Recycling the ISS, Artificial Meteor Storms, Can Hubble See JWST | Q&A 188

[@da1otta]

Imagine your refrigerator was 30 years old. Imagine your car was 30 years old. I don't have to. 😭

[@ccchhhrrriiisss100]

Q: Fraser, do planetary alignments (like the current alignment of five planets in our solar system) create any sort of impact on the Earth's climate? Could such alignments potentially affect the climate and hasten the impact of climate change on our planet?

[@rhoddryice5412]

No. The Sun is 99.86% of the total mass and Jupiter is over 70% of the rest of the mass in our Solar System. And if we add the mass of Jupiter and Saturn they make up over 90% of the rest of the mass. Every other object in our Solar System is basically insignificant.

[@rhoddryice5412]

@Tom's Cubes you have no idea what you are ranting about.

[@Thomas.Delacour]

@@rhoddryice5412 what does 'basically insignificant' mean? I think it is you who doesn't know what you're talking about. Proximity of Mars and Venus means their gravity measurably affects Earth, while Jupiter's distance means it has less, but still some, effect.

[@ccchhhrrriiisss100]

My question is based upon a study that I read a few years ago about the effects of gravitational tugs by outer planets (and nearby Venus) on the climates of Earth, Mars, etc. I cannot post the link to an article about it from USA Today, but the title of the article (that I believe is based upon the paper that I read) is "Weird but true: Orbits of Jupiter and Venus affect Earth’s climate, new study says." So, my question for Frasier Cain is whether or not planetary alignments -- like the current five-planet alignment -- might affect the climate exponentially. There was a special alignment during the 1970s into the 1980s (upon which the Voyager flyby routes were chosen). Would such alignments hasten climate change?

[@Thomas.Delacour]

@@rhoddryice5412 rant /rant/ verb speak or shout at length in an angry, impassioned way. "she was still ranting on about the unfairness of it all" I don't think he was angry or passionate.

[@WilliamDye-willdye]

I often complain about KZbin, but credit where it's due, the addition of links to specific questions makes Q&A videos much easier to scan through. Otherwise I probably would've skipped this video, and missed out on the important (to me) topic or lunar construction equipment.

[@ajhuredreams]

I loved the [Coruscant] question. Your answer set my imagination on fire!

[@realzachfluke1]

[Corellia] gets my vote. Loved the question AND the answer 🌌😎

[@michaelfried3123]

Sadly, not everyone here is really interested in science...and prefer dumbed down philosophy masquerading as science.

[@paulwalsh2344]

Corellia I have an immediate answer to that question of where in the galaxy I'd go if I could be "transported" for a day... to somewhere much much closer to a spectacular nebula like the Orion or Horse Head nebula... like... within the tenuous nebulosity to see if it looked like those magnificent Sci-Fi paintings from on those old SF novel covers from Angus McKie ! That would be so cool !

[@ioresult]

Corellia. Standing on the edge of the 20km high cliffs on Miranda. Walking by a nitrogen geiser on Triton. Watching Charon from a frozen methane hill on Pluto. Floating inside Saturn's B ring. The wonders of the solar system make me dream. Imagine the rest of the galaxy. We get a taste in SpaceEngine, but doing it for real? Wow.

[@AnonymousFreakYT]

Naboo - One also possibility is that the "wrap-around" is beyond our light horizon.

[@Yora21]

Yes, that's considered a possibility.

[@boredgrass]

@ Best question: Coruscant.

[@TexasNightRider]

Great informative video. Thank you.

[@Raz.C]

re - Kamino I like to think that I can answer the question "What lies beyond the observable universe?" More universe! It's not like 'The Man Behind The Curtain' is hiding just beyond the observable limits. Beyond the limits of the observable universe is just MORE universe.

[@Raz.C]

Geonosis gets my vote for _Best Question._ I have to ask a follow up; Could there be unforeseen 'side-effects' to dumping tons of sand into a decaying orbit? Could a large static-electricity charge build up in the upper atmosphere as a result? Could such a charge build up more and more energy and then release it all (or release some portion of it) as an EMP? I mean, have we ever done anything like this before? Have we spent any real time and effort into analysing what unforeseen events might err... eventuate as a result? Could all the sand particles trickling through the atmosphere affect climate change in any way? And so on and so forth...

[@dougsinthailand7176]

Hey, I got a question. With a rotating space station, would the gyroscope effect make its axis point towards the earth as it orbits, or towards the sun or something? Would it start to wobble if someone unbalanced it by walking from one point to another? Thanks!

