this was a lot of fun to watch, and very educational. she's passionate about her subject, a joy to listen too. im looking forward to the next keppler talk she gives. thanks miss Nataly Batalha.
Poor Natalie, she was exhausted at the end. The question period was way too long. She is a very speaker. She masters her subject like no one else does. Bravo, Natalie !! 👍 👌
I keep coming back to this lecture. (The more recent follow up video is a very good compliment to this one) The presentation and content just keeps me listening and absorbing.
Excellent lecture, thx for uploading. Not too long ago we thought that planets might be a very rare thing. Really exciting to hear that there are so many out there.
Love to watch this because its full of great information about things outside of are realm...not to mention the speaker was very attractive in so many ways.
At the 29:00 minute, the most important Earth-like exoplanets known until the date. Until today. Til nowadays. At the 37:22 minute, Kepler 22b, the first habitable zone planet. At the 43:20 minute, Kepler 11. At the 44:23 minute, transit timing variations. At the 56:46 minute, the Alpha Centauri System. At the 57:07 minute, the Alpha Centauri A and B Systems. At the 01:00:00 and 01:00:22 minutes, the Alpha Centauri Double System.
So for every eclipsing habitable zone planet you see, there are lots and lots that you won't see, simply because of the improbability of transit for randomly oriented orbits.
so actual vintage of this lecture I am guessing mid or early 2011. Quite a lot has happened since then, not only with the research, but with Natalie's career.
I'd like to know what it would take to directly image an exoplanet within 15 light years.. What size theorhetical coronagraph/telescope, and how much would it cost?
It’s sweet how from 1:12:00 her body language become cuter and more exaggerated when she gets the question from the (possible prodigy) child. And damn, she knows her stuff.
as I recall, she had frankly commented in some other lectures that she was pleased that girls asked questions. I can understand that, and even if it proved to be a male kid, it was still a kid and the kid asked a rather sophisticated question. Naturally that would appeal to Natalie.
I understood her, I started to love planets discoveries between Kepler statistics, details of motions, "kissing" of trajectories, but ... this is NOT the entire story. I feel very disappointed that the movie finished so quickly.
How do u calculate the mass of an exoplanet by wobble method considering that the system has multiple known planets of varying volumes & may be a few undiscovered ones & the degree of wobble of the star is actually balancing the gravitational tug of all the planets & the planets themselves may be in differnet directions🤔🤔
You can hear that she lives here dream and everthing you really like you are doing good and wow, she is really doeing good , haven't heard such a good speech for a while ! Great and funny explanation !
The whole point finding another planet similar to our own is to prove we are not alone as a living planet in the universe. Before we can even work out how to get there, we need to find these places. Finding new planets that people could live on would also benefit humans in the future, when the earth may become inhabitable, because of asteroids or something happens to our sun or we become too over populated.
5 Billion more years for Earth. Then the Sun turns into a Red Giant and it's all gone. No life. It's possible that a giant asteroid will wipe us out before then. And what about overpopulation? Will we be able to leapfrog to another Earth out there? I think there are 512 other G type stars within 100 light years of Earth. Is it possible that one of them would have a planet we could live on? So many variables. A Jupiter like planet to attract all the comets and meteors that would otherwise hit us. Plate techtonics. An atmosphere. A magnetic field. Oh yeah, the most important element: liquid water. And fresh water for us to drink. It can't all be ocean saltwater.
@@springhillgolfer878 If, by then, we don't have the technology to easily extract salt from seawater, I have doubts about our ability to develop technology to traverse "100 light years" within any logistical context. Btw, several years ago, collaborating researchers in Germany & the USA announced a "Nano Water Chip" device that promises to do the job for a fraction of the energy budget of your typical reverse-osmosis desal plant.. inhabitat.com/nano-water-chip-could-make-desalination-affordable-for-everyone/
ONE thing that we might learn from a more advanced civilization, is how to not destroy ourselves while learning not to make new weapons out of every significant scientific discovery where some source of power is developed or directed.
the presumption is that a planet similar in size and distance from a similar star class, COULD host life, was the basis for the project. As is typical, MUCH MORE diversity has been detected, but the challenge is also partly to develop the means to DETECT bodies like ours. Now having done that, at least we know that our own solar system is not especially unique, so the chances of there being life elsewhere, given the advances in the last 20 years or so, the odds now are VASTLY greater. Still, not positive contact, at least that the general public has been informed about. We did want to confirm or refute the notion that the occurrence of rocky planets ( with atmospheres and water if possible ) were either rare or not rare. What we did more or less confirm is that "hot-jupiter" solar system varieties typically do NOT include terrestrial-type planets in the habitable zone, and also confirm that the detection of solar systems more similar to our own, took some further improvement of our detection and elimination "pipeline" inspection process.
It has to do with trying to find out how common or how uncommon planets around other stars are. What does it say about those stars? What does it say about the planets in our own system? How unique are we? Is there a reason why our solar system is what it is, compared to other stars? And so on.
If you imagine that one of the keplers have a very similar timeline with planet earth, we could see their "Roman empire". I wish we could zoom on exo planets, so much. Genie where are you!!!!
