need but rather how to get bigger and reach farther. I think there is benefit to technology development and I find it intriguing myself, but there are much greater things to resolve within the realm of our own planet which are highly unlikely to be found by leaving to another planet. So in conclusion I would say it sounds fascinating but I still don't see anywhere near enough reason to invest in it.
Do you like microwaves, and think they are useful on Earth? How about computers? GPS? Modern communication gear? These are all things that were developed with, for, or by space agencies and space explorers, or at least greatly accelerated by them. Also aircraft collision-avoidance systems , cordless power tools, corrosion-resistant coatings for bridges, digital imaging, ear thermometers, household water filters, hydroponic plant-growing systems (which could help feed the world), implantable pacemakers, infrared handheld cameras, kidney dialysis machines, LASIK corrective eye surgery, memory foam mattresses, scratch-resistant sunglasses, safety grooving on pavement, virtual reality, and weather forecasting. All technologies developed directly with NASA funding. What about water purification? Desalination, which may very well save us from water wars the world's militaries are already gearing up for, has largely been researched and perfected for space travel. Also, it's easy to underestimate the problems and cost of feeding the world. Let's say, for argument's sake, that you can feed a hungry person for an average of just $500 a year. It's probably higher than that, but that's a nice round number. Now let's say there are three billion people who would need that service. That's $1.5 Trillion *per year* , in perpetuity. Forgetting that that isn't anywhere close to the optimal solution to that problem anyway for the moment, that is somewhere in line with what the entire planet spends on *military spending* . It is more than a hundred times the total global investment in space exploration, which even in the US, the highest investor, is less than half a percent of the government's operating budget. In fact, with only about $14 Billion spent worldwide on space exploration, and over 7 billion people, what you just claimed is that you can feed a starving person for just *two* dollars a year. That's what space exploration costs us. Two bucks. $2, Compared to about $260 per person on military spending. Think space exploration isn't a compelling investment? In fact, it's estimated that every dollar ever invested in space exploration returns $14 to the economy. That's a 1400% ROI in investment terms, of sustained historical performance. In other words, investing in space exploration isn't just the next Microsoft or Facebook... it's the next thousand boom investments like them, and the ground floor everyone always wishes they'd gotten in on? That would be right now. That should be plenty of reason to invest. It isn't an exaggeration to say that if we ignore space exploration to "solve problems at home", we will probably be extinct within the next thousand years, with that probability approaching 100% in the next million. If we were instead to stop fighting each other and spending vast swaths of our global resources on blowing each other up, and invest all of that in space exploration? We could be living in a post-scarcity utopia within our lifetimes and all but immune to extinction in a few centuries, completely immune in a thousand years. P.S. Were you not paying attention to the part about the Overview Effect? More than just anecdotal, there's pretty substantial scientific evidence that those people you're worried about not thinking about the "lower people in need" once they've gone to space do just the opposite: they see past all our petty differences and cherish us all.
Unfortunately GB will loose all foothold towards space, thanks to Brexit - but, as You said, 1£ per person, just for the ISS, is a lot - GB sure can do better without EU.
He might be young, but he presented it pretty well. He also survived the Q&A section decently with its unpredictable questions, that's sometimes where things seem to break down for some speakers. Future old experts have to start somewhere, being able to present this and having a good broad knowledge while also being a specialist working in the field could lead to becoming one of them.
Generic girl - just because you might not have invested your younger years becoming an expert in a field (that earns a place to speak at the RI) doesn't mean anyone can't. There are many people younger than the both of us that are wiser than we will ever be even at 90. Sorry to burst your bubble but age is nothing more than a number. It's how you've used your time that counts.
In light of the looming global climate catastrophic events i demand government cancel funding to all scientific endeavours including medical research that are not directly connected to solving this global emergency.
Bart Barry: There is nothing you or I or mankind or god (if you're silly enough to believe in one) can do about the NATURAL temperature variations on Earth GET OVER IT!
there is some significant radiation in space, but its not that bad. when a solar flare happens you can just cover up yourself, its exactly what the astronauts on the iss do.
