He's got to be squirming in his seat having to promote products that are either utterly unsuitable to him or just plain garbage. He certainly looks both embarrassed and disingenuous.
I don't know how he pulls it off. While Simon says the phrase, he doesn't really take the angle "Don't be like this guy". Makes me wonder how well he could sell the "Slap Chop"
0:55 - Mid roll ads 2:35 - Chapter 1 - What is dark matter 10:20 - Chapter 2 - What is the great attractor 13:30 - Chapter 3 - What was oumuamua 17:30 - Chapter 4 - Is humanity unique ?
Chapter 1 - Gravitational frame shifts. Chapter 2 - the center of gravity of the local cluster. Chapter 3 - Ejected asteroid from a distant system. Chapter 4 - no there are others at similar levels to humans everywhere
For me personally, the Great Attractor is a notifiction that Simon has uploaded a new video to the Whistlerverse. I always gravitate to his channels. Almost naturally.
I wonder how many of his viewers are dedicated Fact Boi Fan Bois and how many are just casual viewers that don't even realize how deep the beard of knowledge goes.
When people ask why we haven’t found life outside the Earth, I imagine pre-contact Easter Islanders wondering why they haven’t encountered life from beyond their island. When you consider the unfathomable enormity of the universe, it’s downright silly to think we can make conclusions about it based on the tiny speck of the universe we have been able to examine. It’s like those Easter Islanders concluding that there is no intelligent life beyond their island because they hadn’t found any in the entire area they had explored.
Completely agree. I've heard a lot about both the 'rare earth' hypothesis, or the other theory that states the universe should be teeming with life. But given the absolutely insane scale of the universe we're talking about, both in time and space... I liken it to a giant warehouse, filled with a penny dropping every 5 minutes on every inch of space. Every penny turning up heads is no life, every one turning up tails is microbial life. And every penny landing on its side is a planet with intelligent life. Taking that into account, how infinitesimally small are the odds that two pennies would fall on their side in each others vicinity and at about the same time?
And to add to the mix. The Easter Islanders were not disadvantaged by time. On a galactic scale, we have 13 billion years of a couple Easter Island races putzing around trying to find someone else to talk to
Your presuppositions fail because you're using your perspective in place of an actual Easter Islander, when you close extrapolate from other Polynesians. Is it like Easter Islanders (direct comparison) or "as if" (hypothetical)? I'm from pedantic because it affects your subsequent points so I want to make sure I'm understanding your argument.
Absolute Nonsense. Those that first colonized Easter Island knew there was human life outside the island and passed this knowledge down through generations.
The great filter theory is why discovering primitive life is scary. It moves the likely timeframe of a great filter forward and thus more likely to be in our future. If we find zero planets with life then odds are we got lucky and got past the great filter. If we start finding crude radio transmissions, especially from multiple sources, but nothing more advanced, well that would truly be scary.
With option 1, the filter theory might indeed be true, but with option 2 it might not be true, because it would show that others are out there. It is only scary if you simply believe in the theory verbatim, without any proof to it. This is equivalent to reading a scifi book and taking it as gospel, just because it sounds kinda plausible at first, without actually looking at it in detail and with actual scientific methods. In either case, we will never know, which is just pretty disappointing.
The existential dread that the Fermi paradox gives me is crazy. There’s a famous quote that goes “we are either alone in the universe or we are not, both of which are equally terrifying” and that pretty much sums up the dread I feel when thinking about alien life.
The one I dread is "Lights Out," when the last star in this universe goes dark. If there are intelligent, technologically advanced beings out there by then (maybe our descendants, what we will become when we are no longer human), what will they try to do? How will they survive? Reignite the last star? Create an artificial one? Kill each other in a fit of despair, like the people in Asimov's story "Nightfall?" (different circumstances, yes, but "world ending" to say the least.) For something that is not expected to happen until, what, ten billion years in the future? it still gives me goosebumps.
@@LuckySSU I may be in the minority, but the China-centric Three Body Problem was a big "nah" for me: hyped, poorly written (or perhaps poorly translated, IDK), with the appearance of depth but the reality of shallowness, I just cannot understand the fandom it has developed. To each their own, of course.
I've always thought the idea that "life can only flourish in a similar type of planet to Earth" to be odd. For instance, this statement: "Most planets aren't in the habitable zone of their host star, and that many of the planet that do live in this safe distance aren't even rocky, but instead gaseous" This is a true problem, but only if we look at it from a human perspective. But humans have evolved specifically for life on the planet Earth. Life didn't form on Earth because it had the perfect conditions for life to form. It's the other way around. Life formed on Earth in such a way that it can survive on the planet. We breath oxygen BECAUSE Earth has plentiful oxygen to breath. Earth's gravity is perfect for us BECAUSE we formed and evolved with the force of Earth's gravity. There is zero reason to believe that if life formed on a different planet, those lifeforms wouldn't be adapted for life on their planet. Like, for instance, Jupiter. Jupiter is not inhabitable for humans because it's too far away from the sun and its atmosphere is mostly hydrogen. But any life that forms on Jupiter would have formed under those conditions, so they would have evolved to breath hydrogen and with the colder heat as their natural heat. There's no reason to believe that Jupiter is unsustainable for intelligent life just because it's unsustainable for HUMAN life.
That's true. But it still doesn't necessarily mean that the universe is teeming with life. Luck is more important than environment when it comes to forming life.
There are actual *chemical* reasons to suspect that "Earth adjacent" conditions are far, *far* more likely than any other. Chemically speaking, a liquid water, hydrogen/carbon/oxygen environment is the one that works the best for the necessary types of chemical reactions for basic processes necessary to equate "life". Other combinations of chemicals don't hit that nice sweet spot of "chemical bonds strong enough to stay consistent" and "chemical bonds reactive enough to allow metabolism of any sort". Even one of the best alternate substitutes for oxygen (chlorine) has quite a lot of short comings as a life sustaining oxidizer. Temperatures significantly outside the range of liquid water either becomes far less reactive (losing down chemical processes that would be necessary for any variation of life, or the additional heat makes for almost instant chemical bond breakdowns and the degradation of complex chemical compounds that can readily change bonds to allow metabolism. Substitute silicon for carbon (silicon being the best alternate for carbon)? Unfortunately, silicon has far fewer useful compounds that could form the backbone of life in the same way carbon does. Water is almost the perfect solvent for the kinds of chemical compounds that would be necessary for any metabolic processes. TL;DR - Science (specifically the atomic structure of the candidate elements and their resulting potential molecular bonds) is what says that life is almost certainly going to be found in "Earthlike" conditions (which, note, doesn't even remotely mean "conditions current life on Earth could survive" - it means a handful of key chemicals in reasonable abundance, within an astronomically narrow temperature range). It isn't that "Earth is uniquely perfect for life", but rather, "Earth falls within a broad range of chemically similar environments where life is far, far more likely to develop," and while it is "average" for a life bearing world, it is still unusual compared to the universe at large.