Ah yes, red dwarfs... much more common, therefore the average is something different. Fair point! So, how does our sun qualify in the yellow star? department? I often feel I am the only one in town that not only calls our sun 'sun', but Sol or a star as well :-)
"yellow" is a certain general morphology and a spectral color, associated with the Hertzprung-Russel ("HR") diagram, describing the "major sequence" of star types. It has far reaching implications and so far has proved to be quite reliable with respect to modeling not only stars but probable star-systems and their planet behaviors.
density of the planet morphology (hence mass) would figure into that, as would spectral class of the star (hence size/mass and therefore gravitational hold on the orbiting planets) among other things. And as she said, binary or more complex star systems would also change that entire picture.
Yes for now its a problem. technology changes and improves so does our knowledge. The first step is to look were we should go. So this is where Kepler is useful.
Apache Sakai We won't get anywhere? Are you serious? Thomas Edison failed 1000 times before getting the lightbulb working, And now, we have such powerful lights and so many of them. For example: Lamps, Lazer pointers, IPhones we have lights that can burn paper, nano lazer pointers! Lithium utilized technology to build amazing flashlights, We have LEDS. We have everything. Benjamin Franklin despite he was told impossible, look at how successful he was, Einstein didn't speak until he was 4 and failed math, James Watt, The camera was first invented as a big clunky machine and it was very difficult to make movies. Now cameras are so popular and powerful there are selfies, the internet, movies, animations, pictures, Same thing with the telephone, television, cars, Steam engine sewing machine, Charles Babbage, Made his first mechanical computer... Have you ever seen a 1st generation computer at all? I suggest you see one via Tim Berners Lee's protocol for the internet. The computer was ugly, big, clunky, only businesses could afford them, They overheated and burned the inside, and nowdays single microchip would have tons more computer power than a computer long ago. And if you can't handle the future, look at the present, we are already developing AI, we have smart walls, smart contacts, Google glasses, smart paper, touchable phones, Computer programming, If anything, technology improves. We learn, we develop, and before you know it, impossible(?) Becomes as easy as a little piece glass plastic and stainless steel in our pockets.
I don't understand the "transiting" of a planet. Isn't it always orbiting the star and transiting it? Doesn't Earth "transit" the Sun 365 days of the year?
"transit" just refers to object B moving in front of object A from an observer (earth)'s observation angle. As she said, technically such occulting objects are ALWAYS projecting a shadow SOMEWHERE into space but if not happening to be on a plane with earth, we would not see that event. The same applies to objects in our own solar system, including the sun, moon and planets. Those are MORE OR LESS on a plane (the ecliptic) but other solar systems could be randomly oriented.
Our sun is actually alittle bigger than the average sun.Red dwarf make up 85 percent of suns in are Galaxy which we cannot see with the naked eye. Most Red dwarfs are about 1/4 the size of our sun.
the alignment and positioning equipment gradually had arguable failures but the "extended project" was based on the assumption that those could be compensated for. And they mostly were, but eventually the power sources ran out, and that pretty much ended the active use of the Kepler. There is however a mountain of data downloaded from it, and that could still be analyzed for years if not decades, especially as the "pipeline" modeling was gradually improved.
Titius - Bode law (Liesegang) There is proposed a hypothesis according to which the regular structure of planetary and satellites systems can be explained as a consequence of spatially periodic condensation of gaseous matter during the formation of the Central Body. According to the hypothesis, the periodic condensation on cosmic scales is analogous to the Liesegang phenomenon. Calculations indicate that the hypothesis is in agreement with certain facts: the mechanism of condensation under consideration does not contradict the basic laws of diffusion and s number of physical models: creatacad.org/?id=21&lng=eng creatacad.org/?id=24&lng=eng www.eso.org/public/archives/releases/sciencepapers/eso1035/eso1035.pdf www.universetoday.com/87784/applying-the-titius-bode-rule-to-exoplanet-systems/ www.scielo.org.mx/pdf/rmaa/v47n1/v47n1a12.pdf Now the Titius-Bode law sometimes helps to find new exoplanets! According to the model Saturn is younger Earth. Titan is younger than Saturn! The violation of law may be in the latter stages of the evolution of planetary and satellite systems as a consequence of the action of gravitational forces.
i notice that sometimes you refer to this as a "law" and other times to a hypothesis. I'd guess without being especially familiar with gaseous condensates on planetary scales, that this is hypothesis and yet to be confirmed, let alone applied for determination of which planets are the oldest.
I think that the wobble stars are a small sun. our sun is big, i don't think our sun is wobbling. inner code's magnetic shielding might be holding tight on our earth.
yep, our sun wobbles. so does the earth, so does the moon. it's all about MEASURING the wobble, that is the point of her project's research and the meaning of it.
it all started from curiosity, later transitioned into Natalie Batalha in the red dress alone with her references to balls and finally ended up with me breaking up with my girl.
my impression is that the Webb and the TESS are slated to be positioned at earth-moon Lagrange points, rather than on the moon itself, but if lunar based it would seem most sensible for such very sensitive instruments to be on the FAR side, hence shielded from RF interference coming from the earth. Then of course requiring an up-link like the chinese chang'e lander on the far side is now using. I am not however aware of any such plans at least on the part of NASA.
