The invisible universe, from supernova to black holes - with Matthew Bothwell

[@robertmeyer7836]

I'm undereducated and certainly have never studied Astronomy, so this lecture by Mr. Bothwell is mind-boggling. At 84, my curiosity has been awakened! Thank you so very much to The Royal Institution and Matthew Bothwell. KUDOS!!

[@rwshaw.palaeo.bio.med.1234]

I'm 58, and just began mastering the advanced math that is the language these wonders are written in. It's NEVER too late. It'll keep me busy until my last breath. Youth is wasted on the young 😊

[@arekkrolak6320]

thanks to Internet we have best educators at a reach of a hand, something our predecessors could only dream about

[@MendTheWorld]

It is our common lot to be undereducated. I mean all 8 billion of us. None of us knows all that we can potentially know. Intelligence is to know what you don't know, and then set about to fill those gaps as best you can. Most people stop trying at a much earlier age.

[@extremeuzer3]

Legend!

[@dimitridoes7936]

No need to say you are undereducated ... you are interested and absorbing knowledge! Happy NY ❤

[@get2113]

Outstanding, one of the best lectures I have ever seen. Entire presentation is organized around spectacular images. A+

[@richardavery2894]

Yes agreed. I've watched so many of these, the images and talking were perfectly woven together. Hopefully we see this kid for many years to come 🙂👍

[@get2113]

I bought his book. A lot of the lecture is from the book, but there is interesting further detail in the book. Worth the $20

[@jgunther3398]

there are significant errors in there

[@fijiwizard]

@@jgunther3398 like what

[@adrianworley7060]

I'm surprised people rate this talk highly. He seems nervous and flustered throughout, he drops his slide tool, his demo didn't work...

[@gardenladyjimenez1257]

One of the BEST lectures I have seen anywhere. He covers an enormous breadth of information, but with clear explanations, connections, descriptions and photos. He never "dumbs it down." One can be a very clever scientist but be unable to explain to regular people how you know what you know. Dr. Bothwell is an example of the distinct and AMAZING talent a scientist needs to communicate his knowledge. Amazon reviews of "The Invisibile Universe" say it so much better - TERRIFIC. I look forward to his book.

[@christophercharles9645]

Thank you, Matthew Bothwell & Royal Institution, for a fantastic lecture! As someone who has long been interested in astronomy and felt that I'd exhausted what KZbin could show me, these lectures - and this one in particular - is a wonderful surprise. Presented for the layman to understand but with as much information as one can absorb - you can really come away feeling you've learned something. Great presentation too.

[@kenchesnut4425]

I agree ..seems like it's harder and harder to find really good science lectures

[@alyoelcompres8804]

@@kenchesnut4425 yyyyy. Y g

[@davecarsley8773]

The piano analogy was brilliant. It's one of those visual things a great teacher can show you that -- even though you've known the underlying _fact_ your whole life -- makes you finally, in an instant, actually "get it".

[@gustavomoretto6449]

Wow! Great lecture. How clear and cohesive his discourse is... He moves really fast through the topics he presents yet it remains amazingly clear throughout. Great job!

[@gteichrow]

Fabulous

[@davidrobinson7112]

I cannot express my level of adminiration for this lecture. In over 60 I have seen as high quality ĺecture. It has literally created a new area of fascination for me. I humbly thank all who made the presentation available

[@exoyt7575]

Such a great speaker, no umhs or ahs every sentence, and just a very smooth and well stuctered presentation. his love and respect for the RI really shines through and shows.

[@bruceh92]

There isn't supposed to be ums and has in this presentation.

[@albertaoridge]

Before watching this video i wouldn’t have thought this was a topic for me, but because the way this man speaks and how he explains things so well, I love it! I want to watch everything from him now. Great and entertaining speaker

[@kwisclubta7175]

I like this guy. Sometimes I am fascinated by the subject matter, but don't like the speaker. In this case, I am a fan of both..

[@basilbenny7709]

Every lectures of The Royal Institution is just straight away epic Never disappoints us

[@davidnewland2461]

There's a whole galaxy of types of galaxies.