[@dropshot1967]

I always love these Q&A's

[@cavemaneca]

In this episode, you answered a question about a stellar gravitational telescope. What are your thoughts on some similar proposals for the "Terrascope", a telescope using the atmospheric lensing of the earth? What would we be able to see with it that we couldn't see with other current telescope technology?

[@connerwalsh1257]

Watch the Cool Worlds channel. He has a great video on it

[@sgtcrash4775]

The question I never knew I had ... thanks

[@kevincarla1612]

Frazer I hope this is not foolish questions How does hubble know which direction is the beginning of the universe and which direction of the universe that's expanding ? Q2 If the universe is expanding does that mean galaxy will eventually fall apart?

[@MNbenMN]

The universe is in all directions, and so is its beginning. Doesn't matter which way you look, you are looking back in time. Same thing with expansion, it's not in any preferred direction, instead everything appears to be just getting generally spread out over time. If space itself is expanding and has always been, then everywhere was all the same place going back far enough. So, here there anywhere, it would all be the same exact place at the beginning of big bang cosmology.

[@kevincarla1612]

@@MNbenMN thanks for the answer but it’s confusing that the beginning is in all directions and the expansions also … I’m so confused

[@MNbenMN]

@@kevincarla1612 Maybe you are trying to think of locations as being timeless, or of there being some time scale independent of specific reference frames? Either way you have to (at least temporarily) abandon those Newtonian concepts to make sense of spacetime in light of general relativity. Even though Newtonian ideas fit common sense and work well in day to day experience, common sense is not developed to consider the very large, very small, very short timespans, or extremely long timespans. Or, to quote doc Brown from Back to the Future III, "You're just not thinking 4th dimensionally!" A simpler way to think of it may be just to say the direction to the beginning is only backward in time, not anywhere specific in space, and the expansion is intrinsic to space itself; in other words, the positions/locations/reference frames themselves are getting farther apart, not necessarily things moving apart to new locations.

[@jorgemiranda6417]

You're the best. I saw a video from Anton saying that the picture of the black hole in the middle of the galaxy was probably wrong because of the data that they used. What do you think?

[@frasercain]

I haven't looked into this yet, but I trust Anton. :-)

[@Halum11]

I am also interested in seeing what he has to say about it, seems like Anton is the only science communicator who has covered it..

[@daveblackford6097]

@@frasercain I have had two experiences myself, one of which was up close, and I'd say quite profound. In both cases, I can say I didn't see a proverbial, "Proudly made at Utopia Planitia Yards Starfleet", logo, so I can't claim what I saw was alien in origin, but as an amateur astronomer, I've got to wonder.

[@pasqualeredo]

Boosting the ISS to a 1000 kM orbit so it would theoretically remain in orbit for DECADES without the need (and expenditure) to boost it, getting the most use out of it for the initial cost of designing, launching, building and assembly, maintenance, technological upgrades, etc... The main issue I see with this plan (which looks good at first glance until you analyze the mission in detail) is I think such an orbit would clearly put the ISS well into the Van Allen Radiation Belts endangering the lives and safety of the crew and the station for not just the obvious reasons (the exposure to ionizing radiation), but statistically,the stress and aging of the station would make the rendering it useless as a manned space station

[@greggweber9967]

Lack of orbital maintenance is bringing it down. How many times someone said that X is too far gone and we'll have to raze it to build my fancy project? Turn it into denser blocks of elements, change inclination to a standardized orbit so others can access, utilize, and leave it.

[@l.baileyjean3719]

It seems incredibly difficult to expect to use asteroids to change the orbit of the earth, in order of elongating the inevitability of being eaten up by a dying star([our] sun).

[@HillOrStream]

Enough of an astroid to make a difference would be a mass extinction event.

[@peterb9038]

[Corellia] Hello Fraser, I enjoyed your interview with Dr White about his research into the Alcubierre warp drive tech. You inspired me to ask a question after you mentioned the Fermi paradox question to Dr White, ie: "if warp drive tech is possible then where are the visitors?". However there was a part of the interview where Dr white and yourself proposed that there is no upper limit to the speed of compressing and expanding space that we know of and therefore instantaneous travel may be a possibility anywhere in the entire universe. My question is this, if the universe is so large and the Alcubierre warp drive can go anywhere instantaneously then the chances of finding another warp capable civilisation are close to zero, in fact the bigger the universe the less likely it is for civilisations to find each other. The reason for this is that there is no time spent on the travel and therefore, you are unlikely to bump into anyone. The way to think of this is say there is an infinite room of boxes, but a finite amount of objects to put in the boxes, therefore the amount of boxes that have something in them are close to zero. Each time you go to a box there is very little chance of it not being empty even if there are billions of objects in boxes in this room. Do you think there could be massive space empires that are just so diffused and undetectable because now the distance from the home world means nothing, civilisations wouldn't need massive structures or mega cities or any kind of easy detectable structures, because space and resources are limitless, if you want a world or galaxy to yourself, no problem?