Great presentation ! What an inspiration & passion for her field of expertise. Wether or not there are 'aliens' out there; if this talk can't get you interested in Astronomy, who the hell can ??? And yes, she also has great legs :).
in the Qur'an it is mentioned that the earth there are seven (Surah 65 verse 12) ... but in Arabic the word seven could mean actually seven or it could mean a lot of .....
like the word several? Islamic society made leaps and bounds in astronomical discoveries back in its golden age. I wish jihad was waged at the limitations of humanity in the discovery of the cosmos rather than pitiful and childish namecalling fatalities. Science belongs to all of us. peace.
Our sun is not that big, it's quite an average star. Our larger solar planets probably wobble it just the same. The Earth, like Mars, Venus, Mercury, are harder to detect. Someone may be lucky enough to see planets crossing the sun, but that chance is also smaller, because the sun is not that large. The planets' orbits are also stable, not egg-shaped, what might cause a larger wobble. We are well-hidden, I worry more about our tv-signals ;-)
fear not...research has been done on hundreds of stars with respect to their sun-spot activity, and those spots are often a good deal smaller than the shadows of transiting planets. So we have the light-gathering resolution necessary to do this kind of work for stars (as Natalie notes) within around 3000 light years. Our galaxy is about 150,000 light years radius, so if we are only seeing 1/50th of our own galaxy, we have a ways to go by stellar standards to really have a LARGE set of random samples. Even so, as we accumulate more data, we do have some means to normalize some of the curves that she was describing, and getting some notion about what "normal or typical" solar systems look like. Incidentally Kepler and Huygens' observations pretty much confirmed that planetary orbits are elliptical, not circular.
I wonder if we can take pictures of Pillars of Creation with Hubble which is 7000 light years away why can`t Hubble take pictures of these "closer" planets? Eg.: Recently discovered Kepler 438b is 470 light years away. Is it because of the relative small size of these planets? Pillars of Creation are giant gas formation compared to these small planet dotts...
The answer to your question is Hubble has been doing that since 1995 I believe. The problem in comparison to the pillars is the light from the host star is so bright they have to remove it from a false colour image in order to show the actual planets. Also keep in mind that the reason why we even see the pillars of creation and other nebulae is due to the stars shinning their light on these gaseous formations. So you can imagine how bright an actual star system would look like if peered at from a very far away instrument like the hubble.
David Agaybi Thanks! I have never seen gaseos formations with my own eyes. (through a telescope) Are they really looks like than those on pictures? You mentioned that the reason why we even see the pillars of creation and other nebulae is due to the stars shinning their light on these gaseous formations. I thought these pictures are colorcoded pictures based on the heat of the gas.
@@SinJeeeah the "pillars" are vastly reprocessed images: vastly magnified, color and contrast enhanced and probably filtered as well. Nor were they individual exposures but rather hundreds if not thousands of "stacked" overlay images, extensively enhanced for best-effect.
I love this lecture and have watched it a couple of times previously, but on this occasion I picked up on the tiny habit she has of adding a very soft, "riiight?" at the end of some statements and now it's all I hear and I'm scared it's totally ruined it for me forever ... :(
well for me i know theres life on other planets. i seen a ufo in 73. it was 10 feet from my window.and im on the second floor . i seen though there window was two people like us wearing silver outfits. it had no sound or wind. seem very peaceful. i wish i didn't see it sometimes. and some how i new how to stop asteroid with sound blast waves. but there one thing i always wonder. did they take me before i woke up. or after i woke up.always wanted someone to put me under to find out. or maybe ill know cool more new things.
I do hope that the minds looking out are more open. We know only of life and how it works here. We know nothing of what exists in the vast universe. We assume it must use what we have learned is needed "here" for our kind of life. The what if's, they are the eyes to what may exist ..out there. Please when opening your eyes to peer out there, make certain your minds are also open. Would you want to meet us? look around you and ask yourself if you would welcome our world and people. Good Luck...if i were an different world, I might stay hidden to prevent the corruption .
So what shes telling us with one of the answers at the Q+A at the end is that Planets move about into different orbits after they form.Didn't Immanuell Velikovsky tell the Asronomy world this way back in the 50's or 60's,but he was ridiculed for even suggesting this,which the whole scientific world at the time stated,in absolute terms,that "Planets don't migrate from one orbit to another".They claimed that "Planets stay in their orbits without change for billions of years".Even though Velikovsky had solid proof that our solar system went thru cataclysmic planetary migrations in the recent past,when humans were alive to see this...
Velikovsky was a fraud. His ''proof'' consisted of basically ancient myths and stories. What he thought he ''knew'' has got nothing to do with our current widening knowledge.
she didn't say it was impossible, she just said that AT THE TIME of this lecture, they had yet to reliably get data at that level of sensitivity. Later on they did pretty much achieve it however.
she's kind of trying to gauge audience temperature. The lights are low in that auditorium and her talk is highly technical but the audience is random public (tending toward a scientific bent of course) so I would guess that she's looking for SOME kind of body language-feedback. Maybe give her a break.
Why ? Do we really need that. Or we rather think about better ways to bring the equality among the people on planet earth. Look around and see if ur curious mind can observe suffering of our brothers and sisters. I am not saying that scientific discoveries are not important what I am trying to say is to reconsider our priorities and actions that we are giving importance to.
Changing the subject. I think there is too much debris in outer space to travel to another star. The way must be cluttered with asteroids, comets, and rogue planets. We should turn the Moon into a Death Star! A space ark!