@@geodkyt To add to what you're saying, the most common elements in the solar system are in descending order of particle count hydrogen, helium, oxygen, carbon, nitrogen. The most common elements in life are in descending order hydrogen, oxygen, carbon, nitrogen. For life to be based on hydrogen, oxygen, carbon, nitrogen in that order doesn't seem like a coincidence but the most likely outcome. We can speculate about silicon based life that breathes fluorine instead of oxygen, but even ignoring the chemistry, why would life ever develop to be silicon based or fluorine breathing when carbon and oxygen are so much more abundant? Due to how elements are formed, there will be no natural environment where any of the alternative elements that speculative forms of life use will be more common than oxygen, carbon, and nitrogen. Plus, there's plenty of silicon on Earth but it plays only a minor role in biochemistry. There are no rock monsters or crystal golems. Calcium is less abundant than silicon but life has made significantly more use of that. There are speculative forms of life that use ammonia instead of water as a solvent or nitrous oxide instead of diatomic oxygen. Those are less outlandish, but still run into the troublesome matter of nitrogen chemistry. That's because diatomic nitrogen has a triple bond which makes it incredibly stable, meaning that nitrogen that's not in diatomic form really really wants to go back to its diatomic form. Explosively so, literally; most of the energy in gunpowder and explosives comes from nitrogen. Nitrogen is a crucial part of life; ATP is provides a lot of the energy in cells but too much nitrogen chemistry would likely be quite troublesome unless the temperature is low enough to make the rate of reaction of all the other chemistry quite slow.
Yep pretty much. And this also will pose A MASSIVE amount of problems for humans if they ever want to try and colonize other planets. This might be impossible to do because we are adapted to live on this specific planet, but as we can see on humans living here, just minimal differences in temperature or atmospheric pressure and particles in our atmosphere can totally mess with us. I seriously doubt that we will ever truly get anywhere outside of the sol system.
The marketing team at Keeps must be high out of their minds if they think that a completely bald guy is going to help sell their hair loss prevention snake oil.
Re: MoND and Dark Matter, I highly recommend watching some of Angela Collier's videos. For example, she explains that dark matter isn't an explanation, it's a somewhat misleading name for a collection of OBSERVATIONS... and that we're still trying to pin down the explanation.
I don't think the Fermi paradox and Copernican principle are so incompatible. To me it just says we have a low sample size, and that makes it hard to figure out what the common elements are.
Kepler's third law works well for systems like our solar system because almost all the mass is concentrated in the central star, and gravity weakens with distance in a predictable way. In spiral galaxies, the situation is very different. Mass isn't just in the center. It's spread throughout the galaxy, including an invisible halo of dark matter. This dark matter changes how gravity works across the galaxy, keeping the stars in the outer arms moving at nearly the same speed as those closer to the center. Because of this, galaxies don't follow Kepler's laws the same way planets do in our solar system.
The biggest flaw with the Fermi paradox is the assumption that alien life would have our technology or better otherwise we're alone when radio is only about 150 years old and has only gotten good enough for long distance communication within the last 30 years or so. There's probably hundreds of thousands of stone-age-esk civilizations we just have to wait for.
The idea is if there are hundreds of thousands, SOME of them should have our technological capacity, and we do not find a trace. Indeed some of the great filters suggest that intelligent life will always eradicate itself.
well, all of these theories are just that... theories. they are made in desperate attemps of trying to make sense of something that we simply cannot solve, unless we get valid data. Everything before that is pure speculation, no matter how interesting or plausible it might sound. I am sure that flat earth and earth being the centre of the universe was all sounding plausible and cool back then, until it was disproven. Especially with Fermi, we are looking at things that are vast with our massively limited and archaic tools, and most likely very imprecise scientific methods and mathematical and physics theories and make broad assumptions, by just looking at things that would suit us specifically, for wether a planet would be suitable for life just how it is on our planet, totally ignoring that there might actually be life in completely different forms that might not be made from carbon chains, but from something else, perhaps something we have just not seen on our own planet, but that exists outside of what we have yet encountered...
@@aneasteregg8171same, for the most part! CC and DTU win though, because podcasts I can listen to in the car... I wish Into the Shadows was podcasted too
(10:18) "WHAT IS THE GREAT ATTRTACTOR?" 😂🤣😂🤣😂 Lmao @ 'Attrtactor'. From now on, I'm going to pronounce the word 'attractor' as "attrtactor" (pronounced: atter-tack-ter) 😂
i like all your vids, but the last and 2nd to last chapters of this one were a fantastic 1 - 2 punch. really got me thinking, i appreciate it. hope you're having a great day.
Do i think there is extraterrestrial life out there somewhere? Yes. Do i think we will ever find them? No, at least not in our lifetimes and perhaps not ever.
I see SO MANY comments about how we are not seeing technological civilizations simply because they haven’t had time to develop yet, or that we are not looking in the right places to be unscientific. Science is not making assumptions and then stating that it’s true, it is about stating an idea and then looking for evidence. If you don’t find the evidence for it, either your assumption is untrue, or your technique is flawed. You DON’T say, “Well, there are PROBABLY many civilizations out there, but we simply haven’t found them.” You say, “We have no evidence for technological civilizations at this time, and may never, so for now, we must assume that we are alone until shown otherwise.” That doesn’t mean you stop looking. It means that you don’t assume that they are there, and you simply haven’t found them.
Niel Degrass Tyson summed up his take on the fermi paradox with one with one question. "if you were to take a cup of water from the ocean, and it contained no whales, should we instantly assume there are no whales?" sheer fact that there is a virtual horizon beyond which we know nothing about, only makes this more poignant.
Professor Tyson have only so much time to popularize science, so maybe he doesn't want people to focus on something that unimportant. The real scale of Fermi paradox cannot be adequately describe in such analogy. Think about that this way, for example. The process of living matter originating from non-organics is not very well researched, because it happen, like 4 billion years ago. We have some ideas, how it could happen, but we probably will never know how exactly it did. What we don't know is any particular thing, that would make it difficult on Earth-like planet. You have an Earth-like planet (with water, atmosphere, and temperate climate in parts, basically) - give it a billion years or so and you should have life on it, or so it seems. Now, there are statistically about 8 billion Earth-like planets in our galaxy, the Milky Way. That seems like a lot, until you realize, that they actually pop up with a rate of about one every 5 years (just years here) or so, which mean that there were more of them in the past. Now, the universe is 14-something billion years old, and our galaxy is not much younger. Some people will point out, that first stars had no planet and they had to die before planet would appear. Yes, but first stars were supermassive and had different stuff in them, so their lifetime was literally dozens of millions of years. We, with all our limitation, already found planets, which age is more than 10 billion years (e.g. PSR B1620−26 b). So not only we should have a bunch of people around now (we might indeed be not able to detect them if we imagine that they are on the same technological level), but we should have absolute bunch of people with billions upon billions years head-start upon us. And we are only, like, 150 thousand years old. These guys should be flying around, spreading radiation with their fancy drives like nobody's business, and building Dyson spheres and whatnot everywhere. And where are these? We observe not a tiniest trace of them for dozens of thousands of light years around us for dozens of thousands of years back in time. 1 billion seconds is 32 years. Imagine, what several billion civilizations developing for several billion years should produce. And compare it to deafening silence we witness. That is why a lot of scientist find Fermi paradox disconcerting.