All these people who say we should be fixing all problems on Earth before wasting time colonising space I ask; why are you wasting your time watching and commenting on youtube videos about space instead of working to fix Earth's problems?
A couple of things people rarely mention:
1. The money spent on space exploration (same as with pretty much everything else) doesn't _disappear._ It's paid to engineers, factory workers, etc.. As long as you're not buying everything from a separate market, that money will stimulate your local (national / continental) economy.
2. Limits on launch weight can be worked around by setting up a spaceship assembly plant in orbit, and sending components up one at a time (as is already done for the ISS), before sending it on its way to some other planet.
Brilliant talk, Mr Hervieu. Incredibly well presented, broad and deep in scope, and the opposite of patronising. I hope to hear more of your talks in the future, I imagine you will become a standout public speaker for astrophysics. Top work, mate.
I've been saying this for years whenever I hear talk of going to Mars - "Set up a Moon base first." If it cost a million bucks per kilogram landed on the Moon, imagine the price per kilogram landed on Mars! Actually, the difference in harshness of environment between Moon and Mars is minimal. Both are barren rocks wide open to space radiation and near vacuum.
check Fraser Cain's latest video about bases on mars moons. He makes a pretty good case why base on Deimos or Phobos first makes so much sense.
@@Czeckie 👍 we will go there. But first we need a literally dirt cheap launch system. And the moon fullfil exactly that setup
Mars is massive enough to retain a thin atmosphere and has more potential for terraforming in the long term though
@@sixdfx how ?
palmer eldritch - Why not terraform the moon too?
Great talk, as always! Thank you, Royal Institution. I was born and grew up at the tail end of the space age/jet age, I remember the excitement around the first commercial supersonic flights (my country was briefly on the list of ones where the Concorde landed!) and hearing sonic booms overhead at military parades or near airbases before supersonic travel over land became very regulated, and all the children’s books in my library more-or-less promised a Moon base in my lifetime - in just a few years, in fact, certainly WELL before the year 2000 - as well as routine commercial lunar travel, permanent undersea exploration bases… people always talk about the flying cars, but that was the least of it. Your talks give me hope, it’s good to know at least some people and the organizations they represent are thinking about space exploration still, scouting for water on the moon, considering how to build semi-sunken radiation-proof Moon structures out of regolith, and so on. If traveling in space ever DOES become commonplace in my lifetime, sign me up!!! 🙂❤️🚀
I am a 1968 baby 🙂 and I agree.
The crater he showed in the start contains so much water we do not need to search anywhere else. We crashed a very heavy used rocket structure into it, and examined the material from the impact. We found so much water that it exceeded many times what we expected 🤘and building a base in the dark of the crater solves radiation exposure. It is a perfect fit. We know the target now. We have our launch site 🤗
Why can't we make that fuel on earth now for our transportation?
we have to stop taking flags to other celestial bodies!
We need one flag only 🌍
Very well spoken!
1:50 Yeah you can say that
that doesnt make it a real problem
brings back memories!!!
9:23 - Sigh. There is no "light side of the Moon". *All* "sides" of the Moon get lit. We only see the side of the Moon facing us, but the other side gets lit as well (except during the full moon phase, when the side facing us is fully lit and the rest is not).
He didn't mention the orbital issues with Moon vs Mars since the Moon is basically fixed distance whereas Mars has limits on realistic launch windows due to it orbiting the Sun whereas the Moon orbiting the Earth.
9:23 "the light side of the Moon" lol - Don't let Neil deGrasse Tyson see this presentation. He would totally flip out :D
The arrogant science teacher? Why?
@@benbernanke7244 because the moon is tidally locked to the Earth, not the sun aka what he called the "light side of the moon" is the Earth facing side, as the moon rotates around Earth all parts of the Moon's surface face the sun at some point so there is no light side, just a side we do not see without spacecraft.
Not sure what is arrogant about a science teacher who does his job though...