Actually, space is remarkably empty. The technical difficulties would relate to time and the maintaining of systems in such a hostile environment. Debris is not really much of an issue outside of a planetary system.
Yes, dark matter also doesn't interact with any of the matter we do observe, which is part of why it is so difficult to detect apart from its gravitational influences. So this still would not pose a problem for interstellar travel.
Planet's have more attributes, like stars than are being talked about. She needs to work-out and know more about the electric nature of this Universe, anode to cathode: anode-male & female pair to cathode; and hallows planets. Dwarf planets (not moons) in relations with other "planets" making pairs of binary planets, both with tenuous atmospheres, like Pluto-Charon, and Earth and her moon, all of which have intelligent structures on their surfaces that can be confirmed by follow up missions.
NASA has more than one research employee. She had to PICK a field, and is not essentially a planetary scientist, but a stellar system discoverer. While she is certainly conversant on planetary science topics, that isn't really her field.
The Sun in its infancy created all the planets in our solar system !!! Distance from the Sun is the key to a planets survival... Earth will end up like Mars in millions of years to come as the heat and light subsides from the Sun ... Then it will be the the planet Venus turn to give life...
Before the sun's energy decreases the sun's size will certainly take in Venus and maybe Earth. Read about the red giant stage of the sun. Neither the Earth nor Venus will be habitable after that...if they still exist.
Of course, it's possible, but the evidence from other stars with our sun's chemistry and size and mass suggests it will follow their path to red giant before shrinking back to a white dwarf: www.universetoday.com/25669/the-sun-as-a-white-dwarf-star/
Dude high school astronomy teaches this. If the shear elementary lesson of Star life wont convince you learn astrophysics and find out your self. science.howstuffworks.com/star6.htm
One of the finest presentation I’ve ever seen. So easy to comprehend and engaging.
Can't get enough of this! She explained the subject so well, I look forward to her next lecture when the new catalog is released.
this was a lot of fun to watch, and very educational. she's passionate about her subject, a joy to listen too. im looking forward to the next keppler talk she gives. thanks miss Nataly Batalha.
Poor Natalie, she was exhausted at the end. The question period was way too long. She is a very speaker. She masters her subject like no one else does. Bravo, Natalie !! 👍 👌
Congrats Dr. Batalha, great lecture! Look forward for the next!
I keep coming back to this lecture. (The more recent follow up video is a very good compliment to this one)
The presentation and content just keeps me listening and absorbing.
Excellent lecture, thx for uploading.
Not too long ago we thought that planets might be a very rare thing.
Really exciting to hear that there are so many out there.
Thanks for an interesting subject and speaker giving an entertaining speech in an understandable fashion.
Love to watch this because its full of great information about things outside of are realm...not to mention the speaker was very attractive in so many ways.
That was great..loved it..thanks indeedy...better than the telly!!
Rock and roll!!
Danny
At the 29:00 minute, the most important Earth-like exoplanets known until the date. Until today. Til nowadays. At the 37:22 minute, Kepler 22b, the first habitable zone planet. At the 43:20 minute, Kepler 11. At the 44:23 minute, transit timing variations. At the 56:46 minute, the Alpha Centauri System. At the 57:07 minute, the Alpha Centauri A and B Systems. At the 01:00:00 and 01:00:22 minutes, the Alpha Centauri Double System.
Thank you for describing the near future in astronomy.
The few emotional expressions were beautifully touchy for me. I felt them too.
Wow she is smart, fun, and fascinating. The fastest hour and 28 minutes I spent on YT. More Natalie Batalha! More Natalie Batalha!
So for every eclipsing habitable zone planet you see, there are lots and lots that you won't see, simply because of the improbability of transit for randomly oriented orbits.
Astronomy lectures? Oh my God I'm there
I admire her just by listening to this talk! So intelligent and beautiful!
Thank you for this video.
so actual vintage of this lecture I am guessing mid or early 2011. Quite a lot has happened since then, not only with the research, but with Natalie's career.
I'd like to know what it would take to directly image an exoplanet within 15 light years.. What size theorhetical coronagraph/telescope, and how much would it
cost?
Wow she's a brilliant speaker.
It’s sweet how from 1:12:00 her body language become cuter and more exaggerated when she gets the question from the (possible prodigy) child.
And damn, she knows her stuff.
as I recall, she had frankly commented in some other lectures that she was pleased that girls asked questions. I can understand that, and even if it proved to be a male kid, it was still a kid and the kid asked a rather sophisticated question. Naturally that would appeal to Natalie.
So clever and so beautiful.
I understood her, I started to love planets discoveries between Kepler statistics, details of motions, "kissing" of trajectories, but ... this is NOT the entire story. I feel very disappointed that the movie finished so quickly.
yeahh
@@danielssandu5578 I started loving her🔥🖤
How do u calculate the mass of an exoplanet by wobble method considering that the system has multiple known planets of varying volumes & may be a few undiscovered ones & the degree of wobble of the star is actually balancing the gravitational tug of all the planets & the planets themselves may be in differnet directions🤔🤔
Where can I get more info on the projects involving sending tiny probes to nearby stars?
good question,how does our star Qualify I do not have an answer to that question,but you could try to google it @ see what you get.