Combine the rare earth theory with the possibility that faster than light travel is truly impossible, and it might be that there is life out there, but we’ll never find it.
Couple that with interstellar travel might also be impossible for us life forms due to some unknown reason we haven't discovered yet, Like artificial gravity might not be the key we think it is. Or we need some magic secret sauce that only inner star systems can provide to survive. Which leads to ask why haven't we seen machine tech life forms then yet? Or maybe faster then light communications is also impossible rendering any advanced civilizations to stay close together until absolutely necessary to move on.
@@facetubetwit1444 if I didn't misunderstand how cables work, ftl communication is technically possible, but it would require a connected wire to whatever we're communicating with. Because when the electrons in a wire push on eachother all of them push on eachother at once, meaning the end of the wire moves at the same time as the start. The information essentially doesn't have to travel any distance. Wireless on the other hand would be limited by the speed of causality (light). Communicating with people on Mars would already be hit with long delays. We're talking about having to wait almost half an hour on the phone to get an answer because it takes fifteen minutes for your message to get to them and fifteen more to get back to you.
@@johnbox271 first born hypothesis? It could be there wasn't enough metal (in the astronomical sense) for life to exist. And we're just early to the party.
watching for a while now, recent subscriber. You speak so well, and of course it doesn't hurt that your topics are fascinating! Keep up the good work and I'll be tuning in.
@@cmecre8629 yeah yeah, that's the drain, but i'm more wondering about the pipe and where they think it goes. cuz you hear people talk about "outside" or" before" the universe, and setting aside that such a thing is essentially impossible as far as we know, it's always interesting to hear what people think that would entail.
5:15 "This particle would interact with mass, and therefore gravity, but not with light. A behavior that we've yet to see elsewhere." I see what you did there writer
@@stereo-soulsoundsystem5070photons (light particles) interact with everything else, that's how we "see". That's the joke. The only thing photons don't interact with is with other photons, but as they don't have any mass, the joke still stands.
Indeed, the entire foundation of the concept of 'dark matter' and 'dark energy' were that the simulations we made did not match what we observed in the real world. The math had a gap.. as if there were missing mass. However, humans being human, egos sort of took the wheel and named it 'dark matter' as a catchy term that didn't imply that physicists didn't have the complete understanding of the universe. The problem is, that this has focused so much energy, perception and even new students into this concept that there must be some physical thing that we haven't discovered, and very little effort on 'Where does our understanding go wrong?', when that is indeed, what started the whole topic. As an engineering student in a school with a strong physics group, it was very frustrating to talk amongst the physics department about how things worked, because it was all about 'oh this is too complex' when it was more like they didn't know either. So much focus about finding new particles and the like, that no one wanted to focus on sorting out where the math went wrong. That's why MOND isn't popular... it starts with the assumption that the physics world isn't perfect, and digs into our flaws. Granted, it very well could be a combination of gaps in the math and new particles or phenomenon we've not yet discovered. But the problem is mostly one of the culture of science these days and the lack of interest and funds to scrutinize what we base our foundations on. Maybe it's just that I've spent my whole career in safety-critical work, where mistakes cost lives, and being skeptical is a way of life. But hopefully some of these new discoveries by JWST showing that no, a singularity is not infinitely small, will get more people back into looking at the less sexy work of checking our assumptions.
I am just waiting for humanity to find a monolith either here on Earth, Luna, or Mars so we can figure out which timeline we're in. For those who don't know: in Dead Space, humanity finds a monolith while excavating the impact crater in Mexico, which helped humanity advance technologically. in Mass Effect, humanity finds the Prothean ruins on Mars, which helped humanity advance technologically. in 2001: ASO, humanity finds the monolith on Luna, causing humanity to build a ship capable of travelling to Europa to investigate the message they received from said monolith.
@@helloidharbl6753 You understand just how meaningless your response is? Nobody thought the Mayans had built highways between their cities until just a couple years ago when they used a satellite equipped with lidar to penetrate the dense jungle to look for any potential lost Mayan ruins.
@@DKforever24 Well then that's why we'll always need people like you who are willing to take that second look at something we think we know everything about. An old saying comes to mind: "Can't see the forest for the trees". That can be interpreted several ways of course but in the case of exploration, maybe we're not seeing the big picture because of the vast amount of little things to sift through.
The assumption that large-scale cosmological structures are affected entirely by gravity and have net-zero charge is not necessarily valid, and we really have very little way of testing it at great distances. Electromagnetism is so strong compared to gravity, that even a slight net charge in the solar wind compared to stars/planets could lead solar systems to bond with each other like atoms, or at least experience Van Der Waals style attractions.
Hello, Simon, Best Wishes from NY. As much as I am a fan of your great, informative and very entertaining science episodes, they also serve an important "off-label" benefit: Your genteel and fine narration feel like visiting with an old and trusted friend. Thanks for all of the wonderful work you do! Art Donovan Southampton
Great video, as usual. One observation: "Unique" is unique. There is no "more unique" or "less unique," than this or that. There is only "unique" by itself: it either is or it isn't. Unique is and absolute. And, of course, among trillions and trillions of galaxies, each of them containing from tens of billions to hundreds of billions of stars, chances for a few worlds pretty much like ours are not low, but shoot up into the millions, at the very least. The Milky Way alone contains more than 100 billion stars. We may be a Black Swan in our little pond in our vast Milky Way island, but with 100 million ponds to check in this island chances are there will be more black swans out there. Unique? Hardly.
I've heard the unusual rotation of galaxies used as the basis for the theory of dark matter but what I'd like to have explained to me is how we're been able to observe any galaxy long enough and precisely enough to even be able to notice something unusual about it's rotation.
20:46 We also have Theia to thank for doubling up our iron core. We’re one planet, with two cores worth of iron. Without the impact of Theia and Pre-Theia Earth, we wouldn’t have as strong of a magnetic sphere. We are also the densest planet in the solar system.
Theres a few possibilities when it comes to the question 'are we alone in the universe?' 1. We are alone (not likely) 2. We are not alone but our alien neighbours are in a similar level of technology to us 3. We are not alone but our alien neighbours view us as to primitive to interact with 4. We are not alone but alien life don't even know we're here
"[...] this particle would interact with mass and therefore gravity but not with light, a behavior that we've yet to see elsewhere." Neutrinos only interact with gravity and the weak force, not with electromagnetism (photons, i.e. light) or the strong force.
Simon is a great narrator, and he picks interesting subjects which keeps people coming back to his channel(s). It's difficult to not use every superlative when describing his work. Having said that, Simon does make mistakes and, in this case, it's the mistake of assumption. This is going to sound nick picky (and it is) but Simon assumes the world's brightest minds are working in science, they are not. Simon calls space exploration the "last frontier", it ain't. Other than that, it's another brilliant video in a very long time of brilliant videos.
