On the topic of "why is the private sector more effective" ... I recommend reading "the space shuttle decision" which goes into depth on all the different actors who pulled onto the program and ultimately made it the compromised money sink that it was. Private companies can simply be much more focused because they do not have to please (for example) governors from however-many states the US has and multiple federal agencies at once.
Question 1 was a chance to mention the Hubble constant; we have measured how "fast" (scare quotes because it's not really a speed) the expansion is: 68-74 km/s/Mpc, which simplifies to 2.2-2.4 × 10⁻¹⁸ Hz. And the range in that value of course leads into a discussion of the "crisis of cosmology," since various current best estimates of this value seem to disagree.
I had a dream so vivid I think I may have remote viewed a black hole. It said "become one" to me, with a seismic voice I can only compare to a powerful thunderous earthquake. I woke up in tears from that dream. I'll never forget it.
Hey Fraser, since SLS is a non reusable rocket does that mean that the other SLS II and SLD III are already being build or maybe even finished? In which timeframe do they build all those new rockets and where do they "store" them?
I think the idea would be all the subsystems and components are already built and tested. So the final assembly and testing of an SLS can be done fairly quickly
Thoughts on the Juno spacecraft making the closest flyby of Europa since Galileo on September 29th and why more people aren't talking about all the brand new data we'll be receiving from it?
Hey Fraser. Is a possible cause of the irregular orbits all pointing in one direction around Neptune and beyond caused by interstellar winds? I know the heliosphere is somewhere close there and I'm not dismissing the idea of planet 9, finding it would be amazing but just looking into the other possibilities. Also I have yet to see a map of both the heliosphere and the trans-neptunian objects together. Thanks
With regard to 'Black Hole Crushing Itself' , I'd like to propose the mental model of Element 246, being the first black hole that attracts matter/energy in decay state levels, where Element 245 is a black hole but only does not allow light to escape, also known as the element of a Rats eye. From to 246, to 247, to 248, to 249, to 250 as a stable element, or a stable black hole. It's core would become element 250 before it's surface, but when it's surface becomes element 250, it's no longer attracting or consuming energy/matter.
You said that almost every piece of Apollo got thrown away except for a small piece at the top - and as a result it was very expensive. You just described SLS! NASA appears to have learnt nothing in over 50 years!
I thought NASA was required by law to pretty much use the same technology and contractors that were used in the shuttle program. Congress passed a bill that essentially makes it illegal for them to change things up to much.
Fraser can you explain in the next Q&A how is that the plasmas in space can remain so hot / in a plasma state for so long? Even with it being so dispersed, it would seem that through the ages / millennia, that the plasma would at the very least be able to radiate away it's heat and cool back down to un-ionized hydrogen, helium, and other gasses and atoms.
21:15 I think this question was leaning more to "can a black hole crush and explode itself". And I think that's a clear no because its sphere of influence is omni-directional so it would equally crush itself everywhere leaving no asymmetry for exploding or "crushing" as it's already "flattened" by gravity.
22:55 Well more precisely, as I understand, the CMB redshift is caused by the *expanding space* through which it travels -- _not_ its direction, or its speed through space (which was always _c_ ), or its speed relative to us over time.
A wise man once said: "One does not book a return ticket when traveling to watch a rocket launch". I wonder how many Florida residents live there because of getting stuck for too long and just settling there 🙂
Hey Dr Cain, what'll be the biggest challenge for getting people to Mars? Life-support for the journey, the journey away from Mars' surface or something else?
professional cosmologist here: the explanation of how we measure the age of the universe is somewhat off. The age of the universe is computed by extrapolating the expansion of the universe back in time, meaning that we calculate how much time has passed since the distance between observers, who take part in the cosmic expansion, was zero. This is the moment of the big bang, at which the so-called scale factor of the universe has a value 0. Today, the scale factor is defined to have a value of 1. The time the scale factor needs to change its value from 0 to 1 is the age of the universe. The evolution of the scale factor, i.e. the relative size of the universe, is given by the Friedmann equation. To calculate the age of the universe, astronomers need to measure the current rate of the cosmic expansion, the so-called Hubble constant, as well as the amount of dark energy, dark matter, normal matter, and the geometry of spacetime. These measurements can be done using multiple cosmological probes, one of which are observations of the cosmic microwave background that was mentioned in the video. The important thing to clarify is that we do not derive the age of the universe from the temperature of the cosmic microwave background. Instead, the aforementioned properties of the universe are derived from the structure seen in the CMB maps. From those temperature anisotropies, we calculate the so-called power spectrum, which we fit with model predictions. The absolute temperature of the CMB was only measured once by the COBE satellite's FIRAS instrument in the 80s. Repeating this measurement with cutting-edge technology would provide a new window into physics shortly after the big bang. WMAP and Planck mapped the anisotropies of the CMB with higher and higher resolution and greater sensitivity, but did not measure its absolute temperature. Regarding the actual question, we only measure the age of the universe in relation to the solar system rest-frame. An observer, who has been in a close orbit around a black hole for billions of years would be affected by time dilation. Observations performed in such a reference frame would yield different values for the cosmological parameters, leading to a different value for the age of the universe. Huge fan of the content though. Keep up the great work, Fraser ;)
One more addition for everyone who is curious about the topic: In the end, we do not derive the age of the universe from the cooldown of the CMB, but rather from the properties of the oscillations of the primordial matter-radiation soup that are powered by the first structures formed by dark matter. The CMB gives us a snapshot of these oscillations the very moment matter and radiation decouple for the first time 380.000 years after the big bang, which is why we refer to the CMB as a baby picture of the cosmos.
We get earth to Mars launch windows every two years or so. Is that reflected on the Mars to earth trip? My main question is: if we send people to Mars, how long will they have before the next return launch window arrives? Will they have only days on the planet? A month? A couple of years?
I think almost a year but defenitely not days, weeks or even a few months. I mean we can send people to Mars and back whenever we want except the time frame is used as the most fuel efficient way to send as every day outside would cost more and more exponentially. Oh and also more time of course
Hello Fraser Just an odd question: When we see stars galaxies millions and millions of light years aways and we see the light coming from them. Is there a chance the light has changed direction due to black hole or anything and where we see might be somehere else then we are looking at.
It's not just possible but likely but in such a case, we have signs of that change in direction. It doesn't even need to be black holes but can be other collections of much mass. Moreover, the distant things can be amplified by gravitational lensing, making us able to see them at all in the first place.
With the SLS it is frustrating as they could have used it as a testbed for newer engines. We could have learned something from the failures, had it as a technology demonstrator. Possibly newer engines not using liquid hydrogen.
Hello Fraser, my question is: why is it that if humans were to travel fast enough to reach a Lorentz factor of 600 plus. Why would the empty space transition from black to red and cycle thru the spectrum like a rainbow?
The Universe received a big 'kick' from Inflation during the first fraction of a second, and then its momentum has continued the expansion since then. All [other] explosions have happened _after_ that.