[@Yora21]

"We missed the party" To quote Barry: "Not really a party. There's a good chance we will die."

[@boredgrass]

On phone Upper corner left: Credit for visual, upper corner right text popups: "Nope" and "Oh he got it right". unless one of those is the code, none code on my screen! does it only appear during the live stream?

[@realzachfluke1]

lol just wait until the first question is brought up and you'll see the code pop up in that same spot in the upper right corner. The first one is Tatooine, the second question's code is Coruscant, the third's is Hoth, etc.

[@metaqllica1]

#hoth I would love to see them retro purpose the ISS. Instead of leaving go to waste

[@frasercain]

It would be cool, and maybe it Starship works, there'll be a way to do it. But it's a machine, and it's getting old and run down. At a certain point it's not worth trying to maintain it.

[@paulhatfield1333]

Hi Fraser. In a double-star system, would it be possible for a planet to have a figure-8 orbit around both of its suns?

[@Yora21]

I think I once heard about such an orbit being mathmatically possible. Really curious if it could exist for real.

[@dkq2k]

Hello I have a Question : Can the solar wind transfer atmosphere from one planet to another. For example if one planet suddenly loses its magnetic field and it start loosing molecules to space can the next planet in line pick them up and change its chemical composition ?

[@MeridianDellerus]

We know that the black hole at the center of Milky Way is actually oriented roughly north pole towards us. How can we then explain the two lobes appearing to the "north" and "south" of the Milky Way? More importantly, if the BH becomes "active" for some reason, what kind of danger would we be in? Would the jet aim towards us or would it still to to the "north" and "south" of the galaxy?

[@IARRCSim]

5:25 to 5:35 Pluto wouldn't disappear if it moved to between Earth and Mars. It would get a tail and lose a lot of mass from outgassing but its rocky core would remain after nearly all the water evaporates and escapes its gravity. How much remains would depend on the size of that rocky core. The rocky core could be anywhere from a tiny fraction of Pluto's radius to 70% of its radius. If you were looking from the Earth, the comet-like tail would be far brighter shortly after it starts than the asteroid-like rocky core but the rocky core will be detectable with a telescope after it is over.

[@mralekito]

Could we do the Hohmann transfer to Mars in reverse? Send a spacecraft backwards so it meets Mars on the way to earth?

[@echo1271]

Question. People born on Earth are Teran. If you were born on another planet, you would be of that planet... Martian, Jovian. Venucian etc.. But what if you were born on the moon of a planet, for instance, if you were born on the moon, would you be Teran. If you were born on Enceladus, would you be Jovian? I tried to not make this about Human Rights, PC, Morality etc, but I suppose they would be issues here too.

[@frasercain]

I'd assume you'd be Enceladun. Or Europan.

[@michaelpaul5040]

With exemptions, but, of course.

[@seditt5146]

29:00 That has always been something I wanted to crowd fund :D . Tiny marbles or sand with different chemical compositions. It would be amazing. Light pollution would not be an issue.

[@cannes76]

How do we enter in questions for the next Q&A? My quesstion would be: When the astronomers look at and talk about the big eliptical galaxies. They observe that star formation has stopped. Won't they eventually undergo gravitational collapse into discs and the gas cool off so star formation can restart?

[@adrianmillard6598]

Question: How do we know that the density at the center of a black hole is infinite? If there is a finite amount of mass in a black hole and two black holes can have a different amount of mass, how can they both have infinite density? Or for that matter, how can either of them have infinite density?

[@ClimbingGuy123]

Question: As we know, solar sails can be an effective method of transport through space. Photons carry momentum and this momentum transfer is what accelerates the vessel. Is this same momentum and force conveyed on the light emitter itself? And if so, is there any viability to accelerate a vessel by essentially emitting light out the back of the vessel. If this force is not generated, is it viable to fire ones own lasers at ones own solar sail to propel through space, to essentially blow your own sail. If viable, this would only require large amounts of energy to propel a vessel rather than a solid fuel

[@_RedWizard]

Hey Frasier, couldn't we just bolt a few ion engines onto the hull of the ISS and power them with a big solar array to prevent orbital decay? They could provide near constant thrust indefinitely. A more extreme solution could be using a nuclear thermal rocket.