[@robertspies4695]

A stellar lecture and presentation. I've rarely seen a science lecture that was this well done and clear.

[@ishanr8697]

Great talk, the presenter did very well. I wish someone had have helped when he couldn't get the thermal camera linked to his laptop properly- he was a bit on his own. Good to see "live" lectures again, although sorry to see it wasn't a full house. I would have happily paid to attend, given the chance.

[@marsc198]

I would think Covid had a lot to do with the small audience. Pity. And agree, it was great talk, and I was thinking how even this soon after this lecture was recorded, we are already seeing images from the JWST. How extraordinarily lucky are we to be here at this time to witness it all.

[@mikelouis9389]

As always, watching one of your videos does not leave me regretting the time I spent watching it. Thank you.

[@hermanmiller6986]

Another epic of RI; a very knowledgeable and, at the same time, humble scientist presents extremely well a novel topic to a wide range of audience in a smooth and coherent narration , starting with a nice and informative introduction of the basis and history of topic, wrapping up with its application in cutting edge technologies.

[@Dr10Jeeps]

Another excellent lecture at the RI. It is so enjoyable to listen to these enlightening talks!

[@243david7]

His presentation style was very good

[@JarodM]

Agreed~

[@savage22bolt32]

Matthew Bothwell didn't draw the largest RI audience (maybe due to covid-19), but IMO this is the most interesting and fascinating lecture I've seen on the RI channel.

[@isubtothebest6020]

10@-4

[@fijiwizard]

@@savage22bolt32 I noticed the crowd too, i thought that is kinda a bummer even though I didn’t know of him until now he is obviously very underrated Great presentation indeed Certainly due for a bigger crowd for the next one

[@savage22bolt32]

@@fijiwizard i just did a KZbin search of his name, and found a couple more vids if him on this topic. Will give them a listen.

[@chrissmith7259]

@Matthew your delivery sounds great, looks great and is an X-ray on things we can't see and radiates on things we feel. A great lecture I wish I was there. Thank you @Ri

[@michaelelbert5798]

This is what I understand about light. A photon is an excitation of a field. This excitation travels through the entire universe as a wave or bubble.

[@BrechdanHam]

This was bloody brilliant. I loved it!

[@dawggonevidz9140]

Look at the wide shots of the lecture theatre. Look at how many seats there are. the RI have been giving lectures and demonstrations in a multitude of scientific disciplines every week (almost, breaks for wars notwithstanding,) for 220 years. Until recently, you had to be there, in one of those seats, to be a part of this tradition of dissemination of expert knowledge of the sciences to the enthusiastic masses. How fortunate we are to live in an age where we can enjoy this anywhere in the connected world, at home, in a cafe, on a train, or laying in a meadow, looking up at the night sky and just listening. This is a golden age, and we are blessed.

[@whirledpeas3477]

Nice to see that Matthew and R.I are Bothwell

[@Timesend]

I can’t get enough of this , space universe is the best thing ever

[@johnchen7349]

Amazing journey for me to understand so much about the universe with an easy, smooth,,efficient, and fun way to learn massive information in short period. Such a legend!

[@abcde_fz]

. TOTALLY fascinating, and one of those talks that answered a question I almost didn't know I had, that was waiting in the wings. I've always kinda' wondered why FLIR infrared camera images were so fuzzy, even whey they weren't looking through brick walls, or the foliage of woods, when they may be looking for someone missing, or lost, or hiding. Dr. Bothwell starts from the lowest level and the earliest history of the technology behind infrared imaging, and it turns out that, A) The _most advanced_ infrared sensors are less than two decades old, and B) Before about two decades ago, there really hadn't been any significant improvement in the tech for nearly one hundred years. It's a slow burn video, but 'cool' for one that talks about cameras that use 'heat' for their imaging.

[@logic-o1s]

INTERESTING presentation, very clear communicator - bought his book

[@ickymouth]

"this photo is in visible (not invisible)" light. State of the art I'm surelol.