Regarding discussion at ~5:00, if the center of spiral galaxies are massive black holes, or a singular massive black hole, would not the time distortions make the inner galaxy appear to move or rotate more slowly than the outer?
MOND theories modify the strength of gravity at different accelerations - but they can't move the center of mass to make gravity's arrow point in other directions away from the visible matter, as the Bullet Cluster suggests.
I always had the problems with axions that if they have very small masses, anything that gives them energy will tend to make them shoot at a velocity just short of light in a vacuum, like neutrinos. Thus there would have to be a force making them stick together, but we're eliminating the forces that could do that.
The Great Attractor is no longer considered a mystery. It is essentially the gravitational center of a massive supercluster known as the Laniakea Supercluster.
if there is life out there, its likely not technologically advanced enough or has such different mechanics we cant detect them and they cant detect us, or they're just far away. like the other side of the galaxy, or hell probably a different galaxy.
I imagine if we ever make contact with more intelligent life than us and we try to explain our theories of dark matter to them, they will laugh their alien asses off at us 😅
We all know that Oumuamua was an extraterrestical spaceship, which was inbound to visit us... but then they received EM transmissions, which they turned out to be a TV broadcast of the Twilight Saga. I would hit the pedal to the metal too in that case.
We're still in the infancy of our ability to develop detection technologies. It's reasonable to say there's a whole lot we just aren't able to see yet.
I think having the diversity of life and environments we do was the crucial element for our level of intelligence, especially life above ground and not underwater. It required life to be prepared for many more things that other environments don't require.
KEEPS is a brand name for Minoxidil. Minoxidil has been since long before Simon was born. So it was around before he lost his hair. When he started losing his hair, one would think he would use whatever the cutting edge chemical hair product is available. That being Minoxidil, does that mean he just let his hair go or that minoxidil doesn’t work?
Ah, for four or five decades I've believed that it will be a watershed event when we understand the relationship between mass and gravity, possibly resulting in anti/null-gravity devices, tractor beams, etc... and even FTL travel?
It is funny to say "we aren't seeing [alien] technology floating around" at 19:00, right after explaining away Oumuamua's characteristics without any explanations that hold water. You effectively demonstrate the widespread impulse to cram the subject back into a comfortable box. It seems smarter to me to acknowledge that we don't have any good explanations for the evidence without deciding that means it is aliens. Oumuamua's velocity before falling into the Sun's gravity field is very curious, the range in it's albedo was extremely unusual, and it's acceleration away from the sun is hard to explain, especially for a tumbling object. That is not even odd compared to the 'tic-tac incident'.
"As our circle of knowledge expands, so does the circumference of darkness surrounding it. Learning, studying, shedding light on a field of inquiry also reveals just how in the dark we continue to be. How many shadowy things there are left for us to illuminate. The diameter of light never exceeds the shadowy circumference." - Vsauce, Michael here. 'What Is The Speed of Dark' video
Just to add to Simon’s doom and gloom for today, taking our own history for example, what happens when a technologically advanced society encounters a less advanced society??? Now imagine that on a planetary scale!!
Even if life is commonplace, civilisations can come and go over unfathomably long timescales. Each simply missing each other by a million years or so, passing each other between ticks of the clock. Couple that with looking from our little spec to find signs of technology that we can comprehend…
Thanks to Keeps for sponsoring this video! Head to keeps.com/SIMON to get a special offer. Individual results may vary
🤓 Grammar pet peeve: @5:40 between vs among.
I can't remember what video you did it on but you'll never top the "Now for the most ironic sponsorship on TH-cam.." intro you gave them one day.
He's got to be squirming in his seat having to promote products that are either utterly unsuitable to him or just plain garbage. He certainly looks both embarrassed and disingenuous.
Fascinating eggskull
I just imagine that whoever writes the Keeps briefs for Simon just sits down and thinks "what can we get the bald dude to say this time?🤣"
It's always nice to find an actual person narrating
So many AI channels these days
A lot of them regurgitate content from other youtubers. they just copy the video and redub it. report them and yeet them off this platform
Maybe he is an AI?
@@LisaAnn777 nope, I can tell the difference. For now.
@@kevinb9830 he could be a robot of some kind. Made only for TH-cam videos, that's why he has so many channels.
Kudos to Keeps for consistently going to the baldest man they could find for the sponsorship.
I don't know how he pulls it off.
While Simon says the phrase, he doesn't really take the angle "Don't be like this guy".
Makes me wonder how well he could sell the "Slap Chop"
He"Keeps" his beard...Its so virile it looks fake., Simon probably turns his camera or head upside down when talking to keeps...
And shout out to Simon for supporting those who still have time. Hairless Hero.
Tbf the day Simon turns up with a full head of hair I'll buy the product
Simon was never talking about his head 😅
0:55 - Mid roll ads
2:35 - Chapter 1 - What is dark matter
10:20 - Chapter 2 - What is the great attractor
13:30 - Chapter 3 - What was oumuamua
17:30 - Chapter 4 - Is humanity unique ?
20:30 - Chapter 5 - No, just me
Chapter 1 - Gravitational frame shifts.
Chapter 2 - the center of gravity of the local cluster.
Chapter 3 - Ejected asteroid from a distant system.
Chapter 4 - no there are others at similar levels to humans everywhere
For me personally, the Great Attractor is a notifiction that Simon has uploaded a new video to the Whistlerverse. I always gravitate to his channels. Almost naturally.
His spelling, less so. 🤔✌️
He IS the great attractor.
I wonder how many of his viewers are dedicated Fact Boi Fan Bois and how many are just casual viewers that don't even realize how deep the beard of knowledge goes.
@@hibaakaiko3888allegedly..... in my opinion.....
He's a talking head, a face. There is no Whistlerverse. Grow up.
When people ask why we haven’t found life outside the Earth, I imagine pre-contact Easter Islanders wondering why they haven’t encountered life from beyond their island. When you consider the unfathomable enormity of the universe, it’s downright silly to think we can make conclusions about it based on the tiny speck of the universe we have been able to examine. It’s like those Easter Islanders concluding that there is no intelligent life beyond their island because they hadn’t found any in the entire area they had explored.
Completely agree. I've heard a lot about both the 'rare earth' hypothesis, or the other theory that states the universe should be teeming with life. But given the absolutely insane scale of the universe we're talking about, both in time and space... I liken it to a giant warehouse, filled with a penny dropping every 5 minutes on every inch of space. Every penny turning up heads is no life, every one turning up tails is microbial life. And every penny landing on its side is a planet with intelligent life. Taking that into account, how infinitesimally small are the odds that two pennies would fall on their side in each others vicinity and at about the same time?
And to add to the mix. The Easter Islanders were not disadvantaged by time. On a galactic scale, we have 13 billion years of a couple Easter Island races putzing around trying to find someone else to talk to
Pale Blue Dot photo from Voyager is a good show of what we really are. A spec.