[@frasercain]

ISS is old and getting run down mechanically. Astronauts have to spend more and more time maintaining it. Even if you could move it to a higher orbit, it'll be approaching 30 years old in a few years.

[@SeaTacDelta]

Interesting thread of questions at the beginning of the video about the universe being in/finite. If the universe was finite and wrapped in on itself, would we even be able to recognize our own planet if we saw it? It could be many billions of years ago. Some plain rock with a bit of cyanobacteria or maybe even just a bunch of rocks and dust orbiting a typical, young, G type star, or even just a large cloud of dust slowly gravitationally collapsing in on itself.

[@KGTiberius]

ISS - Proposal: salvage the truss/ arms and other structural components… de orbit the rest that isn’t shielded for the extra radiation. What would you consider saving? What would the cost be to raise that orbit to… say lunar orbit? (vs. launch of totally new replacement structural components)

[@DominikJaniec]

great story!

[@algiedejesus1635]

Thank you for doing this video I've learned a lot from you.

[@richmon78]

Alderaan. If alien communication were detected somewhere in the universe, then would setting up a solar gravitational lens dedicated to observing that region of space be a no brainer proposal in the next decadal survey? If not, then what are the proposals that the astronomical community would want to put some money behind regarding the discovery?

[@l.johnkellerii1597]

I have always wondered that, if the theory that Earth’s water came from comets, why did this not also occur on the other rocky planets?

[@DRArthur]

Lack of gravity coupled with low magnetic field protection from solar flares and solar winds!

[@SophiaAphrodite]

@@DRArthur among hundreds of other factors. As is assumed life is likely common on a universal scale but probably rare on a galactic one.

[@Lou-pi5tx]

are their any careers in space science? It’s one of the only major interests and hobbies I have

[@tjj300]

I think you misunderstood the [Naboo] question. I think he's asking, "since the universe was so much smaller then, would the image of an object from that early in the universe have grown proportionally as the universe expanded?" Personally, I say no, because like images drawn on a balloon, while they grow from an outside reference, all the measurement standards are also expanding, so inside the universe things always appear to be in the same scale.

[@OhFookinELL]

Loving this channel. Great videos.

[@greggweber9967]

Moon and Mars low gravity probably would affect bulldozer traction.

[@Yora21]

True, but I think the low gravity would also reduce the friction in the sand. It still could work, even if not as well as on Earth.

[@greggweber9967]

@@Yora21 At worst, /ent peg like spikes down deep to push against behind you and then pull them up and out.

[@aboudisamir89]

Are there any projects or technologies been worked or researched on for clearing up the Huge SPACE JUNK in our orbit?? I believe this is a serious problem and with the increasing size and number of the future space missions, it's not hard to think that it will get worse. Any ray of hope on this matter?? Thanks

[@kevinbealer6320]

I have always thought it was fairly obvious why the far side of the moon had more craters than our side; the moon is tidally locked to us, so we protect the moon from impacts on its closer side just as much as it protects us with its far side. But now it occurs to me that I don't actually know if the moon has been tidally locked to the Earth long enough for this to be a satisfactory explanation. Or if it has, why is my theory not correct?

[@Dth091]

RE: Pluto-comet's tail, since the tail's momentum will be radially outward from the sun (i.e. towards Mars' orbit) would the material be likely to collect onto the surface of Mars as it sweeps through the cloud of material? Would the material be more likely to just drift out and disperse?

[@siogyumolcs]

Wo-hoo, thx for shoutout

[@vertigo2893]

Frazer, since you get a lot of questions about UFOs and in particular those recently released navy video's, maybe point your viewers to Mick West's channel, as he gives some excellent, IMO indisputable explanations for most of them. Spoiler alert, its not aliens, the triangles are just stars, the shape is caused by the bokeh of a triangular iris on some night vision scopes, he even matches the video with the correct stars. The Gimbal "tictac F18" video is just a IR glare that appears to rotate because of how the gimbal tracking works internally. His videos are so convincing, its hard to understand how the navy did not figure this out. If anyone is looking for a conspiracy, then the conspiracy is how this ended up in congress. His channel kzbin.info He might be interesting to interview too. He has been on Joe Rogan, but I would prefer your interview I think :)

[@jimcabezola3051]

I really enjoy Mick West’s videos, too, and I’m subscribed. I actually DO think the Navy and such KNOW these are objects are every bit as prosaic and ordinary as we and Mick West think they are. The “problem” for the armed forces is that they have trained aviators that, for all the tremendous observational skills they have, are not infallible observers. Were I in the command structure, I’d be concerned that my pilots aren’t given all the tools to POSITIVELY identify these objects. These videos obtained by the NYT are all rubbish-quality material. They were obtained at least ten years after they were made; can you say “potato cam”? I can only hope that military aviators are given better training and are provided with better equipment with which to make observations. I’ve also considered the possibility that BETTER equipment HAS already been fielded… whose capabilities may be classified at this time. Who knows what footage will be leaked/stolen by the press in the future? These are interesting times.