[@AnthonyMuscio]

Very good speaker (Matthew Bothwell) with immaculately prepared content that is so easily presented it is a pleasure to watch.

[@jaapongeveer6203]

Thank you for this most timely lecture with JWT a couple of months away from starting its science.

[@artdonovandesign]

You're piano/octave analogy is brilliant! Very enlightening. Thank you.

[@djbrut33]

Would have aced it if he'd given the number of piano keys in octave, compared to total keys in grand piano and how many on nine of them

[@deanpappas8388]

What a remarkable presenter! So natural, unpretentious, and not an entertainer (by intention) but fabulously entertaining. I could listen to many more lecturers of his without a break. So delightful and unassuming. NEVERTHELESS, he does not address the main question that totally baffles me: If the reason we see things is because of photons that bounce off of everything (think of a panorama of the Grand Canyons, whatever) and all those photons somehow fit through our tiny iris. I'd love it if someone could explain that phenomenon for me. Thank you.

[@luckyb4541]

They somehow fit. Photons are tiny your eyeball is huge by comparison

[@abdulkaderalsalhi557]

A very good presentation, enjoyable and informative. well done, thanks to RI and Dr. Matthew Bothwell.

[@lGipsyDanger]

this was so interesting. also I'm really glad the lecturer got to live out his childhood dream

[@albertaoridge]

This guy is sooo good! amazing presentation

[@bazyt1]

Great speaker, very engaging and clear.

[@_sbu27]

Thanks

[@TheRoyalInstitution]

Thank you for our first South African rand!

[@M00SEYM00SE-e6d]

Packed with interesting and insightful information presented very professionally. Great knowledge, thanks for sharing.

[@junes2k]

I am very, very stupid. And the lectures on this channel by absolute geniuses are so easy to follow. I appreciate that.

[@jamesbarlow6423]

Dark matter is an unobserved, implied hypothetical meant to 'save the appearance' of certain cosmological theories.

[@pbberger2002]

This is super interesting and mind-blowing. My little brain is just going W.T.F.! The time scales and the distances are incomprehensible.

[@muzikhed]

Brilliant. Such a lot of wonderful interesting science from the fasinating intro on light to early galaxies...looking forward to what the James Webb can tell us.

[@ZeroOskul]

Thank you, Royal Institute!

[@agquaproductions9361]

I enjoyed this presentation.

[@johnmcclain3887]

This has been a very interesting look at the universe, thanks for the clear explanations!

[@seditt5146]

46:00 Does anyone know if they attempted the simulation with the flow coming in one direction and the flow out going 90 degrees to that because when we watch similar formations being created using vibrating plates and fine dust this is what we observe however sadly limited to 2 dimensions for the most part. Matter flows in via veins and out at roughly a right angle to the infalling materials. Not sure what exactly they would need to adjust to even get such behavior but its something I personally should look deeper into.

[@grayaj23]

Very well done and interesting to watch and listen.

[@stephanieparker1250]

I loved this! Great info! 🙌

[@jayceasar2661]

this guy explains things so well that makes it easy to understand..i really enjoyed it..A+

[@Henry-r2f]

well presented. Well structured. Much better than most.

[@fijiwizard]

I noticed that there isn’t quite a full house & i thought that is kinda a bummer even though I didn’t know of him until now he is obviously very underrated. Great presentation indeed Certainly due for a bigger crowd for the next one !!

[@andypaul4242]

Really excellent lecture. The RI is brill

[@toni4729]

Brilliant talk. Thank you so much.

[@sandyago4735]

Wonderful lecture! I'm surprised how few people are in attendance.

[@0.618-0]

cool presentation even non science people can appreciate. Truly Inspirational for young minds.

[@hg6996]

This is a heck of a good lecture. Thanks a lot for it. 👍👍👍

[@jimhostetter9324]

Very interesting, great job Mr. Bothwell.

[@thekingofmojacar5333]

Really great super interesting lecture, first class ilustrations, perfect moderation... 😉

[@SPAH527]

Excellent Presentation.