How many have been confirmed now? Last time I checked it was well over 900 with another 2/3k potentials
thx for the lecture, this is beyond cool :)
You can hear that she lives here dream and everthing you really like you are doing good and wow, she is really doeing good , haven't heard such a good speech for a while ! Great and funny explanation !
All the planets are closer to Sun than mercury? Maybe a different approach its needed. Like stars crossing from behind to show planets...
The whole point finding another planet similar to our own is to prove we are not alone as a living planet in the universe.
Before we can even work out how to get there, we need to find these places.
Finding new planets that people could live on would also benefit humans in the future, when the earth may become inhabitable, because of asteroids or something happens to our sun or we become too over populated.
Well said.
Nobody will leave this planet without some "help"
5 Billion more years for Earth. Then the Sun turns into a Red Giant and it's all gone. No life. It's possible that a giant asteroid will wipe us out before then. And what about overpopulation? Will we be able to leapfrog to another Earth out there? I think there are 512 other G type stars within 100 light years of Earth. Is it possible that one of them would have a planet we could live on? So many variables. A Jupiter like planet to attract all the comets and meteors that would otherwise hit us. Plate techtonics. An atmosphere. A magnetic field. Oh yeah, the most important element: liquid water. And fresh water for us to drink. It can't all be ocean saltwater.
@@springhillgolfer878 If, by then, we don't have the technology to easily extract salt from seawater, I have doubts about our ability to develop technology to traverse "100 light years" within any logistical context. Btw, several years ago, collaborating researchers in Germany & the USA announced a "Nano Water Chip" device that promises to do the job for a fraction of the energy budget of your typical reverse-osmosis desal plant..
inhabitat.com/nano-water-chip-could-make-desalination-affordable-for-everyone/
ONE thing that we might learn from a more advanced civilization, is how to not destroy ourselves while learning not to make new weapons out of every significant scientific discovery where some source of power is developed or directed.
Congrats Dr. Batalha, great lecture!
Thank's from Italy.
Very nice !
Thanks for posting ! :)
Clear as cristal even to a non native english speaker like me. No "Mmmm" , No "Arrr". Where does one learn to do that(or not to do that) ?
Why is it so important a planet be the same/similar size of Earth? What is the significance of the size if the planet is possibly habitable?
Your bones can support a limited amount of weight. Your lungs and heart would wear out quickly. Why die when you can vacation in Bermuda instead.
the presumption is that a planet similar in size and distance from a similar star class, COULD host life, was the basis for the project. As is typical, MUCH MORE diversity has been detected, but the challenge is also partly to develop the means to DETECT bodies like ours. Now having done that, at least we know that our own solar system is not especially unique,
so the chances of there being life elsewhere, given the advances in the last 20 years or so, the odds now are VASTLY greater. Still, not positive contact, at least that the general public has been informed about. We did want to confirm or refute the notion that the occurrence of rocky planets ( with atmospheres and water if possible ) were either rare or not rare. What we did more or less confirm is that "hot-jupiter" solar system varieties typically do NOT include terrestrial-type planets in the habitable zone, and also confirm that the detection of solar systems more similar to our own, took some further improvement of our detection and elimination "pipeline" inspection process.
Where have you gone Natalie?
back to UCSC.
She is professor of Astronomy and Astrophysics at UC Santa Cruz.
Thankyou.
Please do more exoplanet lectures
I understand the what, but I don't understand the why. What good is looking for exoplanets in solar systems we'll never visit?
It has to do with trying to find out how common or how uncommon planets around other stars are. What does it say about those stars? What does it say about the planets in our own system? How unique are we? Is there a reason why our solar system is what it is, compared to other stars? And so on.
@@Emdee5632 that makes sense, thank you.
Thank you doctor I enjoyed your lecture
I really wish you hadn't pointed this out. Now I can't not hear it.
Respect to the audience for not giggling at "you're gonna see lots of pictures of balls." I am not quite as mature.
OK, I think I love this woman! :D
If you imagine that one of the keplers have a very similar timeline with planet earth, we could see their "Roman empire". I wish we could zoom on exo planets, so much. Genie where are you!!!!
That's great but what about a planet like ours that has a strong magnetic field which is important
Excellent talk. And also Natalie is very, VERY attractive. :D
your easy pleased.what a dog she is lol
ellen jones
not really considering how smart she is, attractive factor goes WAY UP.
ikr
I LIKE HER VOICE
Ah yes, red dwarfs... much more common, therefore the average is something different. Fair point! So, how does our sun qualify in the yellow star? department? I often feel I am the only one in town that not only calls our sun 'sun', but Sol or a star as well :-)
"yellow" is a certain general morphology and a spectral color, associated with the Hertzprung-Russel ("HR") diagram, describing the "major sequence" of star types. It has far reaching implications and so far has proved to be quite reliable with respect to modeling not only stars but probable star-systems and their planet behaviors.
Is this amazing or what!
why would a orbital cycle close to earth matter if planet size and temperature is good
density of the planet morphology (hence mass) would figure into that, as would spectral class of the star (hence size/mass and therefore gravitational hold on the orbiting planets) among other things. And as she said, binary or more complex star systems would also change that entire picture.
The main Problem is....... how to reach there, even all the energy on earth is used up, we still cannot reach there
Yes for now its a problem. technology changes and improves so does our knowledge.