Okay, but what is space? I mean, is space being created as it expands? Are new units of space popping into existence in between galaxies? Or if there's a set amount of space units, are they becoming less dense as space expands? What is space anyway?
You asked a really interesting question. Idk what it is either but i imagine it is something. If we look at sound waves, air is what transports the sound. What about light waves? Something is transporting the light as it's always moving on its own regardless of how "empty" it is out there
31:53 There is no easy way to fully simulate Mars gravity on earth, though. Your bodyweight (as experienced in contact with an underlying hard surface) will be influenced by buoyancy, that's true, but you will still have the full 1G pull on bodily fluids and such.
I wonder how long it be till we have a picture of an exoplanet that isn't just a light blob? A few years ago, I would've said ~2060, but now I think it could be closer to ~2030
About JWST, I guess making the images public does not in anyway affect the researchers in doing their research. Isn't that someone wants to censor the images before public can see them. Apparently some discussions on the fundamental concepts of the universe were already been triggered by the images released so far.
Many of the images are made public immediately, especially large surveys like COSMOS-Web. In all other cases the astronomers get 12 months to write their paper before the data is publicly released.
dear fraser, do you think that that the use of hydrogen instead of methane for the sole reason of funding existing contracts will be the ultimate demise of sls and it epitomises the issues between government vs private space enterprise?
Regarding expanding and moving, scientists and professors etc are usually referring to a 'field' when they talk about particles, how particles are in a 'field' etc, is this something physical that actually exists, or is it only something mathematical making it easier to handle stuff? Because, if there is an actual physical field in the universe it must standing still? And we moving through it? And, this is my question, if we could make a mark in the field and see how we move in relation to that mark we know which direction we are moving, how fast we move and also at the same time speed and direction on everything else? Or what?
About the question regarding private companies being ahead of the state space program; The bureaucracy is stale, but with complete cynicism in a collective goal talent may be incentivized more by money and private ambition to join the private sector. If there was a real will for NASA to get ahead it most certainly could I think.
For the astronaut training in water simulating mars gravity: While the astronaut-suite-system may be in a state of simulated low gravity, the astronaut itself and his body would still feel the gravity in form of the air-filled suite pushing up on him. Also for example blood doesn't rush to the astronauts head like it does in micro gravity.
…which is why we need spinning habitats in LEO. We can (almost) perfectly simulate any gravitational regime on a spinning habitat. I say “almost” because spinning habitats will include a weird Coriolis force.
Hi Fraser, love your content. Is New Horizons going to become something like the new Voyager - sending us information from interstellar space for decades to come? Аlso any recent update on it's activities?
Do you consider that photons preserve their entire energy during the travel through space? If they loose some, then how is this reflected in the their appearance? is it possible that the red shift is a result of energy loss during the space travel of light and not a doppler effect? In this case the space is not necessarily expanding but the red shift is just a manifestation of energy loss by the light during the travel.
So the expansion of Gavity, gives mass momentum? How is the vacuum, expansion interacting with galaxies? Which is repelling, which ,or hv I totally fd it
On the Mars buoyancy test why not just have them return and take a nap and see how that might affect muscle growth and Bone development. Or have the Mars buoyancy as part of gravitational readjustment therapy.?
Question for the next round: Was there a time in the early universe when no part was expanded faster than light? Or the Cosmic Event Horizon there in the beginning?
We don't know the size of the universe. If it's infinite then probably only before the big bang which is invalid because time never existed before then. Because the further out you look the faster it's expanding and if the universe is infinitely large then the expansion is also infinite
Hi Fraser, do we have current technology to detect magnetospheres for exoplanets? Since this is needed to retain a tmosphere, which is needed to retain liquid water, which is needed for life! So indirectly, we can look for life on such planets with a higher chance.
Yes. They have seen magnetospheres around exoplanets. It's not my wheelhouse, so forgive me if I'm a bit wrong here, but they have detected a region of charged carbon particles that surrounded a planet and streamed away from it in a long tail as it transited its sun. This is indicative of a magnetosphere.
If the universe was shrinking at the same rate it's expanding now, from right about the size it has now, what would we observe? Would we already have been burned crispy by the high energy radiation coming at us from all directions?
That's a really cool question. I would bet that we'd be roasted by blue shifted light. That said, without the expansion, we'd never cool enough for the universe to become transparent in the first place.
@@deSloleye not even blue shift light. Could be ultraviolet, x-rays and gamma rays. If the universe were to be infinite space itself would be basically creating infinite energy blasting and vaporizing everything. Would it imply that the expansion of the universe is the result of balancing out the energy? 🤔 So many interesting implications i love this question
@@soaringstars314 blue shifted light can absolutely be x-ray or gamma days as the objects emitting are approaching us at increasing speed. James Webb is viewing visible and ultraviolet light that has been redshifted deep into the infra red spectrum but it didn't start out that way
@@deSloleye yeah and if the universe is infinitely big I'd imagine how much gamma rays would build up since eventually it'll all be compressed together hence why it will vaporize everything And probably why it's expanding because otherwise it can lead to this
Hey Fraser! I have a question about the early universe via The James Webb. We have proof that the Big Bang happened. Is it possible that we are misunderstanding the expansive processes of the beginning of our universe? And can this misunderstanding explain dark matter and perhaps galaxies and stars forming sooner than we thought?
That's what I also think. Like something that isn't constant but very gradual where we wouldn't notice. We may never know for sure for a long time but all we can do is keep theorizing and experimenting
If the universe is infinite how will that work and what implications does it have in the amount of possibilities and how far does infinite distance expand from us? The concept of Infinity is confusing to us hoomans. If the universe was finite what happens if we reach the border? Or even cross it? I can't imagine both scenarios and because of my ignorant brain i choose to rather believe in a repeating/looping universe like pac man or asteroid lol! (Kinda)
Is there any verb we can use other than "fly" when talking about returning from the moon to the earth? Seems like the wrong one, and is perhaps why we get things like the millennium falcon moving like a plane through an asteroid field, for instance, when the actual piloting challenge would be way higher. Unless there's one I'm missing, we might need to come up with a new term. Dynam, dynaming, dynammed (from orbital dynamics) Or follow the climbers and use dyno... Idk just spitballing
@@frasercain maybe? For some reason it gives me similar vibes to fly. It still feels to me like the kind of thing where you have to be active the whole time, as opposed to occasional burns while mostly letting inertia do its thing, but it's better! Piloting through an asteroid field (as unrealistic as that is) does seem appropriate. I'm liking dyno more, it's similar to climbing, you plan your trajectory, apply a brief force, and then let your momentum carry you to the right place. Plus the reference to "orbital dynamics". So cool that you respond to so many of your comments... I wonder how you have the time. Could be a team of people, but that's cool too.