Your presuppositions fail because you're using your perspective in place of an actual Easter Islander, when you close extrapolate from other Polynesians. Is it like Easter Islanders (direct comparison) or "as if" (hypothetical)? I'm from pedantic because it affects your subsequent points so I want to make sure I'm understanding your argument.
Absolute Nonsense.
Those that first colonized Easter Island knew there was human life outside the island and passed this knowledge down through generations.
The great filter theory is why discovering primitive life is scary. It moves the likely timeframe of a great filter forward and thus more likely to be in our future. If we find zero planets with life then odds are we got lucky and got past the great filter. If we start finding crude radio transmissions, especially from multiple sources, but nothing more advanced, well that would truly be scary.
With option 1, the filter theory might indeed be true, but with option 2 it might not be true, because it would show that others are out there. It is only scary if you simply believe in the theory verbatim, without any proof to it. This is equivalent to reading a scifi book and taking it as gospel, just because it sounds kinda plausible at first, without actually looking at it in detail and with actual scientific methods.
In either case, we will never know, which is just pretty disappointing.
@@MrSheduur "Two possibilities exist: either we are alone in the Universe or we are not. Both are equally terrifying." - Arthur C. Clarke
10:16 Ah, yes. The Great Attrtactor
😆
This made me wince as well
19:06 Almost as cool as the Fermi Praire Docs
Apparently it attracts great typos.
You got that to a T.
Your humility to advertise for keeps was awesome
The existential dread that the Fermi paradox gives me is crazy. There’s a famous quote that goes “we are either alone in the universe or we are not, both of which are equally terrifying” and that pretty much sums up the dread I feel when thinking about alien life.
Read "The three body problem" books to add to it even more lol It's called Space horror for a reason ;)
It really doesn't matter that much.
Nothing to fear, if they come they come, if not then life goes on like it did for millions of years.
The one I dread is "Lights Out," when the last star in this universe goes dark. If there are intelligent, technologically advanced beings out there by then (maybe our descendants, what we will become when we are no longer human), what will they try to do? How will they survive? Reignite the last star? Create an artificial one? Kill each other in a fit of despair, like the people in Asimov's story "Nightfall?" (different circumstances, yes, but "world ending" to say the least.) For something that is not expected to happen until, what, ten billion years in the future? it still gives me goosebumps.
@@LuckySSU I may be in the minority, but the China-centric Three Body Problem was a big "nah" for me: hyped, poorly written (or perhaps poorly translated, IDK), with the appearance of depth but the reality of shallowness, I just cannot understand the fandom it has developed. To each their own, of course.
I've always thought the idea that "life can only flourish in a similar type of planet to Earth" to be odd. For instance, this statement:
"Most planets aren't in the habitable zone of their host star, and that many of the planet that do live in this safe distance aren't even rocky, but instead gaseous"
This is a true problem, but only if we look at it from a human perspective. But humans have evolved specifically for life on the planet Earth. Life didn't form on Earth because it had the perfect conditions for life to form. It's the other way around. Life formed on Earth in such a way that it can survive on the planet. We breath oxygen BECAUSE Earth has plentiful oxygen to breath. Earth's gravity is perfect for us BECAUSE we formed and evolved with the force of Earth's gravity. There is zero reason to believe that if life formed on a different planet, those lifeforms wouldn't be adapted for life on their planet. Like, for instance, Jupiter. Jupiter is not inhabitable for humans because it's too far away from the sun and its atmosphere is mostly hydrogen. But any life that forms on Jupiter would have formed under those conditions, so they would have evolved to breath hydrogen and with the colder heat as their natural heat. There's no reason to believe that Jupiter is unsustainable for intelligent life just because it's unsustainable for HUMAN life.
Much less Earth life. :) This needs more likes.
That's true. But it still doesn't necessarily mean that the universe is teeming with life. Luck is more important than environment when it comes to forming life.
There are actual *chemical* reasons to suspect that "Earth adjacent" conditions are far, *far* more likely than any other.
Chemically speaking, a liquid water, hydrogen/carbon/oxygen environment is the one that works the best for the necessary types of chemical reactions for basic processes necessary to equate "life". Other combinations of chemicals don't hit that nice sweet spot of "chemical bonds strong enough to stay consistent" and "chemical bonds reactive enough to allow metabolism of any sort".
Even one of the best alternate substitutes for oxygen (chlorine) has quite a lot of short comings as a life sustaining oxidizer.
Temperatures significantly outside the range of liquid water either becomes far less reactive (losing down chemical processes that would be necessary for any variation of life, or the additional heat makes for almost instant chemical bond breakdowns and the degradation of complex chemical compounds that can readily change bonds to allow metabolism.
Substitute silicon for carbon (silicon being the best alternate for carbon)? Unfortunately, silicon has far fewer useful compounds that could form the backbone of life in the same way carbon does.
Water is almost the perfect solvent for the kinds of chemical compounds that would be necessary for any metabolic processes.
TL;DR - Science (specifically the atomic structure of the candidate elements and their resulting potential molecular bonds) is what says that life is almost certainly going to be found in "Earthlike" conditions (which, note, doesn't even remotely mean "conditions current life on Earth could survive" - it means a handful of key chemicals in reasonable abundance, within an astronomically narrow temperature range). It isn't that "Earth is uniquely perfect for life", but rather, "Earth falls within a broad range of chemically similar environments where life is far, far more likely to develop," and while it is "average" for a life bearing world, it is still unusual compared to the universe at large.
@@geodkyt To add to what you're saying, the most common elements in the solar system are in descending order of particle count hydrogen, helium, oxygen, carbon, nitrogen. The most common elements in life are in descending order hydrogen, oxygen, carbon, nitrogen. For life to be based on hydrogen, oxygen, carbon, nitrogen in that order doesn't seem like a coincidence but the most likely outcome.
We can speculate about silicon based life that breathes fluorine instead of oxygen, but even ignoring the chemistry, why would life ever develop to be silicon based or fluorine breathing when carbon and oxygen are so much more abundant? Due to how elements are formed, there will be no natural environment where any of the alternative elements that speculative forms of life use will be more common than oxygen, carbon, and nitrogen. Plus, there's plenty of silicon on Earth but it plays only a minor role in biochemistry. There are no rock monsters or crystal golems. Calcium is less abundant than silicon but life has made significantly more use of that.
There are speculative forms of life that use ammonia instead of water as a solvent or nitrous oxide instead of diatomic oxygen. Those are less outlandish, but still run into the troublesome matter of nitrogen chemistry. That's because diatomic nitrogen has a triple bond which makes it incredibly stable, meaning that nitrogen that's not in diatomic form really really wants to go back to its diatomic form. Explosively so, literally; most of the energy in gunpowder and explosives comes from nitrogen. Nitrogen is a crucial part of life; ATP is provides a lot of the energy in cells but too much nitrogen chemistry would likely be quite troublesome unless the temperature is low enough to make the rate of reaction of all the other chemistry quite slow.