I just have one word, centrifugal bases. Just as we have simulated gravity using centrifugal force in space we can do the same on the surface of a lower gravity body. Think of a linked chain of modules on a rail arranged in a circle going round and round, as the speed picks up the individual modules lean inward and we would experience a centrifugal gravity effect towards the floor.
Problem is lower gravity bodies tend to be all shapes but round.
That's two words. :P
which implies a colony on a high speed bullet train that has to run 24/7 for years without anything going wrong and big problems on maintaining it. What ever could go wrong?
~ 2:15 That should read "faring", not "fairing".
Seems like Calum is a good guy to keep following!
Don't really see anything extra ordinary in him.
We will no doubt use all the water before we even get to go there in any large numbers.
A trip to Mars should not be attempted until a means of generating artificial gravity is discovered.
Oniel cylinders. Anything else?
Facepalm 😫
"Danger, Will Robinson!"Danger!!!
Would you mind adding English subtitles please. Auto translate sucks most of the time.
English subtitles are available
It's not VON BRAWN, it's pronounced as Fon Brown.
And yet, you understood. :)
*warning* do not read the comments section
To late 🥴
I THOUGHT NASA FORGOT HOW THEY GOT TOO THE MOON
boy, I miss old Christmas lectures (very old ones) with boring title. these were fantastic. they were not very entertaining but filled with fundamental of scientific thoughts.
You won't have to miss them anymore, here they are - www.rigb.org/christmas-lectures/watch?p=2&video-type=series
There's still a few series we're working on getting up, and another few that are missing, but it should be enough to get you started down a nostalgia path!
highly disagree... time 2:15 --- what has some god to do with anything and sentence after... do we really first colonize other planet, while we are not educated enough to be free(of religions, money, ..), healthy and so on.. there are still lot of people, who care only for money.. we should first solve some "Earth-like" - human problems... good luck with educating when you start your lecture with GOD :D
You high, bro?
Just to get back to reality, at $1,000,000 per kilogram it would cost $113,000,000,000 to ship one cargo load of a Boeing 747-400F. The plane itself cost around $250,000,000.
UK USA-51st STATE
Water has a *high hydrogen content?* Who Knew!? - j q t -
2:09 "Space _fairing"_ (sic)? Sorry, but I've lost all faith in this talk having any serious research in it already.
I think aliens live on moon.. They demaged chandaryan2 orbiter Vikram.
I think 👽 stole your brain 😜
You have a great passion and a gift for persuasive oration. I must interject however, that we could buy probably enough food to feed everyone in the world who's hungry for the money that would be invested in this program. And people looking back at Earth after spending all that money are not likely to think about lower people in need but rather how to get bigger and reach farther. I think there is benefit to technology development and I find it intriguing myself, but there are much greater things to resolve within the realm of our own planet which are highly unlikely to be found by leaving to another planet. So in conclusion I would say it sounds fascinating but I still don't see anywhere near enough reason to invest in it.
Do you like microwaves, and think they are useful on Earth? How about computers? GPS? Modern communication gear? These are all things that were developed with, for, or by space agencies and space explorers, or at least greatly accelerated by them. Also aircraft collision-avoidance systems
, cordless power tools, corrosion-resistant coatings for bridges, digital imaging, ear thermometers, household water filters, hydroponic plant-growing systems (which could help feed the world), implantable pacemakers, infrared handheld cameras, kidney dialysis machines, LASIK corrective eye surgery, memory foam mattresses, scratch-resistant sunglasses, safety grooving on pavement, virtual reality, and weather forecasting. All technologies developed directly with NASA funding.
What about water purification?
Desalination, which may very well save us from water wars the world's militaries are already gearing up for, has largely been researched and perfected for space travel.