A good example of what is going on with SLS is "Chapter F." Look that up (Space Shuttle) and you'll see that both politics and favors can either destroy a project or slow it down significantly. I call the SLS "The Book full of Chapter F" for this very reason. :O/-
It always has been *Initially made as a possible way to nuke other places *It's always the rich who end up going *People protesting the government to stop wasting tax dollars on space especially on the appllo mission *Politicians changing priorities on what missions we should do *When talks about NASAs budget they always talk about how to reduce the budget as much as possible. Privatization of space might add onto that *People demanding to stop polluting space where the esa is usually the ones who takes it seriously with the recent Russia anti satellite test *Talks about why we should stay here on earth than spread our issues onto other planets The future may politicize it way more on colonizations of other bodies and who knows what more. I personally don't see most of them as political but unfortunately people like to look everything as political instead of actual issues that need to be fixed :(
Hi Fraser, I've had this nagging question for years that I can't seem to get a satisfactory answer for...The redshift of light is literally light waves being stretched to have a lower frequency by the expansion of space... Doesn't this also mean that as light travels through space it is actually losing energy... Couldn't this imply that instead of expansion causing redshift it could actually be the light waves losing energy to the quantum field that light waves originate from and travel through which would rule out the expansion theory? I would love to hear your thoughts on this.... Cheers from Australia....
Light could just have a half-life, is basically the gist of that idea. This idea has been floating around in the scientific community, but is considered pseudo-science. Light is quantized, but shifting through the redshift doesn't remove packets of this "energy", just like it doesn't gain energy when it is blueshifted. What basically happens is that light will redshift instead of falling behind, while it blueshifts instead of getting closer.
@@soaringstars314 I don't think that is a terminology applicable to individual photons. Redshift doesn't spread "energy", it merely looks like that as an artifact of the laws of physics. If you were able to fly side by side to that photon and inspect it on its way, you would never see it change properties ever.
No otherwise we'd be using the sun's radiation. I mean it's light is radiation but even if we're talking about that the light from other stars is too dim so we'd need earth size solar panels or something crazy lol
we are building extremely large rockets testing them daily. in testing all this thrust is captured by the test stand attached to our planet. what are we doing to Earths orbit?
For that ram jet engine, can we harvest hydrogen from Jupiter or Saturn and burn that? It will take multiple orbits, but each pass through the atmosphere to gather hydrogen will burn to burn higher and higher?
Would NEA (NearErthAstreroids) not be a better source for the resources for further space exploration? It needs less fuel to get to them and you don't need to bring your water out of a gravity well. When I here people talking about getting resources from the moon I always think about a paper red some years ago that calculated the advantages of mining water from NEAs to even get to the surface of the moon.
But many NEA's dont always stay near earth. Many intercent earth's orbit once every few years. I am pretty sure there are asteroids at L3/L4 of the Earth/sun lagrange points, but those are further away than the moon. Also wouldn't asteroids being in the 'habitable zone" usually mean they are close enough to the sun that they have liquid water on the surface? so wouldn't that mean the asteroids would lose that water? There is a lot of stuff I do not know, but I am sure those running these exploration projects have people on the teams that have better knowledge and would think of using these things.
@@MrT------5743 I'm sure there would be enough to use no? About the water most would probably be found underground as ice but i think it's more common on further and larger asteroids. But yeah the moon is more practical anyway for other reasons
Why do scientists call Black Holes, Black Holes (as if to say they lead somewhere?.) Wouldn't it be better to call Black Holes, Black stars instead, essentially that make more sense then colling them holes.?
Mr. Cain. With time dilation and lack of speed and resources, will/how will Humans EVER be a space faring species. we cant go fast enough to make it worth while, and natural decay would make a generational ship impractical.
Would it be better placing a dozen antennas on the Moon (pointing at Earth with a greater territory coverage) instead of thousands of satellites in Lower Earth Orbit (ex Starlink)?
I do have a question that i think many people are quietly asking with every new rover sent to mars that is, there are things on mars that really have created a great deal of intetest. The idea that mars may have been habitable at one stage of its life and that the habitation may have been equal to or very close to our level , Why is it NASA seems to make a point of stzying away from these areas rather that settle the matter for everyones peace of mind, i refer to Cydonia where the face is. I think the same could be said of the moon, as there are structures there that are clearly worth a second look, it does not need to be humans, as with many of these rovers its far safer than sending people there but none the less these places are screaming out to be looked at with a much closer look. I have often wondered why instead of ground based units i often wonder if a form of gas filled type of flying device that could travel a lot further as see a whole lot more, i am sure that there must be a gas that offers enough lift so the energy to move around is far less that ground contact units, these would be a lot better than ground bases units as they would not be subjected to anywhere near the same amount of dust and grit which effects how long these units can operate for before bearings become a problem.??
I've heard that galaxies aren't really traveling all that fast anywhere, and most of their apparent speed is actually the expansion of space. To me it feels like the rate that galaxies go through time is changing at a different rate than the intergalactic medium. Maybe from an observer resting in the middle of the cosmic void far from any galaxy, the universe isn't really changing much but the galaxies are all shrinking.
It seems that no matter what, FTL is impossible So perhaps instead of going faster than light, we could try and slow down time? It would have roughly the same effect Taking 40,000 years to reach another planet is a lot, but if time on the spacecraft is slowed down, it shouldn’t be a problem If that’s not possible, cryogenic sleep might be the only option, combined with nuclear/ion power
Actually that's exactly why you can't travel at the speed of light because of time dialation. The time at a moving object on the outside perspective slows down the faster you go so you can move faster than the speed of light in your perspective. But as a result everything around you will go forward in time hence you'd travel to the future Alternatively you can somehow have space itself move you and not travel at the speed of light but still get to places ftl anyway
Great channel love your channel and I enjoy your enthusiasm so much however I believe there are people already living on Mars , under the surface and there has been - for a long long time and there have been people on Mars long before there were people on earth and there was also a missing planet the 4th planet in line that was also being lived on and was so earthlike except somewhat bigger , however it was destroyed on purpose. I think there's a lot more here than meets the eye and that is already known by the right people.
The most important task for JWST is detecting bio-signatures on distant planets. Everything else is not going to capture the public imagination 💭 or garner more resources for more science.
I agree tho with that I'm always interested in seeing the furthest objects it can see even tho radio telescopes can see the furthest, Someday seeing the James deep field view, and the other gas giants and dwarf planets in our solar system.
I wonder if the ultimate Proof that space is expanding faster than the speed of light is that very distant galaxies finally just wink out of existence. Have we observed this at all? What would it take to see this?
They won't wink out, they'll just fade away slowly as their light is stretched by the expanding Universe. But it'll take billions of years for them to go from visible light to infrared to microwave to radio waves.
What if we for the sake of argument suspend that space is expanding…. And create a thought experiment where our solar system is at the edge of a void, a big void in space… and if Aaron galaxy S on the end of this avoid and the galaxies or the other side of the void or attracted to matter on opposite of the void….. in such a manner that the Galaxy is on the opposite side of the void or moving away from us and galaxies on our side of the word are moving faster way from us because they’re closer to something that attracts them matter of some sort and we are accelerating slower but in the same direction, would that create an illusion that is similar to the universe expanding.????? and if that is true how can we truly say that the universe is expanding, can’t we just say that it might be expanding but we’re not really sure….?