Yep pretty much. And this also will pose A MASSIVE amount of problems for humans if they ever want to try and colonize other planets. This might be impossible to do because we are adapted to live on this specific planet, but as we can see on humans living here, just minimal differences in temperature or atmospheric pressure and particles in our atmosphere can totally mess with us.
I seriously doubt that we will ever truly get anywhere outside of the sol system.
The marketing team at Keeps must be high out of their minds if they think that a completely bald guy is going to help sell their hair loss prevention snake oil.
Yeah but his beard looks like it's on the Roids 😂
Re: MoND and Dark Matter, I highly recommend watching some of Angela Collier's videos. For example, she explains that dark matter isn't an explanation, it's a somewhat misleading name for a collection of OBSERVATIONS... and that we're still trying to pin down the explanation.
is she hot?
Not the latest space news but a collection of the most interesting!
Perfect production as always!
I ❤ it!
I don't think the Fermi paradox and Copernican principle are so incompatible. To me it just says we have a low sample size, and that makes it hard to figure out what the common elements are.
Kepler's third law works well for systems like our solar system because almost all the mass is concentrated in the central star, and gravity weakens with distance in a predictable way. In spiral galaxies, the situation is very different. Mass isn't just in the center. It's spread throughout the galaxy, including an invisible halo of dark matter. This dark matter changes how gravity works across the galaxy, keeping the stars in the outer arms moving at nearly the same speed as those closer to the center. Because of this, galaxies don't follow Kepler's laws the same way planets do in our solar system.
The biggest flaw with the Fermi paradox is the assumption that alien life would have our technology or better otherwise we're alone when radio is only about 150 years old and has only gotten good enough for long distance communication within the last 30 years or so. There's probably hundreds of thousands of stone-age-esk civilizations we just have to wait for.
The idea is if there are hundreds of thousands, SOME of them should have our technological capacity, and we do not find a trace. Indeed some of the great filters suggest that intelligent life will always eradicate itself.
well, all of these theories are just that... theories. they are made in desperate attemps of trying to make sense of something that we simply cannot solve, unless we get valid data. Everything before that is pure speculation, no matter how interesting or plausible it might sound. I am sure that flat earth and earth being the centre of the universe was all sounding plausible and cool back then, until it was disproven.
Especially with Fermi, we are looking at things that are vast with our massively limited and archaic tools, and most likely very imprecise scientific methods and mathematical and physics theories and make broad assumptions, by just looking at things that would suit us specifically, for wether a planet would be suitable for life just how it is on our planet, totally ignoring that there might actually be life in completely different forms that might not be made from carbon chains, but from something else, perhaps something we have just not seen on our own planet, but that exists outside of what we have yet encountered...
I’ve been watching too much decoding the unknown cuz it’s weird to hear Simon read more than one sentence without going off on some tangent…
original tangent channel is allegedly Brain blaze
@@pretzelgtr Alegendly...
Honestly I prefer the channels where he includes the tangents and his own thoughts, it's more fun. Just reading a script gets dry
@@aneasteregg8171same, for the most part! CC and DTU win though, because podcasts I can listen to in the car... I wish Into the Shadows was podcasted too
@@aneasteregg8171 I like both
(10:18) "WHAT IS THE GREAT ATTRTACTOR?" 😂🤣😂🤣😂
Lmao @ 'Attrtactor'. From now on, I'm going to pronounce the word 'attractor' as "attrtactor" (pronounced: atter-tack-ter) 😂
i like all your vids, but the last and 2nd to last chapters of this one were a fantastic 1 - 2 punch. really got me thinking, i appreciate it. hope you're having a great day.
Do i think there is extraterrestrial life out there somewhere? Yes. Do i think we will ever find them? No, at least not in our lifetimes and perhaps not ever.
we might detect electromagnetic signals sent by a very extinct civilization a billion years ago.
10:18 Dude, did someone fall asleep at the keyboard? 😂
😂😂
I see SO MANY comments about how we are not seeing technological civilizations simply because they haven’t had time to develop yet, or that we are not looking in the right places to be unscientific. Science is not making assumptions and then stating that it’s true, it is about stating an idea and then looking for evidence. If you don’t find the evidence for it, either your assumption is untrue, or your technique is flawed. You DON’T say, “Well, there are PROBABLY many civilizations out there, but we simply haven’t found them.” You say, “We have no evidence for technological civilizations at this time, and may never, so for now, we must assume that we are alone until shown otherwise.” That doesn’t mean you stop looking. It means that you don’t assume that they are there, and you simply haven’t found them.
Niel Degrass Tyson summed up his take on the fermi paradox with one with one question. "if you were to take a cup of water from the ocean, and it contained no whales, should we instantly assume there are no whales?" sheer fact that there is a virtual horizon beyond which we know nothing about, only makes this more poignant.
Also, just because we can’t detect it, it doesn’t mean it isn’t there… Or hasn’t been there in the past… Or won’t be there in the future.
Professor Tyson have only so much time to popularize science, so maybe he doesn't want people to focus on something that unimportant. The real scale of Fermi paradox cannot be adequately describe in such analogy. Think about that this way, for example.
The process of living matter originating from non-organics is not very well researched, because it happen, like 4 billion years ago. We have some ideas, how it could happen, but we probably will never know how exactly it did. What we don't know is any particular thing, that would make it difficult on Earth-like planet. You have an Earth-like planet (with water, atmosphere, and temperate climate in parts, basically) - give it a billion years or so and you should have life on it, or so it seems.
Now, there are statistically about 8 billion Earth-like planets in our galaxy, the Milky Way. That seems like a lot, until you realize, that they actually pop up with a rate of about one every 5 years (just years here) or so, which mean that there were more of them in the past. Now, the universe is 14-something billion years old, and our galaxy is not much younger. Some people will point out, that first stars had no planet and they had to die before planet would appear. Yes, but first stars were supermassive and had different stuff in them, so their lifetime was literally dozens of millions of years. We, with all our limitation, already found planets, which age is more than 10 billion years (e.g. PSR B1620−26 b).
So not only we should have a bunch of people around now (we might indeed be not able to detect them if we imagine that they are on the same technological level), but we should have absolute bunch of people with billions upon billions years head-start upon us. And we are only, like, 150 thousand years old. These guys should be flying around, spreading radiation with their fancy drives like nobody's business, and building Dyson spheres and whatnot everywhere. And where are these? We observe not a tiniest trace of them for dozens of thousands of light years around us for dozens of thousands of years back in time.
1 billion seconds is 32 years. Imagine, what several billion civilizations developing for several billion years should produce. And compare it to deafening silence we witness. That is why a lot of scientist find Fermi paradox disconcerting.
Yes, I remember this..
😃
Don't listen to that man. He's no better than the homeless nutters.
also, Tyson is a rabid lunatic. just saying.
Combine the rare earth theory with the possibility that faster than light travel is truly impossible, and it might be that there is life out there, but we’ll never find it.
Couple that with interstellar travel might also be impossible for us life forms due to some unknown reason we haven't discovered yet, Like artificial gravity might not be the key we think it is. Or we need some magic secret sauce that only inner star systems can provide to survive. Which leads to ask why haven't we seen machine tech life forms then yet? Or maybe faster then light communications is also impossible rendering any advanced civilizations to stay close together until absolutely necessary to move on.