[@Hugo_Overthere]

Distant masses are not older than near masses. They were all created about the same time. The objects we see look older because we are seeing them as they were, and not as they are. Redshift refers to the Doppler effect in objects closing on an observer at relativistic velocity. Expanding space as well as time dilation might add some clarity to the reason why distances measured by brightness appear farther than distances measured by redshift. As far as we know the universe has stopped expanding, and is now contracting. We can only see objects back in time when they were receding.

[@nHans]

Great lecture. My only complaint is in treating *wavelength* rather than *frequency* as the primary characteristic of light. The wavelength of light changes as light travels through different media. The frequency doesn't. In fact, the wavelengths of visible light already change a little when they enter our atmosphere from space. They change even more in our eyeballs in the _vitreous humor,_ just before they hit the retina. For example, the wavelength of *red* light-750 nm in vacuum-changes to about 560 nm in the eyeball. In vacuum, 560 nm corresponds to *green* light! But, in our eyes, we see 560 nm light as red, not green. Similarly, just-visible violet light-400 nm in vacuum-becomes 300 nm in the eyeball. 300 nm in vacuum corresponds to invisible ultra-violet! But we see it alright-that too, without damaging the eye. Note that the frequency of light does not change in any of the above examples. And that's why I recommend using frequency rather than wavelength in such situations.

[@robertkoen5506]

Frequency and wavelength are related directly. They cannot change independent of the other

[@nHans]

​@@robertkoen5506 Like I said in the very first para of my original post, you're wrong. If you read the rest of it-clearly you haven't-you'll understand why.

[@helenaleahy9396]

Love this lecture and reminds us how much more we need learn and discover and how small olmost insignificant we are ? Really ?

[@AgadorSpartacus100]

Fabulous presentation thank you

[@davidginn119]

At 38.12 he connects dark matter with gravity, is this worth looking into

[@sideshowbobrobert]

GREAT presentation. will definitely get the book !

[@ronankelly376]

this was brilliant

[@arekkrolak6320]

Everybody starts with saying how special it is to speak, it is good icebreaker, but this audience must have heard it 100 times already :)

[@leonloya1180]

very informative and confirming presentation. However, I would recommend that the individual slides be consistent when showing the light spectrum and the redshift such that they all are left to right and not a mixed bag. Thanks for a very salient presentation.

[@timsmith6675]

@The Royal Institution, great lecture by a great teacher to us science enthusiasts! 😊 I liked Matthew's talk so much, I bought his hardcover book on Amazon for only $20 U.S.

[@moazdarwish9360]

A masterpiece presentation!

[@manjitkumar6510]

Thanks for these wonderful lectures by wonderful and eminent personalities. Thanks to this channel for making these wonderful lectures available to common people across the globe. It is strange to see the almost empty hall. People do not have time to listen about universe. It is surprising that only very few people are are torch bearers of science and knowledge while rest of others are busy reaping profits from scientific knowledge. Thanks for this wonderful channel.

[@sumina8653]

Ditto to the last comment. In awe of the 30 year production & launch of the James Webb telescope. Thank you for explaining why it is so important using infra red long wave light in addition, to make the invisible early universe visible. The history of science of light equally fascinating that led to this possibility. As the images are being released from the JWST would you please do follow up lectures? showing & explaining the optical & infra red comparisons, as in this lecture please? I look forward to learning more. Thank you so much.

[@orlandogardner5288]

Thanks, really interesting.

[@MK-hv7zg]

Where is the screen expanding option?

[@ulysissira9808]

Very helpful and very good wonderful sound mixed with great quality of how to used the ingredients of subject matter which is necessary for the next Generation to be used for any kind of presentation object to give people inspired, and more new discover about the future of new Generation galaxies tools..this is its best for me and understand. be loved, and enjoyed to connect the world and universe with the light of art and what reality about the Invisible Universe..

[@radovanvargic7847]

Ďakujeme.

[@TheRoyalInstitution]

Nie je za čo!

[@vladimirp2674]

Stunning!