[@vertigo2893]

@@jimcabezola3051 Its not equipment failure. If you look through nightvision goggles that are out of focus, you are going to see bokeh and the shape will depend on the iris shape. I can imagine someone buying his first night vision goggle being taken by surprise, but someone on the outlook on a warship presumably used it for longer than 10 minutes? And even if he didnt, someone else on that ship. or anyone all the way up through the chain of command surely has? How did that end up before congress? As for pilot videos; the IR ones, those pilots look at the same screen as we do. If that targeting pod is at maximum zoom, it isnt showing anything that would be visible with the naked eye. I think the issue here is mostly a form of confirmation bias. The "problem" is almost certainly with the ship radar was getting returns on some balloons or atmospheric phenomena (they didnt give us radar plots or data), but radar operators dont see the raw data, what they see is a game like screen after the signals are processed and "indentified" by computer algorithms which then show the operator something "weird", something that makes no sense - because its not real, because those algorithms arent perfect. Then jet fighters are scrambled to intercept that weird thing thats appearing and disappearing or making impossible moves, and so the pilots expect to see something weird. And then bubbles in the water from a feeding whale, or an IR glare that just happens to appear to rotate weirdly, well, their brain is primed to interpret that as the thing they where sent out to investigate.

[@zapfanzapfan]

Fraser did interview Mick West a little over a year ago. The chat was lively that day as I recall...

[@jimcabezola3051]

@@vertigo2893 Then... you bring up a scary point. I suppose that pilots can be taken aback by what they see in aircraft displays. Having serviced certain weapon systems in the 1980s, I can say that those systems were not of the highest resolution. My test equipment was developed decades before we had HDTV or HDR full colour pictures. That said, listening to the pilot chatter made me think that these people sounded young when these "events" took place. Maybe observational techniques and reactions to stimuli mellow with age. I doubt this old guy (pointing at myself) would yell, laugh, and joke around when seeing unfamiliar objects. I need to cut these young aviators some slack. Maybe the sensationalist mainstream media need to do the same before they go gassing on about UAP being controlled by ET.

[@jimcabezola3051]

@@vertigo2893 Two thumbs way up on the confirmation bias. Like those pilots, I, too, see what I want to see in my daily life. Hmmm... it appears I have a flair... for the boring and prosaic, 😆 🤣 😂!!

[@daviddziuk9806]

Maybe the question of whether the ISS can be recycled needs a bit more imagination. It seems to me we are still thinking with the "big lift" solution of moving stuff from the surface of the deep gravity well of the Earth when the long term future is in exploiting resources in smaller gravity wells in the outer solar system. This means finding the "tortoise" solution instead of using our "hare" based approach. While it may be too late to develop a system of ion drive space tugs to move masses like the ISS around in orbit, in a long term and far more efficient way than chemically fueled rockets can, I would think that the development of off Earth infrastructure for moving and recycling what we send from the surface might be a good idea. Though there are many issues involved in the development of space based industry it seems to me that the big problem is fuel and for anything to be economically feasible we need to find a way to provide a less expensive source than lifting chemical fuels from the planetary surface. All ion drive tugs would need, after placement in orbit, is a right kind of mass to use as a propellant and there is plenty of ices and gases in the outer solar system might meet this need through robotic mining and processing. Likely being a solution that is years, if not decades away, we need to looking at the feasibility of this now.

[@RyouConcord]

love your content thank you!

[@bmwolgas]

Kind of a follow-up question to the idea that we could use asteroids to push the earth further from the sun: If an alien civilization was doing this somewhere, would we be able to detect the larger orbit with each pass? This seems like a far more likely occurrence than say, a Dyson sphere - particularly if we target stars that are near their red giant phase.

[@PongoXBongo]

Lunar regolith is infamous for being hostile to both man and machine. Would it be possible/desirable to sort blast clean a portion of the Moon's surface before building a habitat? What might the Moon look like if we "dusted off" the whole thing?