The first step is to look were we should go. So this is where Kepler is useful.
We won't get any where trust me on this.
Raymon Danielson
i 100% agree with you
Apache Sakai We won't get anywhere? Are you serious?
Thomas Edison failed 1000 times before getting the lightbulb working, And now, we have such powerful lights and so many of them. For example: Lamps, Lazer pointers, IPhones we have lights that can burn paper, nano lazer pointers! Lithium utilized technology to build amazing flashlights, We have LEDS. We have everything.
Benjamin Franklin despite he was told impossible, look at how successful he was, Einstein didn't speak until he was 4 and failed math, James Watt,
The camera was first invented as a big clunky machine and it was very difficult to make movies. Now cameras are so popular and powerful there are selfies, the internet, movies, animations, pictures, Same thing with the telephone, television, cars, Steam engine sewing machine,
Charles Babbage, Made his first mechanical computer... Have you ever seen a 1st generation computer at all? I suggest you see one via Tim Berners Lee's protocol for the internet. The computer was ugly, big, clunky, only businesses could afford them, They overheated and burned the inside, and nowdays single microchip would have tons more computer power than a computer long ago.
And if you can't handle the future, look at the present, we are already developing AI, we have smart walls, smart contacts, Google glasses, smart paper, touchable phones, Computer programming, If anything, technology improves. We learn, we develop, and before you know it, impossible(?) Becomes as easy as a little piece glass plastic and stainless steel in our pockets.
Abiel Kim
.. we are not talking a lightbulb we are talking about something does not exist, something that overcome fizik law
I don't understand the "transiting" of a planet. Isn't it always orbiting the star and transiting it? Doesn't Earth "transit" the Sun 365 days of the year?
If an observer happens to be in the right place, yes. If they are not looking at the system edge on, that method won't work.
"transit" just refers to object B moving in front of object A from an observer (earth)'s observation angle. As she said, technically such occulting objects are ALWAYS projecting a shadow SOMEWHERE into space but if not happening to be on a plane with earth, we would not see that event. The same applies to objects in our own solar system, including the sun, moon and planets. Those are MORE OR LESS on a plane (the ecliptic) but other solar systems could be randomly oriented.
@@shanemarx9210 right but later the project did develop some other methods.
another?
Our sun is actually alittle bigger than the average sun.Red dwarf make up 85 percent of suns in are Galaxy which we cannot see with the naked eye. Most Red dwarfs are about 1/4 the size of our sun.
hence goldilocks zone for those stars, would be closer planet orbits, all other things equal.
amazing!! Kepler is now buggered since this was made is it not? guidance system I believe
www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.php?release=2014-062
science.time.com/2013/08/16/the-kepler-space-telescope-may-be-dead-but-its-planet-hunting-mission-continues/
Ed Prato That's a good article, cheers
That's true enough mate, but the reams of data the science team collected has still got way more discoveries to make.
the alignment and positioning equipment gradually had arguable failures but the "extended project" was based on the assumption that those could be compensated for. And they mostly were, but eventually the power sources ran out, and that pretty much ended the active use of the Kepler. There is however a mountain of data downloaded from it, and that could
still be analyzed for years if not decades, especially as the "pipeline" modeling was gradually improved.
I want her
There are planets similar to this planet however it's unlikely that anyone will hear your signals.
if other civilizations are more advanced than we, they might also have a better means of such detection and might well already be aware of "earth".
We need warp speed space vehicles to travel to those planets.
I'll settle for 25% c.
Titius - Bode law (Liesegang)
There is proposed a hypothesis according to which the regular structure of planetary and satellites systems can be explained as a consequence of spatially periodic condensation of gaseous matter during the formation of the Central Body.
According to the hypothesis, the periodic condensation on cosmic scales is analogous to the Liesegang phenomenon. Calculations indicate that the hypothesis is in agreement with certain facts: the mechanism of condensation under consideration does not contradict the basic laws of diffusion and s number of physical models:
creatacad.org/?id=21&lng=eng creatacad.org/?id=24&lng=eng
www.eso.org/public/archives/releases/sciencepapers/eso1035/eso1035.pdf
www.universetoday.com/87784/applying-the-titius-bode-rule-to-exoplanet-systems/
www.scielo.org.mx/pdf/rmaa/v47n1/v47n1a12.pdf
Now the Titius-Bode law sometimes helps to find new exoplanets!
According to the model Saturn is younger Earth. Titan is younger than Saturn!
The violation of law may be in the latter stages of the evolution of planetary and satellite systems as a consequence of the action of gravitational forces.
i notice that sometimes you refer to this as a "law" and other times to a hypothesis. I'd guess without being especially familiar with gaseous condensates on planetary scales, that this is hypothesis and yet to be confirmed, let alone applied for determination of which planets are the oldest.
I think that the wobble stars are a small sun.
our sun is big, i don't think our sun is wobbling. inner code's magnetic shielding might be holding tight on our earth.
yep, our sun wobbles. so does the earth, so does the moon. it's all about MEASURING the wobble, that is the point of her project's research and the meaning of it.
it all started from curiosity, later transitioned into Natalie Batalha in the red dress alone with her references to balls and finally ended up with me breaking up with my girl.