Thinking about redshifting light as the universe expands, what happens to the energy of each photon? (since visible light photons are more energetic than the microwaves they have been stretched into)
?? assuming that my understanding is right, mass is effectively the same as energy and that time seems to be based on energy and mass as well. Could one say that without energy/mass there is no time? So the "big bang" (or whatever might replace that) would be "the beginning of time" and when the universe "burns out" that would be "the end of time"? To put things another way: the speed of light (speed is distance traveled/time) seems to be based on the amount of energy or mass available or time is based on energy or mass available. Or maybe I totally missed the underlying concepts. Or is Dark energy/matter a large enough portion of things to effectively stabilize time and it's speed?
Congress won't have an excuse for what they did with all the tax dollars they receive. Would be great, but I don't think Politicians and their large pocket donors would like looking like crooks.
If dark matter avoids gravity, most would be located on intergalactic spaces between galaxies or even universes but who knows there could be some lurking around inside galaxies and star systems by chance
@@MrT------5743 Yes that was the point of the comment. Andromeda is larger than the Milky Way so we are more likely bound to them. But fair, it does go both ways. Andromeda has more influence on us than we do on them due to mass differences. But fair point.
@@soaringstars314 "The Andromeda Galaxy is the largest galaxy in the Local Group with some 1 trillion stars - roughly twice the population of our own Milky Way." GALEX/NASA/JPL-Caltech
@@SeaTacDelta yeah no denying that, tho imo it's not enough to constitute as our galaxy gravitationally bound to Andromeda because Pluto and Charon are considered as a binary system at times except Charon is less than a half as dense as Pluto. Not to mention the local group is barely held together more loose than Pluto and Charon from the sun far out because expansion of the universe. Not to mention there are other galaxies around Hence why imo it's more like we're all bound to the center. Eh it doesn't matter in the end we're colliding each other anyway so ye
I think perhaps some public opinion might object to greater space related funding. Like myopic politicians appealing only to the wallets of their voters to get into office and dissing science research. Because there are many that only care about gas prices, COL increases and electric bills. Unfortunately I can't blame them for wanting to care for their families. But it's up to the Space Industry to present it all in the correct light and to detail the TRUE value of all this effort and the benefits of related industries and research.
I feel like space x supposedly making space flights cheaper might lead to giving them more reasons to lower space related funding and will lead to profits rather than actual curiosity. Idk I'm speculating
I never thought of how capitalism benefited the space industry by offloading the consequences of failure onto the private sector. Before, I always thought that a lot of potential was lost by no longer having the availability of the large pool of money that comes from government investment. Capitalism is only viable if short term profits are made. As we see from the medical, education and housing industry, greed has the opposite effect. I used to think, "what profits could be made by studying the universe?"
How do you crush something that doesn't occupy more than a planc length? The space around the black hole is curved so much that light orbits the black hole and cannot reach an escape velocity. The space that is distorted is not a thing that could be "crushed" it can only be bent until it turns back onto itself and not allow any information it contains to escape. It is theorized that the information can escape once it has degraded to the point of being an incomplete quark set where it's mass is more theortical than actual and is emitted as radiation. Space expanding is a result of hot objects pushing away from eachother, the temperature gradient and separation between the objects, I believe, when measured across as large a sample as is feasible. It will be found that hotter objects near to others but outside of obvious gravitation causation range would be found to be retreating from eachother more quickly than cooler objects at similar distance.
For plank i know gravity affects space and time so maybe space is being shrunk the more gravity until it's infinitely small? I'm just hypothesizing For the expansion what if it's to balance out the lights from the stars? I was looking at another comment and if we shrink the universe for example it will shift to higher radiations thus supposedly creating energy no? Idk lol
Is there a relationship between gravity and space expansion? Is there space contraction? Maybe gravity is not that regular matter curves space but contracts space. more/infinite matter, space contracts more. less/zero matter, space expands more. Not need to have dark energy and dark matter. Just that space contracts/expands.
What a great explanation on the Government v. Private methods of space exploration. Great work, my friend. Dave in Phoenix
How exciting the next 10 years are going to be!
On the topic of "why is the private sector more effective" ... I recommend reading "the space shuttle decision" which goes into depth on all the different actors who pulled onto the program and ultimately made it the compromised money sink that it was. Private companies can simply be much more focused because they do not have to please (for example) governors from however-many states the US has and multiple federal agencies at once.
Makes sense, although as FC mentions most of the private rocket companies have ended up going bankrupt
Question 1 was a chance to mention the Hubble constant; we have measured how "fast" (scare quotes because it's not really a speed) the expansion is: 68-74 km/s/Mpc, which simplifies to 2.2-2.4 × 10⁻¹⁸ Hz. And the range in that value of course leads into a discussion of the "crisis of cosmology," since various current best estimates of this value seem to disagree.
I had a dream so vivid I think I may have remote viewed a black hole. It said "become one" to me, with a seismic voice I can only compare to a powerful thunderous earthquake. I woke up in tears from that dream. I'll never forget it.
If you did, you did. Congratulations, and keep listening
Love these videos, I always miss the live event because my kids 3 hour bedtime routine so I look forward to these
Hey Fraser, since SLS is a non reusable rocket does that mean that the other SLS II and SLD III are already being build or maybe even finished? In which timeframe do they build all those new rockets and where do they "store" them?
I think the idea would be all the subsystems and components are already built and tested. So the final assembly and testing of an SLS can be done fairly quickly
Thoughts on the Juno spacecraft making the closest flyby of Europa since Galileo on September 29th and why more people aren't talking about all the brand new data we'll be receiving from it?
Hey Fraser. Is a possible cause of the irregular orbits all pointing in one direction around Neptune and beyond caused by interstellar winds? I know the heliosphere is somewhere close there and I'm not dismissing the idea of planet 9, finding it would be amazing but just looking into the other possibilities. Also I have yet to see a map of both the heliosphere and the trans-neptunian objects together. Thanks
With regard to 'Black Hole Crushing Itself' , I'd like to propose the mental model of Element 246, being the first black hole that attracts matter/energy in decay state levels, where Element 245 is a black hole but only does not allow light to escape, also known as the element of a Rats eye. From to 246, to 247, to 248, to 249, to 250 as a stable element, or a stable black hole. It's core would become element 250 before it's surface, but when it's surface becomes element 250, it's no longer attracting or consuming energy/matter.
Fraser, nice to see that you sunburn is fading away. Best regards.
You said that almost every piece of Apollo got thrown away except for a small piece at the top - and as a result it was very expensive. You just described SLS! NASA appears to have learnt nothing in over 50 years!
SLS is a less powerful rocket than a Saturn V. So it gets fully disposed delivering Orion to Gateway.