[@injunsun]

@Fraser Cain, Two questions, wherein time isn't a worry. First question: If we could use self-replicating bots to go out to the Öort Cloud and the asteroid belt, using them to fling every comet and asteroid at Mars, would it add enough mass and water to make Mars habitable (after some obvious terraforming), once the dust settled? Others have said there's not enough mass in all that material to do more than increase Mars' mass by about 10%, and the water wouldn't be enough to make it anything like Earth, beyond helping warm the atmosphere by a few degrees, and only raising the pressure by a max of 25% or so. Second question: Could we "mine" enough of Venus' atmosphere, and fling it to Mars, to make both planets habitable?

[@frasercain]

What you're really asking is, could we magically change Mars to make it a better planet. Yes. If we thickened its atmosphere, it would warm up. If we increased its mass, it would be better. But nothing can fix its lack of an internal dynamo. It has 1/10th the mass of Earth. So any atmosphere you add will just get blown away by the solar wind again. If you could destroy Jupiter and tear out its guts, you'd have 10-30 times the mass of Earth in rocky material to make whatever you like. :-)

[@injunsun]

@@frasercain I didn't say anything magical. And I'm aware we would need to set up a magnetic shield to preserve the atmosphere. Duh. That's not hard to do. An array in space would work.

[@lordFields]

I've built myself a 5000m space telescope. In which direction do I have to look to see the big bang (or whats still visible from there very origin of the universe)?

[@zapfanzapfan]

Coruscant. Both Ceres and Vesta are inside (this side) of the frost line (at least present day, Ceres may have been just outside when it formed) so ice on the surface sublimates. Ceres seems to have had geysers of some sort relatively recently leaving salt behind (the bright dots) when the water evaporated.

[@ylette]

4:45 That title probably goes to me asking what the difference between space and outer space was.

[@DJMythadrall]

To solve the Mars dust storm issue, could a space elevator with solar panels be an answer?

[@michaelpaul5040]

So, are they saying that the flat earth belief might apply to these parallel universes?

[@davidarundel6187]

Where would I like to go off world - as long as myself could live long enough , without breaking down , I would like to see everything - the list of sights would grow , as the travels continued .

[@vincentcleaver1925]

I think you are missing the point of the ISS recycling question. We need to learn how to do all those things, and an electrodynamic tether would help boost the ISS to a new, higher, less precarious orbit

[@Jenab7]

My refrigerator is about 30 years old. I've heard the the US Housing & Urban Development department has refrigerators from the 1950s in their Section 8 housing for poor folks. They're still ticking along.

[@Yora21]

Why are both lightyears and parsecs used to measure interstellar distances? Are there different use cases where either unit is more useful?

[@frasercain]

Astronomers always use parsecs because the definition of a parsec more closely matches the way they make their observations. One parsec is gives you a 1-arcsecond angle at 1 AU of distance.

[@curtisspain7571]

Will the JWST be able to see an exoplanet around Proixma Sentarri ? Please excuse my poor spelling .

[@Disasterina]

I vote for Endor! Also, how big would a hollowed out asteroid have to be and how fast would it have to spin to recreate earth gravity on its inside wall?

[@TagiukGold]

No, you don't spin the hollow asteroid, its just shielding mass, and possibly counter mass to spin against. The tin can cylindrical habitat goes inside the hole and spins. But you want a radius of at least 1000 feet.

[@MNbenMN]

@@TagiukGold Right! The cylinder is the key! Spinning the asteroid itself that fast would tear it apart! For one earth gravity on the hollow inside, there would be more than that outward at the outside surface, and asteroids are mostly loosely held together boulders.

[@bravo_01]

Hi Fraser, have you done an interview with Scott Kelly ?

[@PhysicsNative]

Just found your channel. There is no “certainty” that quasars are powered by supermassive vacuum black holes. That has just become the consensus acceptance by a community of closed minded astrophysicists that have pushed the idea above others, and berating those with competing models. Due to the limited observability of these high redshift z objects there remains much uncertainty. Please don’t scare away the new generations that might want to do real physics, astrophysics to settle what is unsettled. We need better observation capability, better modeling , etc. There is NO certainty here!!!!

[@michaelfried3123]

there's a lot of philosophical rubbish masquerading as science in astrophysics these days. It's like the content providers wanna dumb everything down and play pretend with science.

[@nraynaud]

2 questions came to mind: - about the asteroid belt being at the frost line, is there a connection between the two? no clear mechanism comes to mind to make the asteroids loiter there. do they get their orbit bossted by vapor when they are too close to the sun and an orbit decay by collisions on the other sied? - about boosting the ISS to a higher orbit, there is energy in the ISS. Can we "just" bring some mass that would be expelled backwards at high velocity (I suppose it's a bit science-fictionny because in reallity we only know how to propel noble gasses with electriity)

[@raycornelius4654]

I would expect Pluto to have enough non volitols to leave behind a good size core.