[@corinnefeldmann5259]

Excellent talk, thankyou.

[@padraiggluck2980]

There’s a heartbreaking episode in Hershel’s pursuit of astronomy. He spent two years grinding and polishing a new lens and when it was finished he picked it up and it slipped out of his hands. He had to begin the grinding process all over again but eventually produced his new lens.

[@Jim007baker]

great presentation thank you

[@joshzammit6023]

Truly awesome video

[@johneonas6628]

Thank you for the video.

[@johnlewis5330]

Great talk.

[@DNTMEE]

From what I understand, technically speaking, the Milky Way and Andromeda galaxies are already colliding. The "halos" of thinly scattered stars, globular clusters of stars, and tenuous gas/dust which surround both galaxies extend a bit more than half way to each other. So this matter is already colliding. Though "colliding" may be somewhat of an exaggeration since it's much more likely all that stuff is simply mingling rather than smashing into each other, given how sparse it all is. Even when the main event occurs, billions of years hence, the chances of collisions between individual stars is remote. The gravitational forces of each star will have much more effect than actual collisions. Not to mention the effects of the anticipated merging of our respective black holes. Our solar system may even be left relatively unscathed. Not that it will matter much to us since our sun will have destroyed earth long before then. The sun giveth, and the sun taketh away. Even Sunblock 10,000 won't help.

[@eyutup]

Matthee Bothwell. Bagus sekali presentasi anda.

[@ActualDav]

Excellent 👍🏼

[@You_Can_Do_If]

Nice ending. Good speaker. Thank you

[@paulberk2264]

Does JWT have a detector for sub-millimeter IR? I found references to NIRCAM and H2RG but those seem to operate at shorter wavelengths.

[@lshtar777]

I find it fascinating, how much of this information, is careful speculation.

[@rockfordlow571]

Yes , interesting , and YES , too many lecturers speak at double speed and the whole point of the exercise is lost- don't know how something SO OBVIOUS goes under the radar.

[@noneofyourbizness]

hopefully lecturers know their audience is exponentially greater in number than those who made it to the RI's live event .

[@kenchesnut4425]

I'm in Charleston S.C..I will be taking a trip to London soon ..I would love to come to a lecture at the Royal Society..The amount of brain power that has walked through those doors...remarkable

[@davidhughes2960]

Nice work man

[@nitro13333]

15:28. Despite assurances from some experts the collision between the two galaxies will probably not result in individual star collisions due to the immense distances, will there be significant additional gravitational forces that rip a habitable planet from its position about its star?

[@robinwinsor4392]

Thanks!

[@TheRoyalInstitution]

Thank you Robin!

[@elisejaudon925]

@45:53. Someone sat down and created a universe? And tinkerd with it. Yeup.

[@joshzammit6023]

Awesome video

[@adastra5346]

Fantastic lecture. Excellent job with your work. I absolutely loved it.

[@abcde_fz]

. 02:40 Thanx for the accuracy that Newton avoided! I have no idea how many people in which countries were originally taught, (as I was), that the spectrum was Red, Orange, Yellow, Green, Blue, Indigo, Violet, but I see you have the correct SIX colors, eliminating Indigo. What? (You may ask). What about Indigo? Newton intentionally added a color that (buried deep in his own papers) he admitted he did not actually see. He was disturbed that there weren't SEVEN colors in his spectrum experiments. I leave you to research it. His reason for adding Indigo was directly related to his beliefs in both God, and numerology. It's VERY interesting.

[@nHans]

Yes, I too was taught VIBGYOR in school in India many decades ago. But even before that, in the local languages, I had learnt that the rainbow colors were simply red, orange, yellow, green, and blue. That's what the color charts in the local languages showed-and still do. Mind you, these 5 colors preceded Newton's 7 by several centuries-after all, even without the help of prisms, people can and do observe rainbows. Funnily, some stories and poems claimed that there were indeed 7 colors in the rainbow-to go with the 7 musical notes! Roughly translated, these are: red, orange, yellow, green, green-blue, sky blue, and dark blue. Later, when I learnt that it's a continuous spectrum of colors, not 5 or 7 discrete ones, I wondered if more color names had been invented. Sure enough, today Wikipedia identifies some 30 distinct colors by name and wavelength! Anyway, I had always assumed that the number of colors and their names are a cultural thing, and that different regions and languages will assign different colors to the spectrum. Consequently, I avoid flame wars of this nature. Still, we are rather proud that indigo is included in the English rainbow colors-it's an organic dye that originated in India.