I would think gravity . I was told on the moon you would feel real light and on Jupiter so heavy you couldn't function well
WMAP/ ESA are you sure that you have included all these planets in your 4% ordinary matter pie chart or you forgot it in dark matter 25% ??????
where did the guy who introduced the person get his speech pattERN!
I believe andy franknoi was from europe or canada originally, so he does have a slight accent himself.
Did anyone notice that her(NASA) graphs are 2 dimensional? But space is 3 dimensional, allowing the creation of an illusion of planets around stars.
ya lose a dimension in the projection
Robert W
Now how can I argue with that? lol
she did rotate at least one stellar planetary system diagram to indicate that. trust me, the doppler approach PRESUMES it to be 3-D.
We need a way to see other systems more clearly! Maybe on the moon??
my impression is that the Webb and the TESS are slated to be positioned at earth-moon Lagrange points, rather than on the moon itself, but if lunar based it would seem most sensible for such very sensitive instruments to be on the FAR side, hence shielded from RF interference coming from the earth. Then of course requiring an up-link like the chinese chang'e lander on the far side is now using. I am not however aware of any such plans at least on the part of NASA.
Great presentation ! What an inspiration & passion for her field of expertise. Wether or not there are 'aliens' out there; if this talk can't get you interested in Astronomy, who the hell can ??? And yes, she also has great legs :).
I got bored really quickly and read comments instead of watching the video. :(
hendes forklaring er en nobel pris værdig
in the Qur'an it is mentioned that the earth there are seven (Surah 65 verse 12) ... but in Arabic the word seven could mean actually seven or it could mean a lot of .....
like the word several? Islamic society made leaps and bounds in astronomical discoveries back in its golden age. I wish jihad was waged at the limitations of humanity in the discovery of the cosmos rather than pitiful and childish namecalling fatalities. Science belongs to all of us. peace.
Our sun is not that big, it's quite an average star. Our larger solar planets probably wobble it just the same. The Earth, like Mars, Venus, Mercury, are harder to detect. Someone may be lucky enough to see planets crossing the sun, but that chance is also smaller, because the sun is not that large. The planets' orbits are also stable, not egg-shaped, what might cause a larger wobble. We are well-hidden, I worry more about our tv-signals ;-)
fear not...research has been done on hundreds of stars with respect to their sun-spot activity, and those spots are often a good deal smaller than the shadows of transiting planets. So we have the light-gathering resolution necessary to do this kind of work for stars (as Natalie notes) within around 3000 light years. Our galaxy is about 150,000 light years radius, so if we
are only seeing 1/50th of our own galaxy, we have a ways to go by stellar standards to really have a LARGE set of random samples. Even so, as we accumulate more data, we do have some means to normalize some of the curves that she was describing, and getting some notion about what "normal or typical" solar systems look like.
Incidentally Kepler and Huygens' observations pretty much confirmed that planetary orbits are elliptical, not circular.
I wonder if we can take pictures of Pillars of Creation with Hubble which is 7000 light years away why can`t Hubble take pictures of these "closer" planets? Eg.: Recently discovered Kepler 438b is 470 light years away. Is it because of the relative small size of these planets? Pillars of Creation are giant gas formation compared to these small planet dotts...
The answer to your question is Hubble has been doing that since 1995 I believe. The problem in comparison to the pillars is the light from the host star is so bright they have to remove it from a false colour image in order to show the actual planets. Also keep in mind that the reason why we even see the pillars of creation and other nebulae is due to the stars shinning their light on these gaseous formations. So you can imagine how bright an actual star system would look like if peered at from a very far away instrument like the hubble.
David Agaybi
Thanks! I have never seen gaseos formations with my own eyes. (through a telescope) Are they really looks like than those on pictures? You mentioned that the reason why we even see the pillars of creation and other nebulae is due to the stars shinning their light on these gaseous formations. I thought these pictures are colorcoded pictures based on the heat of the gas.
in comparison with the size of a planet, the "pillars of creation" are gas formations that are larger than entire solar systems.
@@SinJeeeah the "pillars" are vastly reprocessed images: vastly magnified, color and contrast enhanced and probably filtered as well. Nor were they individual exposures but rather
hundreds if not thousands of "stacked" overlay images, extensively enhanced for best-effect.
Am I dirty minded or she's sayin BOLLS too much? (my impression on first 4 minutes of the video)
I think your dirty minded. Just like me.
Some with Gravity , you would need to Weigh about the Same , In order to survive :) I think
A WOMEN OF INTELLECT
I love this lecture and have watched it a couple of times previously, but on this occasion I picked up on the tiny habit she has of adding a very soft, "riiight?" at the end of some statements and now it's all I hear and I'm scared it's totally ruined it for me forever ... :(
well for me i know theres life on other planets. i seen a ufo in 73. it was 10 feet from my window.and im on the second floor . i seen though there window was two people like us wearing silver outfits. it had no sound or wind. seem very peaceful. i wish i didn't see it sometimes. and some how i new how to stop asteroid with sound blast waves. but there one thing i always wonder. did they take me before i woke up. or after i woke up.always wanted someone to put me under to find out. or maybe ill know cool more new things.
You're 100 % correct.
I have heard a lot of story like you said so i believe you.
there are websites where you can describe your experience, in case you want to share it further.