I thought NASA was required by law to pretty much use the same technology and contractors that were used in the shuttle program. Congress passed a bill that essentially makes it illegal for them to change things up to much.
@@zlm001 Hence the "Senate Launch System" nick name 🙂
Thank you Fraser.
Fraser can you explain in the next Q&A how is that the plasmas in space can remain so hot / in a plasma state for so long? Even with it being so dispersed, it would seem that through the ages / millennia, that the plasma would at the very least be able to radiate away it's heat and cool back down to un-ionized hydrogen, helium, and other gasses and atoms.
21:15 I think this question was leaning more to "can a black hole crush and explode itself".
And I think that's a clear no because its sphere of influence is omni-directional so it would equally crush itself everywhere leaving no asymmetry for exploding or "crushing" as it's already "flattened" by gravity.
22:55 Well more precisely, as I understand, the CMB redshift is caused by the *expanding space* through which it travels -- _not_ its direction, or its speed through space (which was always _c_ ), or its speed relative to us over time.
Thanks, Fraser! 😊
But yeah, now I'm happy there's no bears on Mars! 😂
Stay safe there with your family! 🖖😊
A wise man once said: "One does not book a return ticket when traveling to watch a rocket launch". I wonder how many Florida residents live there because of getting stuck for too long and just settling there 🙂
Ha ha ha.... ha
Hey Dr Cain, what'll be the biggest challenge for getting people to Mars? Life-support for the journey, the journey away from Mars' surface or something else?
professional cosmologist here: the explanation of how we measure the age of the universe is somewhat off. The age of the universe is computed by extrapolating the expansion of the universe back in time, meaning that we calculate how much time has passed since the distance between observers, who take part in the cosmic expansion, was zero. This is the moment of the big bang, at which the so-called scale factor of the universe has a value 0. Today, the scale factor is defined to have a value of 1. The time the scale factor needs to change its value from 0 to 1 is the age of the universe. The evolution of the scale factor, i.e. the relative size of the universe, is given by the Friedmann equation. To calculate the age of the universe, astronomers need to measure the current rate of the cosmic expansion, the so-called Hubble constant, as well as the amount of dark energy, dark matter, normal matter, and the geometry of spacetime. These measurements can be done using multiple cosmological probes, one of which are observations of the cosmic microwave background that was mentioned in the video. The important thing to clarify is that we do not derive the age of the universe from the temperature of the cosmic microwave background. Instead, the aforementioned properties of the universe are derived from the structure seen in the CMB maps. From those temperature anisotropies, we calculate the so-called power spectrum, which we fit with model predictions. The absolute temperature of the CMB was only measured once by the COBE satellite's FIRAS instrument in the 80s. Repeating this measurement with cutting-edge technology would provide a new window into physics shortly after the big bang. WMAP and Planck mapped the anisotropies of the CMB with higher and higher resolution and greater sensitivity, but did not measure its absolute temperature.
Regarding the actual question, we only measure the age of the universe in relation to the solar system rest-frame. An observer, who has been in a close orbit around a black hole for billions of years would be affected by time dilation. Observations performed in such a reference frame would yield different values for the cosmological parameters, leading to a different value for the age of the universe.
Huge fan of the content though. Keep up the great work, Fraser ;)
One more addition for everyone who is curious about the topic: In the end, we do not derive the age of the universe from the cooldown of the CMB, but rather from the properties of the oscillations of the primordial matter-radiation soup that are powered by the first structures formed by dark matter. The CMB gives us a snapshot of these oscillations the very moment matter and radiation decouple for the first time 380.000 years after the big bang, which is why we refer to the CMB as a baby picture of the cosmos.
@@Kante0 thanks for clarifying and elaborating, it's much appreciated!
Q: You've talked about how the universe expanding creates an event horizon: why isn't the CMBR beyond that?
We get earth to Mars launch windows every two years or so. Is that reflected on the Mars to earth trip? My main question is: if we send people to Mars, how long will they have before the next return launch window arrives? Will they have only days on the planet? A month? A couple of years?
I think almost a year but defenitely not days, weeks or even a few months. I mean we can send people to Mars and back whenever we want except the time frame is used as the most fuel efficient way to send as every day outside would cost more and more exponentially. Oh and also more time of course
And the time it takes to process the infrared data and create a visual image from it must take an enormous amount of effort!
Hello Fraser
Just an odd question: When we see stars galaxies millions and millions of light years aways and we see the light coming from them. Is there a chance the light has changed direction due to black hole or anything and where we see might be somehere else then we are looking at.
It's not just possible but likely but in such a case, we have signs of that change in direction. It doesn't even need to be black holes but can be other collections of much mass. Moreover, the distant things can be amplified by gravitational lensing, making us able to see them at all in the first place.
With the SLS it is frustrating as they could have used it as a testbed for newer engines. We could have learned something from the failures, had it as a technology demonstrator. Possibly newer engines not using liquid hydrogen.
Space X has bugger all to do with "luck", in truth. Musk doesn't compromise on vision and executes. He's really special.
Hello Fraser, my question is: why is it that if humans were to travel fast enough to reach a Lorentz factor of 600 plus. Why would the empty space transition from black to red and cycle thru the spectrum like a rainbow?
Hi Fraser, could the shockwaves from explosion's throughout the universe be the reason for the expansion of the universe.
The Universe received a big 'kick' from Inflation during the first fraction of a second, and then its momentum has continued the expansion since then. All [other] explosions have happened _after_ that.
Very cool you visited Miami! I live in the county!
Okay, but what is space? I mean, is space being created as it expands? Are new units of space popping into existence in between galaxies? Or if there's a set amount of space units, are they becoming less dense as space expands? What is space anyway?
You asked a really interesting question. Idk what it is either but i imagine it is something. If we look at sound waves, air is what transports the sound. What about light waves? Something is transporting the light as it's always moving on its own regardless of how "empty" it is out there
31:53 There is no easy way to fully simulate Mars gravity on earth, though. Your bodyweight (as experienced in contact with an underlying hard surface) will be influenced by buoyancy, that's true, but you will still have the full 1G pull on bodily fluids and such.
I think the point is to test the strength of people and how capable they're working to some degree. But yeah I agree tho
I wonder how long it be till we have a picture of an exoplanet that isn't just a light blob?
A few years ago, I would've said ~2060, but now I think it could be closer to ~2030
About JWST, I guess making the images public does not in anyway affect the researchers in doing their research. Isn't that someone wants to censor the images before public can see them. Apparently some discussions on the fundamental concepts of the universe were already been triggered by the images released so far.
Many of the images are made public immediately, especially large surveys like COSMOS-Web. In all other cases the astronomers get 12 months to write their paper before the data is publicly released.
dear fraser, do you think that that the use of hydrogen instead of methane for the sole reason of funding existing contracts will be the ultimate demise of sls and it epitomises the issues between government vs private space enterprise?