[@abcde_fz]

@@nHans Can't disagree with any of that, but I CAN admit that I had not thought about the fact that different cultures, and indeed, different languages, may look at, or refer to, different wavelengths of the spectrum of visible light in different ways. I won't call that a sin of omission, it's simply something I hadn't thought about before. I can say, once again, Newton's own notes say he 'added' indigo for reasons related to his beliefs in a Christian God, and numerology. Also, technically, regardless of the number of colors Wikipedia may or may not 'recognize', the fact of the matter is the human eye can only perceive colors that sufficiently stimulate the receptors in the eye, and the nature of those receptors dictate what colors, or combinations of colors, the brain is able to conceptualize and then abstract to the point that we can name them. Long story short? There are only so many colors we can differentiate and name, and different cultures and languages may each do that differently.

[@nHans]

​@@abcde_fz Thanks! 👍 BTW, I wasn't disputing anything that you said either. Newton's involvement with the occult is well-documented. As you say, he could very well have picked 7 for non-scientific reasons. I got the impression that you were objecting to 7 because of its occult origin, and that you'd be okay with 6 or 8 or any number that's not 7. To me, a couple of colors more or less don't matter, because it's all subjective. In general, I feel the fewer things children are asked to memorize, the better. But in this particular case, I'm inclined to keep VIBGYOR, because it is widely known and widely taught. I hate to keep unlearning and relearning stuff that otherwise matters so little! I think that subjectivity and convention are the reasons why people have stuck with VIBGYOR. With objective science, we've had no hesitation modifying Newton's theories-or even throwing them out altogether-when he was later proved wrong. For example: corpuscular theory of light, gravity, laws of motion etc. So why did we keep indigo? Well, when it comes to demarcating hard boundaries in a continuous spectrum, there's no objective way to do it. If Newton had Pantone or Dulux swatches back then, he'd likely have hundreds of named colors in the visible spectrum! Secondly, it's not wrong-indigo does have a deep bluish shade. If he had called it 'pink' instead, that would have been immediately rejected. 😂 I agree with your conclusion that we can differentiate and name only a finite number of colors. But even that can be overwhelming: When I got my house painted recently, I had to choose from over 2,200 named colors! (Including non-spectrum colors, obviously.) The whites alone numbered in the hundreds. I swear, after staring at them for a while, the colors started floating around, mixing, swirling ... I started seeing variations even within each swatch!

[@abcde_fz]

@@nHans Ever hear the one about the Inuit culture having numerous 'root' words for snow/types of snow? Well... I find it both funny and humbling that it took a chit-chat on KZbin to point out to me something that SHOULD have been obvious. That my little 'Newton's spectrum' anecdote is almost hilariously provincial. 😊 It's SSSOOO Anglo-centric as to be almost unforgivable. OF COURSE people from different parts of the world are going to, in the first place, have different words for even the simple primary colors! What is the POINT in nit-picking about the [basically] continuous range of perceptible colors in the spectrum of visible light? I've now adjusted my anecdote to simply point out the fact that whatEVER the finer points may be, Newton thought there 'should be' seven colors in his list because of an intersection in the details of his naming convention, and the special places God and the number seven had 'in his heart'. 😊 We seem to have been on the same page all along, and quite frankly, I'm no longer going to find any conflict between Roy G. Biv and the number of colors in the Pink Floyd "Dark Side Of The Moon" album cover art. 😊

[@wazzup105]

With the JWST operational we really need an update video :-)

[@clawsonsful]

Amazing lecture!