Also, it's easy to underestimate the problems and cost of feeding the world. Let's say, for argument's sake, that you can feed a hungry person for an average of just $500 a year. It's probably higher than that, but that's a nice round number. Now let's say there are three billion people who would need that service. That's $1.5 Trillion *per year* , in perpetuity. Forgetting that that isn't anywhere close to the optimal solution to that problem anyway for the moment, that is somewhere in line with what the entire planet spends on *military spending* . It is more than a hundred times the total global investment in space exploration, which even in the US, the highest investor, is less than half a percent of the government's operating budget. In fact, with only about $14 Billion spent worldwide on space exploration, and over 7 billion people, what you just claimed is that you can feed a starving person for just *two* dollars a year. That's what space exploration costs us. Two bucks. $2, Compared to about $260 per person on military spending.
Think space exploration isn't a compelling investment? In fact, it's estimated that every dollar ever invested in space exploration returns $14 to the economy. That's a 1400% ROI in investment terms, of sustained historical performance. In other words, investing in space exploration isn't just the next Microsoft or Facebook... it's the next thousand boom investments like them, and the ground floor everyone always wishes they'd gotten in on? That would be right now. That should be plenty of reason to invest.
It isn't an exaggeration to say that if we ignore space exploration to "solve problems at home", we will probably be extinct within the next thousand years, with that probability approaching 100% in the next million. If we were instead to stop fighting each other and spending vast swaths of our global resources on blowing each other up, and invest all of that in space exploration? We could be living in a post-scarcity utopia within our lifetimes and all but immune to extinction in a few centuries, completely immune in a thousand years.
P.S. Were you not paying attention to the part about the Overview Effect? More than just anecdotal, there's pretty substantial scientific evidence that those people you're worried about not thinking about the "lower people in need" once they've gone to space do just the opposite: they see past all our petty differences and cherish us all.
Apart from limited resources on Earth leaving no other option inevitably than to search and gathering eleswhere.
Unfortunately GB will loose all foothold towards space, thanks to Brexit - but, as You said, 1£ per person, just for the ISS, is a lot - GB sure can do better without EU.
Absolutely absurd, we can't build a viable biosphere on Earth
Way to miss the point.
@@JustFamilyPlaytime sure sure we're gonna live on the Moon, 😂. I'll believe it when I see it
This lad is way too young to be giving out lectures on such vast topics.
He might be young, but he presented it pretty well. He also survived the Q&A section decently with its unpredictable questions, that's sometimes where things seem to break down for some speakers. Future old experts have to start somewhere, being able to present this and having a good broad knowledge while also being a specialist working in the field could lead to becoming one of them.
Patronising? Did you mean to say Dismissive?
Still learning English, any tips would be greatly appreciated.
Generic girl - just because you might not have invested your younger years becoming an expert in a field (that earns a place to speak at the RI) doesn't mean anyone can't. There are many people younger than the both of us that are wiser than we will ever be even at 90. Sorry to burst your bubble but age is nothing more than a number. It's how you've used your time that counts.
How come there are no stars out in space?
for the same reason you can´t see stars at daytime.
Olueni onLoppu That makes no sense. It doesn’t make sense either that there are not any satellites or space junk in photos
How come people with no intelligence live on Earth ?
@@katballou I bet you use a 🔦 in daytime because darkness is fake news
TrickOrRetreat So none of the planets are actually moving in space and if rocks flew by space station, the cameras could not pick them up?
Isnt there someone older who can give this lecture as it seems like idealistic bs coming from this kid who obviously hasn't experienced much in life.
Waiting for your next lecture Melvin.
Whats life experience got to do with anything? Please think before you interact with the world around you Jesus
If you can do it better, be my guest.
In light of the looming global climate catastrophic events i demand government cancel funding to all scientific endeavours including medical research that are not directly connected to solving this global emergency.
Bart Barry: There is nothing you or I or mankind or god (if you're silly enough to believe in one) can do about the NATURAL temperature variations on Earth GET OVER IT!
It's not a question about political will. It is a question about being able to survive the radiation in space, and not simply faking it.
faking it ?
Lol, facts
Flat Earthers gunna flat.
there is some significant radiation in space, but its not that bad. when a solar flare happens you can just cover up yourself, its exactly what the astronauts on the iss do.