Regarding expanding and moving, scientists and professors etc are usually referring to a 'field' when they talk about particles, how particles are in a 'field' etc, is this something physical that actually exists, or is it only something mathematical making it easier to handle stuff?
Because, if there is an actual physical field in the universe it must standing still? And we moving through it? And, this is my question, if we could make a mark in the field and see how we move in relation to that mark we know which direction we are moving, how fast we move and also at the same time speed and direction on everything else? Or what?
About the question regarding private companies being ahead of the state space program;
The bureaucracy is stale, but with complete cynicism in a collective goal talent may be incentivized more by money and private ambition to join the private sector.
If there was a real will for NASA to get ahead it most certainly could I think.
Dear Rfaser Cain may be an episode on fater than light vehicles. That the gonernment may have or not have.
For the astronaut training in water simulating mars gravity: While the astronaut-suite-system may be in a state of simulated low gravity, the astronaut itself and his body would still feel the gravity in form of the air-filled suite pushing up on him. Also for example blood doesn't rush to the astronauts head like it does in micro gravity.
Yeah, that's why I said it would only work for a few hours. Maybe a sideways centrifuge would work?
…which is why we need spinning habitats in LEO. We can (almost) perfectly simulate any gravitational regime on a spinning habitat. I say “almost” because spinning habitats will include a weird Coriolis force.
Seeing how soft stone asteroids are (slowly formed by dust and gravity) how are pure metal asteroids formed?
My guess is that pure metal asteroids were once the core of a large asteroid or protoplanet that got hit and the outer parts were knocked away.
Hi Fraser, love your content. Is New Horizons going to become something like the new Voyager - sending us information from interstellar space for decades to come? Аlso any recent update on it's activities?
It didn't get the gravity assists from the gas giants, so it isn't moving as fast and will take longer to get to interstellar space
Thanks
Do you consider that photons preserve their entire energy during the travel through space? If they loose some, then how is this reflected in the their appearance? is it possible that the red shift is a result of energy loss during the space travel of light and not a doppler effect? In this case the space is not necessarily expanding but the red shift is just a manifestation of energy loss by the light during the travel.
Light left BEFORE they started receding faster than c? What does that boldfaced word mean in this context?
Good show 👍
So the expansion of Gavity, gives mass momentum? How is the vacuum, expansion interacting with galaxies? Which is repelling, which ,or hv I totally fd it
On the Mars buoyancy test why not just have them return and take a nap and see how that might affect muscle growth and Bone development. Or have the Mars buoyancy as part of gravitational readjustment therapy.?
Question for the next round: Was there a time in the early universe when no part was expanded faster than light? Or the Cosmic Event Horizon there in the beginning?
We don't know the size of the universe. If it's infinite then probably only before the big bang which is invalid because time never existed before then. Because the further out you look the faster it's expanding and if the universe is infinitely large then the expansion is also infinite
@@soaringstars314 As you saying the universe was infinite from the first second?
@@CeresKLee if it's infinite in size then there will always be a point where it seems like it's infinitely moving away from us
Hooray it's back. Inform meeeee!
Hi Fraser, do we have current technology to detect magnetospheres for exoplanets? Since this is needed to retain a tmosphere, which is needed to retain liquid water, which is needed for life! So indirectly, we can look for life on such planets with a higher chance.
Yes. They have seen magnetospheres around exoplanets. It's not my wheelhouse, so forgive me if I'm a bit wrong here, but they have detected a region of charged carbon particles that surrounded a planet and streamed away from it in a long tail as it transited its sun. This is indicative of a magnetosphere.
When a star goes supernova, in addition to ejecting gas and dust, do they eject large, solid chunks of metal like iron or nickel?
I miss when you used to do all these videos outside.
If the universe was shrinking at the same rate it's expanding now, from right about the size it has now, what would we observe? Would we already have been burned crispy by the high energy radiation coming at us from all directions?
That's a really cool question. I would bet that we'd be roasted by blue shifted light. That said, without the expansion, we'd never cool enough for the universe to become transparent in the first place.
@@deSloleye not even blue shift light. Could be ultraviolet, x-rays and gamma rays. If the universe were to be infinite space itself would be basically creating infinite energy blasting and vaporizing everything. Would it imply that the expansion of the universe is the result of balancing out the energy? 🤔 So many interesting implications i love this question
@@soaringstars314 blue shifted light can absolutely be x-ray or gamma days as the objects emitting are approaching us at increasing speed. James Webb is viewing visible and ultraviolet light that has been redshifted deep into the infra red spectrum but it didn't start out that way
@@deSloleye yeah and if the universe is infinitely big I'd imagine how much gamma rays would build up since eventually it'll all be compressed together hence why it will vaporize everything
And probably why it's expanding because otherwise it can lead to this
What do you lift bro, negative infinity?
Hi Fraser, Have you seen For All Mankind on Apple TV. Alternative history Space race drama. Would love your take on it!
Hey Fraser! I have a question about the early universe via The James Webb. We have proof that the Big Bang happened. Is it possible that we are misunderstanding the expansive processes of the beginning of our universe? And can this misunderstanding explain dark matter and perhaps galaxies and stars forming sooner than we thought?
That's what I also think. Like something that isn't constant but very gradual where we wouldn't notice. We may never know for sure for a long time but all we can do is keep theorizing and experimenting
Question : Do you think the universe is infinite? if so how can something that has a beginning be infinite?
If the universe is infinite how will that work and what implications does it have in the amount of possibilities and how far does infinite distance expand from us? The concept of Infinity is confusing to us hoomans.
If the universe was finite what happens if we reach the border? Or even cross it?
I can't imagine both scenarios and because of my ignorant brain i choose to rather believe in a repeating/looping universe like pac man or asteroid lol! (Kinda)
“Let’s explore all the things”
Struck a cord with me. I depend on the future. You can make it a wonderful place.
Well, You look a little more relaxed then usual.
I miss the mini documentary videos!
Is there any verb we can use other than "fly" when talking about returning from the moon to the earth? Seems like the wrong one, and is perhaps why we get things like the millennium falcon moving like a plane through an asteroid field, for instance, when the actual piloting challenge would be way higher. Unless there's one I'm missing, we might need to come up with a new term.
Dynam, dynaming, dynammed (from orbital dynamics)
Or follow the climbers and use dyno...
Idk just spitballing
Pilot?
@@frasercain maybe? For some reason it gives me similar vibes to fly. It still feels to me like the kind of thing where you have to be active the whole time, as opposed to occasional burns while mostly letting inertia do its thing, but it's better! Piloting through an asteroid field (as unrealistic as that is) does seem appropriate.
I'm liking dyno more, it's similar to climbing, you plan your trajectory, apply a brief force, and then let your momentum carry you to the right place. Plus the reference to "orbital dynamics".
So cool that you respond to so many of your comments... I wonder how you have the time. Could be a team of people, but that's cool too.
Aren't all magnetic fields infinite in size? ~14:30
A good example of what is going on with SLS is "Chapter F."