I think a better qustion is why haven't they found us?
von Neumann probes
@@facetubetwit1444 if I didn't misunderstand how cables work, ftl communication is technically possible, but it would require a connected wire to whatever we're communicating with. Because when the electrons in a wire push on eachother all of them push on eachother at once, meaning the end of the wire moves at the same time as the start. The information essentially doesn't have to travel any distance.
Wireless on the other hand would be limited by the speed of causality (light). Communicating with people on Mars would already be hit with long delays. We're talking about having to wait almost half an hour on the phone to get an answer because it takes fifteen minutes for your message to get to them and fifteen more to get back to you.
@@johnbox271 first born hypothesis? It could be there wasn't enough metal (in the astronomical sense) for life to exist. And we're just early to the party.
Ah yes another existential quandary to add to my list of Things I Am Displeased To Read About™
This was really good episode thank you. That’s giving me a lot of food for thought!
0:18
It's been a long road,
Getting from there to here.
It's been a long road. But my time is finally here.
Stroking it while watching this video and reading this comment
@@MORE_BEANS_PLZ horny jail. You're going to horny jail
Worst theme song ever.
watching for a while now, recent subscriber. You speak so well, and of course it doesn't hurt that your topics are fascinating! Keep up the good work and I'll be tuning in.
Ever thought the gravitational pull might be the universal "sink drain" and we're swirling into it?
No becayse that would go against all observable evidence.
Change gravitational pull with dark energy and you might have a leg to stand on there
where is it draining to, in your model?
@@micahfoley9572 the great attractor?
@@cmecre8629 yeah yeah, that's the drain, but i'm more wondering about the pipe and where they think it goes. cuz you hear people talk about "outside" or" before" the universe, and setting aside that such a thing is essentially impossible as far as we know, it's always interesting to hear what people think that would entail.
5:15 "This particle would interact with mass, and therefore gravity, but not with light. A behavior that we've yet to see elsewhere."
I see what you did there writer
explain pls
@@stereo-soulsoundsystem5070photons (light particles) interact with everything else, that's how we "see". That's the joke. The only thing photons don't interact with is with other photons, but as they don't have any mass, the joke still stands.
Indeed, the entire foundation of the concept of 'dark matter' and 'dark energy' were that the simulations we made did not match what we observed in the real world. The math had a gap.. as if there were missing mass. However, humans being human, egos sort of took the wheel and named it 'dark matter' as a catchy term that didn't imply that physicists didn't have the complete understanding of the universe. The problem is, that this has focused so much energy, perception and even new students into this concept that there must be some physical thing that we haven't discovered, and very little effort on 'Where does our understanding go wrong?', when that is indeed, what started the whole topic.
As an engineering student in a school with a strong physics group, it was very frustrating to talk amongst the physics department about how things worked, because it was all about 'oh this is too complex' when it was more like they didn't know either. So much focus about finding new particles and the like, that no one wanted to focus on sorting out where the math went wrong. That's why MOND isn't popular... it starts with the assumption that the physics world isn't perfect, and digs into our flaws.
Granted, it very well could be a combination of gaps in the math and new particles or phenomenon we've not yet discovered. But the problem is mostly one of the culture of science these days and the lack of interest and funds to scrutinize what we base our foundations on. Maybe it's just that I've spent my whole career in safety-critical work, where mistakes cost lives, and being skeptical is a way of life. But hopefully some of these new discoveries by JWST showing that no, a singularity is not infinitely small, will get more people back into looking at the less sexy work of checking our assumptions.
I loved the slow pan to the alien in the corner 😂
Time for our brains to become ever more wrinkly
*gray matter jiggling intensifies*
With our host Simon "Brain wrinkler" Whistler
I have gained another wrinkle...
... My brain must be full, they're forming on my face instead.
Psh speak for yourself, my brain is smooth af. 😎
Unlike some other TH-cam channels I can actually understand Simon, so clear and concise, rather like SciShow. I also don’t think he’s nuts :)
Harambe in 2016 “Listen kid I haven’t got much time, the great attractor is….”
I am just waiting for humanity to find a monolith either here on Earth, Luna, or Mars so we can figure out which timeline we're in.
For those who don't know:
in Dead Space, humanity finds a monolith while excavating the impact crater in Mexico, which helped humanity advance technologically.
in Mass Effect, humanity finds the Prothean ruins on Mars, which helped humanity advance technologically.
in 2001: ASO, humanity finds the monolith on Luna, causing humanity to build a ship capable of travelling to Europa to investigate the message they received from said monolith.
Cool and all, but we've gone over every centimeter of Earth's surface. So, the bottom of our Oceans or subterranean.
@@helloidharbl6753 You understand just how meaningless your response is? Nobody thought the Mayans had built highways between their cities until just a couple years ago when they used a satellite equipped with lidar to penetrate the dense jungle to look for any potential lost Mayan ruins.
@@DKforever24 Well then that's why we'll always need people like you who are willing to take that second look at something we think we know everything about.
An old saying comes to mind: "Can't see the forest for the trees". That can be interpreted several ways of course but in the case of exploration, maybe we're not seeing the big picture because of the vast amount of little things to sift through.
I love that keeps continues sponsoring him 😂
The assumption that large-scale cosmological structures are affected entirely by gravity and have net-zero charge is not necessarily valid, and we really have very little way of testing it at great distances. Electromagnetism is so strong compared to gravity, that even a slight net charge in the solar wind compared to stars/planets could lead solar systems to bond with each other like atoms, or at least experience Van Der Waals style attractions.
Fantastic episode! Thank you so much to Simon et al for putting together this deep dive into some really interesting science!!! ❤
Hello, Simon,
Best Wishes from NY.
As much as I am a fan of your great, informative and very entertaining science episodes, they also serve an important "off-label" benefit:
Your genteel and fine narration feel like visiting with an old and trusted friend.
Thanks for all of the wonderful work you do!
Art Donovan
Southampton
I was driving by our local Taco Bell and this chick “walked” out the door…I know for a FACT that I single handily found The Great Attractor.
Great video, as usual. One observation: "Unique" is unique. There is no "more unique" or "less unique," than this or that. There is only "unique" by itself: it either is or it isn't. Unique is and absolute. And, of course, among trillions and trillions of galaxies, each of them containing from tens of billions to hundreds of billions of stars, chances for a few worlds pretty much like ours are not low, but shoot up into the millions, at the very least. The Milky Way alone contains more than 100 billion stars. We may be a Black Swan in our little pond in our vast Milky Way island, but with 100 million ponds to check in this island chances are there will be more black swans out there. Unique? Hardly.
Whenever i hear about the Great Attractor i always feel like its the start of a 'your mum' joke?
13:25 hes talking about me ❤
The alien sighting has me weak! I didn't click on this to laugh, but damn, I'm dying. Well played editor.
Great episode!