I do hope that the minds looking out are more open. We know only of life and how it works here. We know nothing of what exists in the vast universe. We assume it must use what we have learned is needed "here" for our kind of life. The what if's, they are the eyes to what may exist ..out there. Please when opening your eyes to peer out there, make certain your minds are also open. Would you want to meet us? look around you and ask yourself if you would welcome our world and people. Good Luck...if i were an different world, I might stay hidden to prevent the corruption .
the Drake Equation has already considered a lot of that stuff.
What the h is wrong with all you people commenting on how hot the speaker is? Get a freaking life.
they are guys. some of them listen with something other than their ears. They mean no harm but she would probably ignore them, or try to.
You felt a bit lectured by her, right? :)
So what shes telling us with one of the answers at the Q+A at the end is that Planets move about into different orbits after they form.Didn't Immanuell Velikovsky tell the Asronomy world this way back in the 50's or 60's,but he was ridiculed for even suggesting this,which the whole scientific world at the time stated,in absolute terms,that "Planets don't migrate from one orbit to another".They claimed that "Planets stay in their orbits without change for billions of years".Even though Velikovsky had solid proof that our solar system went thru cataclysmic planetary migrations in the recent past,when humans were alive to see this...
Velikovsky was a fraud. His ''proof'' consisted of basically ancient myths and stories. What he thought he ''knew'' has got nothing to do with our current widening knowledge.
Mr. Weenus brought me here.
So we are going about it the wrong way. If its impossible to see a goldylocks planet transit
most were jupiter size and closer than mercury...not really earth twins
she didn't say it was impossible, she just said that AT THE TIME of this lecture, they had yet to reliably get data at that level of sensitivity. Later on they did pretty much achieve it however.
Over half a decade old...not the latest at all
Good video.
But at the start that guy kept on making really strange inflections, couldn't help pissing myself, but overall interesting stuff.
hmmkay? right. she speaks well but I can do without these two words.
she's kind of trying to gauge audience temperature. The lights are low in that auditorium and her talk is highly technical but the audience is random public (tending toward a scientific bent of course) so I would guess that she's looking for SOME kind of body language-feedback. Maybe give her a break.
Que mulher!
and i guess she is portuguese too Batalha is a tipically portuguese last name
by way of Brazil.
She just looooooves saying the word "balls" doesn't she?
Why ? Do we really need that. Or we rather think about better ways to bring the equality among the people on planet earth. Look around and see if ur curious mind can observe suffering of our brothers and sisters. I am not saying that scientific discoveries are not important what I am trying to say is to reconsider our priorities and actions that we are giving importance to.
Hmm... yeah, but she's probably not single anyways ;)
Changing the subject. I think there is too much debris in outer space to travel to another star. The way must be cluttered with asteroids, comets, and rogue planets. We should turn the Moon into a Death Star! A space ark!
Actually, space is remarkably empty. The technical difficulties would relate to time and the maintaining of systems in such a hostile environment. Debris is not really much of an issue outside of a planetary system.
Dark Matter is invisible to current technology. It and Dark Energy make up 90% of the Universe. Some of it might be gravel. :-)
Yes, dark matter also doesn't interact with any of the matter we do observe, which is part of why it is so difficult to detect apart from its gravitational influences. So this still would not pose a problem for interstellar travel.
that's the plot of 1999.
Ticky21 except for the dubious amount of radiation coming from the sun that is one of the main problems of getting to mars...
Planet's have more attributes, like stars than are being talked about. She needs to work-out and know more about the electric nature of this Universe, anode to cathode: anode-male & female pair to cathode; and hallows planets. Dwarf planets (not moons) in relations with other "planets" making pairs of binary planets, both with tenuous atmospheres, like Pluto-Charon, and Earth and her moon, all of which have intelligent structures on their surfaces that can be confirmed by follow up missions.
NASA has more than one research employee. She had to PICK a field, and is not essentially a planetary scientist, but a stellar system discoverer. While she is certainly conversant on planetary science topics, that isn't really her field.
Great legs!
ha, she said balls.
What does Moses or Mohamud have to say about this??
HAHAHA
Nothing Einstein!
moses or mohamud WHO?
ah ok. Thank you. I guess that would be an important consideration lol
🖤
We failed to take care of this planet and they want another one to exploit.
Find another earth thats a high order there. There cant be another earth there could not exist each planet is unique to its own star.
ㅎㅇㅌ
heheh I guess so yeh.
Not to mention that in order for them to speak you need to be of a proper vibratory level
The Sun in its infancy created all the planets in our solar system !!! Distance from the Sun is the key to a planets survival... Earth will end up like Mars in millions of years to come as the heat and light subsides from the Sun ... Then it will be the the planet Venus turn to give life...
Before the sun's energy decreases the sun's size will certainly take in Venus and maybe Earth. Read about the red giant stage of the sun. Neither the Earth nor Venus will be habitable after that...if they still exist.
platoman214 We are to young to know everything. What if, they have it all wrong ?
Of course, it's possible, but the evidence from other stars with our sun's chemistry and size and mass suggests it will follow their path to red giant before shrinking back to a white dwarf: www.universetoday.com/25669/the-sun-as-a-white-dwarf-star/
Dude high school astronomy teaches this. If the shear elementary lesson of Star life wont convince you learn astrophysics and find out your self. science.howstuffworks.com/star6.htm
Incorrect mars was artificially destroyed.