Look that up (Space Shuttle) and you'll see that both politics and favors can either destroy a project or slow it down significantly.
I call the SLS "The Book full of Chapter F" for this very reason. :O/-
Hint: Richard Feynman + Challenger
I hope, hope, HOPE that space doesn't become politicized.
Tim Urban from Wait But Why fears it might as people associate it with billionaires.
It always has been
*Initially made as a possible way to nuke other places
*It's always the rich who end up going
*People protesting the government to stop wasting tax dollars on space especially on the appllo mission
*Politicians changing priorities on what missions we should do
*When talks about NASAs budget they always talk about how to reduce the budget as much as possible. Privatization of space might add onto that
*People demanding to stop polluting space where the esa is usually the ones who takes it seriously with the recent Russia anti satellite test
*Talks about why we should stay here on earth than spread our issues onto other planets
The future may politicize it way more on colonizations of other bodies and who knows what more. I personally don't see most of them as political but unfortunately people like to look everything as political instead of actual issues that need to be fixed :(
Hi Fraser, I've had this nagging question for years that I can't seem to get a satisfactory answer for...The redshift of light is literally light waves being stretched to have a lower frequency by the expansion of space... Doesn't this also mean that as light travels through space it is actually losing energy... Couldn't this imply that instead of expansion causing redshift it could actually be the light waves losing energy to the quantum field that light waves originate from and travel through which would rule out the expansion theory? I would love to hear your thoughts on this.... Cheers from Australia....
Light could just have a half-life, is basically the gist of that idea. This idea has been floating around in the scientific community, but is considered pseudo-science.
Light is quantized, but shifting through the redshift doesn't remove packets of this "energy", just like it doesn't gain energy when it is blueshifted.
What basically happens is that light will redshift instead of falling behind, while it blueshifts instead of getting closer.
@@Yezpahr so would it be considered as spreading that energy more or so? Intriguing question tho!
@@soaringstars314 I don't think that is a terminology applicable to individual photons. Redshift doesn't spread "energy", it merely looks like that as an artifact of the laws of physics.
If you were able to fly side by side to that photon and inspect it on its way, you would never see it change properties ever.
@@Yezpahr ah i see i was looking at a more bigger picture rather than a individual photon thanks for correction tho
Hi Fraser. Can cosmic radiation be used as a energy source to power spacecrafts far away from the sun
No otherwise we'd be using the sun's radiation. I mean it's light is radiation but even if we're talking about that the light from other stars is too dim so we'd need earth size solar panels or something crazy lol
Will JWST do a true deep field (with extra long exposure)?
It should at some point. Idk when tho
we are building extremely large rockets testing them daily. in testing all this thrust is captured by the test stand attached to our planet. what are we doing to Earths orbit?
For that ram jet engine, can we harvest hydrogen from Jupiter or Saturn and burn that? It will take multiple orbits, but each pass through the atmosphere to gather hydrogen will burn to burn higher and higher?
I'd bet yah money my neighbor hates space. She hates everything.
How can you hate space, I hate her
What a shame.
Given that everything is in space…
@@CarFreeSegnitz I have heard her on multiple occasions yelling that she hates 'everyone in this neighborhood'. So yes. Everything.
Her name must be karen...
Would it be possible for jwst to image the universe 360?
Yes if we give it around 6 months it can. The sun blocks arout50% of the viewso we'd have to wait for it to orbit around the sun for that
Somebody: "With baby steps we learn to run."
Would NEA (NearErthAstreroids) not be a better source for the resources for further space exploration? It needs less fuel to get to them and you don't need to bring your water out of a gravity well. When I here people talking about getting resources from the moon I always think about a paper red some years ago that calculated the advantages of mining water from NEAs to even get to the surface of the moon.
But many NEA's dont always stay near earth. Many intercent earth's orbit once every few years. I am pretty sure there are asteroids at L3/L4 of the Earth/sun lagrange points, but those are further away than the moon. Also wouldn't asteroids being in the 'habitable zone" usually mean they are close enough to the sun that they have liquid water on the surface? so wouldn't that mean the asteroids would lose that water?
There is a lot of stuff I do not know, but I am sure those running these exploration projects have people on the teams that have better knowledge and would think of using these things.
@@MrT------5743 I'm sure there would be enough to use no? About the water most would probably be found underground as ice but i think it's more common on further and larger asteroids. But yeah the moon is more practical anyway for other reasons
Why do scientists call Black Holes, Black Holes (as if to say they lead somewhere?.) Wouldn't it be better to call Black Holes, Black stars instead, essentially that make more sense then colling them holes.?
They're "holes" in spacetime, and you can't see them so they're black. But I agree, it's a terrible name. Sometimes bad names just stick. :-(
Hopefully our technology will help find those distant galaxies in a 100 billion years, and get us there by worm hole technology
Mr. Cain. With time dilation and lack of speed and resources, will/how will Humans EVER be a space faring species. we cant go fast enough to make it worth while, and natural decay would make a generational ship impractical.
The government funds and develops the private space industry without which it would not exist.
Would it be better placing a dozen antennas on the Moon (pointing at Earth with a greater territory coverage) instead of thousands of satellites in Lower Earth Orbit (ex Starlink)?
No, the time delay is too long. Can you imagine playing a video game with 2000 ms ping times?
@@frasercain For Chess maybe... xD online pokemon perhaps... Final Fantasy 14? no way
Yay
I do have a question that i think many people are quietly asking with every new rover sent to mars that is, there are things on mars that really have created a great deal of intetest.
The idea that mars may have been habitable at one stage of its life and that the habitation may have been equal to or very close to our level ,
Why is it NASA seems to make a point of stzying away from these areas rather that settle the matter for everyones peace of mind, i refer to Cydonia where the face is.
I think the same could be said of the moon, as there are structures there that are clearly worth a second look, it does not need to be humans, as with many of these rovers its far safer than sending people there but none the less these places are screaming out to be looked at with a much closer look.
I have often wondered why instead of ground based units i often wonder if a form of gas filled type of flying device that could travel a lot further as see a whole lot more, i am sure that there must be a gas that offers enough lift so the energy to move around is far less that ground contact units, these would be a lot better than ground bases units as they would not be subjected to anywhere near the same amount of dust and grit which effects how long these units can operate for before bearings become a problem.??
I've heard that galaxies aren't really traveling all that fast anywhere, and most of their apparent speed is actually the expansion of space. To me it feels like the rate that galaxies go through time is changing at a different rate than the intergalactic medium. Maybe from an observer resting in the middle of the cosmic void far from any galaxy, the universe isn't really changing much but the galaxies are all shrinking.