[@rJaune]

People talk about uniting Relativity and Quantum Physics all the time. But what does it mean for the Universe if they don't connect? Does it break science?

[@MNbenMN]

They already don't connect. Science always has limits, but works well within them. The search for unification is about trying to find a new theory that agrees with all the same observations as quantum physics and general relativity, but it won't make them any less useful within their limits. For example, Netwton's law of gravity is still highly accurate for day to day engineering on human scales. We don't need to use GR to find the force due to gravity on a mass on the surface of the Earth. (In orbit, the difference becomes noticeable, though.) A unified theory would make predictions about things where quantum physics and GR disagree that would give us something to try to observe to verify the unified theory. Then we would eventually find limits to that theory, and repeat the search for something that explains even more. Science is an ongoing process.

[@KenMathis1]

Ever since I heard about the possibility of a solar gravitational lens, it has become my top explanation to the Fermi paradox. It would be far easier, and give far more timely results to use your local star as a sensor to the universe than to try to physically send craft to explore them. Also note that any physical exploration would take hundreds to hundreds of thousands of years. What technology could last that long unattended and still work when it reaches its destination?

[@vertigo2893]

Its not really an answer to the fermi paradox, though it might explain why we see no von neumann probes. My personal belief is that Frazer's assumption that a civilization's energy consumption will continue going up exponentially indefinitely, is incorrect and therefore there are no Dyson speres that we would be able to detect. This indefinte exponential energy usage growth is an assumption is based on a sample of one that is ridiculously early on the Kardashev scale. Already we see that progress is no longer measured by how much energy we use, but rather how efficiently we use it. I think its very likely a civilization expansion will be bottlenecked by something other than energy usage, long before they consume a decent fraction of a star's energy output.

[@KenMathis1]

@@vertigo2893 Completely agree. I got carried away with my love of the solar gravitational lens, and made it too simplistic of an answer. I've also had the problem with futurist predictions that rely on infinite progress, and naively extrapolating current trends indefinitely. There is an upper limit to knowledge and progress, and we are already starting to bump up against it. There is an absolute speed limit of light. Populations stabilize and even contract as they get more advanced. The standard model and general relativity do actually explain the vast majority of the things that could possibly interact with things at the human scale. Civilizations must adapt to use renewable energy if they are to progress many thousands of years after industrialization. Those limits and more are why I don't think it's likely that we'd easily be able to detect other intelligent civilizations. In addition to no physical evidence from von neumann probes, they wouldn't have an external footprint large enough for us to detect. They also are not going to be beaming a signal directly at earth for the millions of years needed for us to advance enough to see them. Passively scanning the galaxy and universe is the best possible way to explore it. Only when they detect signs that an intelligent civilization advanced enough to receive and understand a signal would they send one, and on galactic time scales, the earth has only just very recently been able to do that. Btw I have criticisms of an AI singularity for similar reasonings. There are too many bottlenecks and intellectual limits for an AI to have a runaway cognitive ability.

[@Roland14d]

04:35 01: If we had the ability to move Pluto/Charon (P/C) to the inner system, wouldn't we have the ability to set up a Sun Shield as well? That would deal with the off-gassing issue. 02: Even with the loss the lighter gasses, since Pluto is about 1/3 water, would the water also be loss? If so, how long before we're left with a Ceres size rock? 03: Given the amount of water & methane on P/C, this would seem to be an excellent terraforming resource for Mars, Luna, and other bodies. If the sun shield had a focusing lens, all that CH4 could relatively cheaply be converted into hydrogen fuel and carbon reaction mass. Not efficient but cheap and plentiful within it's environment. Instead of moving Pluto sun-ward, perhaps we could hollow it out and build a propulsion system on it and make it one of Issac Arthur's crawlonization ships?

[@mohdmohsin6381]

If an astroid on a course to hit the earth how current astronomy gonna deal with it ? Had watched a lot of movies about it just curious to know what is our capability to deal with such situation

[@shayanirenberg3294]

One thing I don’t understand is why do missions die if they lose solar power. Why can’t the mission wake back up when the sun comes back just divert a bunch power to the heaters and start back up?

[@frasercain]

The cold temperatures kill their battery. They need a little bit of electricity to run their battery heaters.

[@Yora21]

I think there have been a few cases on Mars where probes shut down because the solar panels were covered in sand, but could then restart when the sand was blown off quickly enough.

[@arthur_stephens]

My favorite Q&A was [Jedha].