I've heard the unusual rotation of galaxies used as the basis for the theory of dark matter but what I'd like to have explained to me is how we're been able to observe any galaxy long enough and precisely enough to even be able to notice something unusual about it's rotation.
20:46 We also have Theia to thank for doubling up our iron core. We’re one planet, with two cores worth of iron.
Without the impact of Theia and Pre-Theia Earth, we wouldn’t have as strong of a magnetic sphere. We are also the densest planet in the solar system.
Theres a few possibilities when it comes to the question 'are we alone in the universe?'
1. We are alone (not likely)
2. We are not alone but our alien neighbours are in a similar level of technology to us
3. We are not alone but our alien neighbours view us as to primitive to interact with
4. We are not alone but alien life don't even know we're here
Galaxies pulled towards a point in the universe. I feel a "Your momma" joke coming up.
Th Keeps promo you put at th start of this video was brilliant, funny, and very well done. Kudos.
The great attractor has been one of my fave mysteries.
The beard length difference between the video and the advert is crazy 🤣
I really enjoyed this video.
18:35 THEY 👽 ARE 👽 ALWAYS 👽 WATCHING 👽
"[...] this particle would interact with mass and therefore gravity but not with light, a behavior that we've yet to see elsewhere."
Neutrinos only interact with gravity and the weak force, not with electromagnetism (photons, i.e. light) or the strong force.
Simon is a great narrator, and he picks interesting subjects which keeps people coming back to his channel(s). It's difficult to not use every superlative when describing his work. Having said that, Simon does make mistakes and, in this case, it's the mistake of assumption. This is going to sound nick picky (and it is) but Simon assumes the world's brightest minds are working in science, they are not. Simon calls space exploration the "last frontier", it ain't. Other than that, it's another brilliant video in a very long time of brilliant videos.
The Great Attractor is truly powerful since it managed to pull all Simon's hair.
😂😂 Simon !!! The keeps, is for your head mate! ❤❤❤😂
It still feels like it's more likely that we just don't understand all of the math than there being some magical material that we can't see... :P
Regarding discussion at ~5:00, if the center of spiral galaxies are massive black holes, or a singular massive black hole, would not the time distortions make the inner galaxy appear to move or rotate more slowly than the outer?
The MONDS theories have already been dismantled in a pair of studies released last month. Anton Petrov covered it
I think gravity scales in a way we don't understand yet. More likely than invisible matter.
MOND theories modify the strength of gravity at different accelerations - but they can't move the center of mass to make gravity's arrow point in other directions away from the visible matter, as the Bullet Cluster suggests.
Unsolved Space Mysteries: A bald man promoting a shampoo.
I always had the problems with axions that if they have very small masses, anything that gives them energy will tend to make them shoot at a velocity just short of light in a vacuum, like neutrinos. Thus there would have to be a force making them stick together, but we're eliminating the forces that could do that.
I want these mysteries to be solved ASAP.
The Great Attractor is no longer considered a mystery. It is essentially the gravitational center of a massive supercluster known as the Laniakea Supercluster.
if there is life out there, its likely not technologically advanced enough or has such different mechanics we cant detect them and they cant detect us, or they're just far away. like the other side of the galaxy, or hell probably a different galaxy.
I imagine if we ever make contact with more intelligent life than us and we try to explain our theories of dark matter to them, they will laugh their alien asses off at us 😅
We all know that Oumuamua was an extraterrestical spaceship, which was inbound to visit us... but then they received EM transmissions, which they turned out to be a TV broadcast of the Twilight Saga. I would hit the pedal to the metal too in that case.
This is the episode ya show yer mates. Perfection!
We're still in the infancy of our ability to develop detection technologies. It's reasonable to say there's a whole lot we just aren't able to see yet.
I think having the diversity of life and environments we do was the crucial element for our level of intelligence, especially life above ground and not underwater. It required life to be prepared for many more things that other environments don't require.
KEEPS is a brand name for Minoxidil. Minoxidil has been since long before Simon was born. So it was around before he lost his hair. When he started losing his hair, one would think he would use whatever the cutting edge chemical hair product is available. That being Minoxidil, does that mean he just let his hair go or that minoxidil doesn’t work?
It's a fridge magnet.
i always thought the great attractor was a “come hither” smile
Concerning Dark Matter - our galaxy, and most others, are contained within megastructures. Dyson swarms of absolute enormity.
"We can lick gravity, but sometimes the paperwork is overwhelming."
-- Wernher von Braun
How Simon keeps coming up with new material is a mystery...
I’d love to hear you talk about Turoks big bang is a mirror work.
Very interesting-thank you
This should be on the Main Channel. Brilliant content!
Is that a joke I don't get? What do you think the "main channel" is?
@@cheekyb71You haven't found his main channel yet? Oh my Gosh, you've got to! It brings together the best parts of all the others.
Commenting for the algorithm. Love this topic!
***shows New York*** “about the size of a skyscraper”
We all know what you meant there Simon 😂
CDM gives me feelings like the "Space" we inhabit is like a fluid and galaxies are floating along the currents.
Ah, for four or five decades I've believed that it will be a watershed event when we understand the relationship between mass and gravity, possibly resulting in anti/null-gravity devices, tractor beams, etc... and even FTL travel?
It is funny to say "we aren't seeing [alien] technology floating around" at 19:00, right after explaining away Oumuamua's characteristics without any explanations that hold water.
You effectively demonstrate the widespread impulse to cram the subject back into a comfortable box. It seems smarter to me to acknowledge that we don't have any good explanations for the evidence without deciding that means it is aliens. Oumuamua's velocity before falling into the Sun's gravity field is very curious, the range in it's albedo was extremely unusual, and it's acceleration away from the sun is hard to explain, especially for a tumbling object. That is not even odd compared to the 'tic-tac incident'.
When he mentioned red dwarf stars, who else started singing, 🎶"It's cold outside; there's no kind of atmosphere..."🎶
"As our circle of knowledge expands, so does the circumference of darkness surrounding it. Learning, studying, shedding light on a field of inquiry also reveals just how in the dark we continue to be. How many shadowy things there are left for us to illuminate. The diameter of light never exceeds the shadowy circumference." - Vsauce, Michael here. 'What Is The Speed of Dark' video
Every time he says dark matter they meen " no clue" 😂😂😂
This would be the best simulation video game ever!!
Side projects, huh? What a great name to grab!
Just to add to Simon’s doom and gloom for today, taking our own history for example, what happens when a technologically advanced society encounters a less advanced society???
Now imagine that on a planetary scale!!
magnetic fields are the reason stars towards the edge of galaxies move faster than expected
Even if life is commonplace, civilisations can come and go over unfathomably long timescales. Each simply missing each other by a million years or so, passing each other between ticks of the clock.
Couple that with looking from our little spec to find signs of technology that we can comprehend…
Howdy from Temple, Texas, USA!
People, Simon is the Great Attractor.
The great attractor is the singularity at the center of the black hole that our universe is inside of.
I have always thought the universe would make a lot more sense if it wasn't for us existing.
Skip to 2:30 if you care about your life