It seems that no matter what, FTL is impossible
So perhaps instead of going faster than light, we could try and slow down time? It would have roughly the same effect
Taking 40,000 years to reach another planet is a lot, but if time on the spacecraft is slowed down, it shouldn’t be a problem
If that’s not possible, cryogenic sleep might be the only option, combined with nuclear/ion power
Actually that's exactly why you can't travel at the speed of light because of time dialation. The time at a moving object on the outside perspective slows down the faster you go so you can move faster than the speed of light in your perspective. But as a result everything around you will go forward in time hence you'd travel to the future
Alternatively you can somehow have space itself move you and not travel at the speed of light but still get to places ftl anyway
15:00 NASA is beholden to the law just like I'm beholden to my work's policies. It's not very different in practice.
Great channel love your channel and I enjoy your enthusiasm so much however I believe there are people already living on Mars , under the surface and there has been - for a long long time and there have been people on Mars long before there were people on earth and there was also a missing planet the 4th planet in line that was also being lived on and was so earthlike except somewhat bigger , however it was destroyed on purpose. I think there's a lot more here than meets the eye and that is already known by the right people.
It’s statute initiative spending literally the only way federal government spends.
The most important task for JWST is detecting bio-signatures on distant planets. Everything else is not going to capture the public imagination 💭 or garner more resources for more science.
I agree tho with that I'm always interested in seeing the furthest objects it can see even tho radio telescopes can see the furthest, Someday seeing the James deep field view, and the other gas giants and dwarf planets in our solar system.
I wonder if the ultimate Proof that space is expanding faster than the speed of light is that very distant galaxies finally just wink out of existence. Have we observed this at all? What would it take to see this?
They won't wink out, they'll just fade away slowly as their light is stretched by the expanding Universe. But it'll take billions of years for them to go from visible light to infrared to microwave to radio waves.
@@frasercain thank you
What if we for the sake of argument suspend that space is expanding…. And create a thought experiment where our solar system is at the edge of a void, a big void in space… and if Aaron galaxy S on the end of this avoid and the galaxies or the other side of the void or attracted to matter on opposite of the void….. in such a manner that the Galaxy is on the opposite side of the void or moving away from us and galaxies on our side of the word are moving faster way from us because they’re closer to something that attracts them matter of some sort and we are accelerating slower but in the same direction, would that create an illusion that is similar to the universe expanding.????? and if that is true how can we truly say that the universe is expanding, can’t we just say that it might be expanding but we’re not really sure….?
Bussard ramjet after physicist Robert Bussard, the subtitles says "buzzard"...
Thinking about redshifting light as the universe expands, what happens to the energy of each photon? (since visible light photons are more energetic than the microwaves they have been stretched into)
Space is limiting the speed of light, not light limiting the speed of space.
?? assuming that my understanding is right, mass is effectively the same as energy and that time seems to be based on energy and mass as well. Could one say that without energy/mass there is no time? So the "big bang" (or whatever might replace that) would be "the beginning of time" and when the universe "burns out" that would be "the end of time"? To put things another way: the speed of light (speed is distance traveled/time) seems to be based on the amount of energy or mass available or time is based on energy or mass available. Or maybe I totally missed the underlying concepts. Or is Dark energy/matter a large enough portion of things to effectively stabilize time and it's speed?
Mass creates gravity and gravity affects space and time. It also causes time dialation so i wouldn't be surprised
Could they replace the gateway with another starship? It seems more than big enough and wouldn't need assembly?
Congress won't have an excuse for what they did with all the tax dollars they receive. Would be great, but I don't think Politicians and their large pocket donors would like looking like crooks.
If the galaxies are moving away bc the dark matter, what happens with dark mater inside of every galaxy?
If dark matter avoids gravity, most would be located on intergalactic spaces between galaxies or even universes but who knows there could be some lurking around inside galaxies and star systems by chance
1:17 or more likely we are gravitationally bound to Andromeda
At 1:22 literally 5 seconds after your timestamp he said we are gravitationally bound to Andromeda. Being bound goes both ways not one way.
@@MrT------5743 Yes that was the point of the comment. Andromeda is larger than the Milky Way so we are more likely bound to them. But fair, it does go both ways. Andromeda has more influence on us than we do on them due to mass differences. But fair point.
Imo the difference doesn't seem enough where i feel like the whole local group is bound to each other to the center of mass/gravity
@@soaringstars314 "The Andromeda Galaxy is the largest galaxy in the Local Group with some 1 trillion stars - roughly twice the population of our own Milky Way." GALEX/NASA/JPL-Caltech
@@SeaTacDelta yeah no denying that, tho imo it's not enough to constitute as our galaxy gravitationally bound to Andromeda because Pluto and Charon are considered as a binary system at times except Charon is less than a half as dense as Pluto. Not to mention the local group is barely held together more loose than Pluto and Charon from the sun far out because expansion of the universe. Not to mention there are other galaxies around Hence why imo it's more like we're all bound to the center. Eh it doesn't matter in the end we're colliding each other anyway so ye
I think perhaps some public opinion might object to greater space related funding. Like myopic politicians appealing only to the wallets of their voters to get into office and dissing science research. Because there are many that only care about gas prices, COL increases and electric bills. Unfortunately I can't blame them for wanting to care for their families. But it's up to the Space Industry to present it all in the correct light and to detail the TRUE value of all this effort and the benefits of related industries and research.
I feel like space x supposedly making space flights cheaper might lead to giving them more reasons to lower space related funding and will lead to profits rather than actual curiosity. Idk I'm speculating
I never thought of how capitalism benefited the space industry by offloading the consequences of failure onto the private sector.
Before, I always thought that a lot of potential was lost by no longer having the availability of the large pool of money that comes from government investment.
Capitalism is only viable if short term profits are made. As we see from the medical, education and housing industry, greed has the opposite effect. I used to think, "what profits could be made by studying the universe?"
SLS will fly once and then program will be scrapped...
How do you crush something that doesn't occupy more than a planc length? The space around the black hole is curved so much that light orbits the black hole and cannot reach an escape velocity. The space that is distorted is not a thing that could be "crushed" it can only be bent until it turns back onto itself and not allow any information it contains to escape. It is theorized that the information can escape once it has degraded to the point of being an incomplete quark set where it's mass is more theortical than actual and is emitted as radiation. Space expanding is a result of hot objects pushing away from eachother, the temperature gradient and separation between the objects, I believe, when measured across as large a sample as is feasible. It will be found that hotter objects near to others but outside of obvious gravitation causation range would be found to be retreating from eachother more quickly than cooler objects at similar distance.
For plank i know gravity affects space and time so maybe space is being shrunk the more gravity until it's infinitely small? I'm just hypothesizing
For the expansion what if it's to balance out the lights from the stars? I was looking at another comment and if we shrink the universe for example it will shift to higher radiations thus supposedly creating energy no? Idk lol
If you took your houseplant to the ISS, would it be a Space Monstera?
No
Is there a relationship between gravity and space expansion? Is there space contraction?
Maybe gravity is not that regular matter curves space but contracts space.
more/infinite matter, space contracts more.
less/zero matter, space expands more.
Not need to have dark energy and dark matter. Just that space contracts/expands.
Maybe gravity isn't constant over time? That was my thoughts at times