[@professortweekfreebee8902]

Do we have an gravitational lens telescope at all ?

[@gueranjones6719]

What kind of rare minerals are found on the moon or on comets? Not found on earth?

[@elementus2857]

Could we use a hollow Starship as a large space telescope? What sort of resolution could we get from a telescope that size in space?

[@istvansipos9940]

for the time being (my bet: for many many years), we cannot use any kind of starship. She is not even in L.E.O. yet. and IF we can use her some day, she won't be hollow. If she could be hollow, she would be already. But she needs engines and fuel and oxidizer and tanks and pipes and pumps etc. The hollow part is her faring. Always as big as possible. So no, you cannot make her more hollow.

[@elementus2857]

@@istvansipos9940 I never said anything about making it more hollow

[@istvansipos9940]

@@elementus2857 I know. You only meant that. because you know (I guess) that starship is already hollow to some extent. It has to be. Bigger cargo is better than smaller cargo. That's why space crafts are always as hollow as possible. And if you did not mean "more hollow", then I don't see your point. Starship is already hollow.

[@stevemickler452]

Microwave power beaming from Mars orbit can provide constant power to rectennas on the surface unaffected by dust storms.

[@iberomagazine]

was there space before de the big bang? if not, how is space being created as we speak?, if the anwers is yes, could there be serveral univererses being created right now within the same universe? If 2 magnetar crush, could a magnetic blackhole be created?

[@Jenab7]

There is such a thing as cosmological magnification. You can work it out as a function of redshift.

[@Jenab7]

cloudynights.com/images/2020/Kolkich_BASIC%20EXTRAGALACTIC%20ASTRONOMY_part4_files/image006.jpg

[@Jenab7]

To find the observed angular diameter of a galaxy, multiply the "ordinary" (non-cosmologically-magnified) angular diameter that you get from trigonometry and multiply that by the quantity of (1 + redshift). observed angular diameter of galaxy = (1+z) arctan{ (physical diameter of galaxy in light years) / (distance to galaxy in light years) }

[@charlesavant6291]

why couldn't ion engines be used to slowly push the ISS to a higher orbit and help maintain it

[@Neidzwiedz1]

If C is the maximum speed possible then does it really matter if we broadcast out presence to the universe? If i remember right the solar neighborhood is roughly 600 light years in diameter and contains about 1,000 stars. The raidio signals we have been broadcasting for the last hundred years or so will still need another 200 years to reach the edge of that and then it will take another 300 years for a reply and the farther away a civilization is the longer that gap. I would think that we would have heard from any advanced civilization within 300 lys unless they are only as advanced as wo ourselves.

[@stevepr100]

Sounds entropic.........

[@echofloripa]

A ou the repeating patterns, could be that we don't see these patterns because of the apareebr distance in time each pattern bit be?

[@andreask.2675]

There are no flying saucers buzzing through our atmosphere because strangely - though having adavanced technologies to travel light years - they tend to crash on earth. I guess they never invented breasks and landing gears. :'D

[@jimashby43]

Where are the Lava tubes on Mars? Have we seen one yet up close?

[@tjj300]

[QUESTION] If space only exists in relation to the matter within it, and matter slowly decomposes, way in the future when the last subatomic particle fizzles out of existence, does the entire universe instantly snap back to a point and we get a new Big Bang?

[@adamtschupp9825]

How does the cold of Mars actually kill rovers? I thought electronics worked best in the cold?

[@tonysworld4488]

Is it possible in the future to have 3 telescopes linked, One on earth, one on Mars, and one on the moon? The detail of sync of these telescopes could far surpass anything we have today. And while we are at it could we also sync telescopes like the JW telescope.?

[@TCDooM]

Jehda was real cool

[@anthonypazana6105]

Can JWST take closups or is it a fixed focal length.

[@executivesteps]

The Universe was already there. The Big Bang was just an event in the existing infinite Universe.

[@greggweber9967]

I suspect that it takes more than pointing a gun with sand downwards considering orbital mechanics. Action Reaction move the ISS? Probably expensive to get the sand up there.

[@arthurhamilton5222]

I would go to the planet Nibiru. The first inhabited planet of the solar system.

[@rhoddryice5412]

15:54 Bespin Do you know of anyone who has made a simulation f the end of Solar System? Most science communicators usually just gloss over the end with “The Sun expands its’ envelope and the inner planets evaporate.” Someone should have looked into it , don’t you think?

[@Pencil0fDoom]

You obviously weren’t a lego maniac as a kid, because salvaging & repurposing the ISS on a component level is a total wet dream for me.

[@michaelpaul5040]

So to speak.