This star is 10 billion times larger than the Sun! A space documentary about mysterious stars

In this captivating documentary, we explore the awe-inspiring scale of the largest star known to humanity, where the mighty Sun is reduced to a mere grain of sand in comparison. Cutting-edge visuals and expert insights guide you through the mind-boggling dimensions of this colossal celestial body, inviting you to witness the extremes of stellar magnificence.
As we delve into the mysteries of the universe, discover the science behind the biggest star and its impact on our understanding of cosmic proportions. From mind-bending size comparisons to the mesmerizing beauty of the cosmos, this video unveils the wonders of the universe on an unimaginable scale.
Animation is created by Bright Side.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Music by Epidemic Sound www.epidemicso...
Check our Bright Side podcast on Spotify and leave a positive review! open.spotify.c...
Subscribe to Bright Side: goo.gl/rQTJZz
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Our Social Media:
Facebook: / brightside
Instagram: / brightside.official
TikTok: www.tiktok.com...
Stock materials (photos, footages and other):
www.depositpho...
www.shuttersto...
www.eastnews.ru
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For more videos and articles visit:
www.brightside.me

[@hunterbohman7555]

This video states that proxima a&b are traveling at 5 miles per second, and that a super car travels at that speed, at it's fastest. A super car can travel in hundreds of miles per hour. Not even close to 5 miles per second. That is wildly untrue and has me questioning any of the other information in this video

[@ghostchick5275]

It was probably an error - and an insignificant one at that.

[@SharonD369]

5 miles per second is 18,000 mph lol.

[@adoptmetrades610]

It's not wrong cuz it's very big and the universe bigger.

[@adoptmetrades610]

Even the earth spins around itself 3600km/h

[@SharonD369]

@@adoptmetrades610 No, the earth spins at 1609kph or 1000mph.

[@ottoschnosel6996]

Too many wrong informations,

[@user-hy4hm4fm9s]

what do you mean

[@colognelotion4260]

Name one

[@michaelharrington75]

​@@colognelotion4260 Having to "wiggle and dodge space rocks" while traveling through the asteroid belt. The rocks in the asteroid belt are so small and so far apart a ship traveling through probably wouldn't see a single asteroid.

[@hogg4229]

Too much*

[@hogg4229]

@@colognelotion4260a car can travel 5MPS. C’mon dude

[@contraversionmedia2556]

You mean to tell me I could fit a million marbles in one basketball? There’s something off here

[@MF-kr4hf]

It's called the 'Theory of Relativity' for a reason..

[@contraversionmedia2556]

@@MF-kr4hf doesn’t matter how much this is a theory there is no way you can fit a million pencil erasers in that Basketball? I would’ve just believed it if there wasn’t an illustration of that basketball

[@michaelschwartz9485]

If the marbles were small enough, then you could!

[@contraversionmedia2556]

@@michaelschwartz9485 but they are not He using a general example of a marble not smaller or bigger

[@hogg4229]

He didn’t say that. He said 1/2 of a pencil eraser. Pay attention.

[@colinoneill3659]

ERRORS 1:52 "They don't have enough mass for those 'chemical' reactions." 8:15 "Yu Scai is a record-breaker in fuel 'combustion'..." Stars have nuclear reactions, not chemical reactions. 20:48 "Black holes are the 'heaviest' objects in space. This is a mischaracterization. Black holes range from as heavy as 3x solar mass to much, much heavier. I think they meant to say they are the 'densest' objects in known space. Also they mischaracterize the magnitude of the gravitational force of a black hole. Nearby a black hole gravity is indeed a phenomenon; but at astronomical distances, it acts like star-caliber gravity. 21:20 "[Betelgeuse] will turn into a white dwarf [until] it becomes invisible." It will eventually stop shining. Unseen is not the same as invisible.

[@matthewfrazee3352]

Stars are fueled by nuclear reactions not chemical reactions.

[@brucemccheyne4699]

You sure about chemical vs nuclear... jury is still out after you cut through the BS

[@HE-pu3nt]

I'm so glad you wrote all this, now I don't have to.

[@karaburgei2344]

Betelgeuse will become a neutron star not a white dwarf as betelgeuse is a red supergiant. red supergiants go supernova and supernova cant produce white dwarfs

[@colinoneill3659]

@@karaburgei2344 Thanks for the clarification. I had originally thought white dwarf and neutron stars were the same thing. The video quoted @21:20 was referring to a white dwarf becoming "invisible."

[@TotalImpacteSportsNetwork]

Jeez, this video wins the award for most factually incorrect upload !

[@user-hy4hm4fm9s]

ya think

[@buggsy5]

It is not unusual for this "creator". All of their videos are loaded with factual errors.

[@jetsetter8541]

10 billion times bigger than our Sun ! Beyond imagination. ...

[@xLUMINOUSx]

Also beyond truth

[@JohnHo1975]

10 billion times exaggeration

[@Blazeww]

So. Voyager 1 isn't even close to 1 light-year away. More like 20 or so light hours. And 5 miles per sec is 2 miles per sec shy of escape velocity. Like space shuttle. Mach 17+

[@ImagineIf-SciFi]

Amazing to think that one of the smallest stars, a brown dwarf, weighs 80 times more than Jupiter.

[@dereknelson3080]

They have no clue how much it weighs.... I mean cmon now. Can't weigh anything in space.

[@jarrett7023]

@@dereknelson3080 The trick lies in exploiting the connection between a star’s mass and the strength of the gravity it generates. For stars with planets, the strength of gravity dictates how fast a given planet will complete an orbit of any specific size, and Newton’s law of gravity can then be used to give the star’s mass. The same technique also works for binary stars, where two stars orbit around each other. Measuring the mass of isolated stars is harder, but also possible. That’s how they do it…..it is very possible to measure weight in space

[@user-hy4hm4fm9s]

a brown dwarf is not a star

[@user-hy4hm4fm9s]

it is a failed star

[@raosohail3506]

That's absolutely incredible

[@RobertWilliams-mk8pl]

Not chemical but nuclear reactions isn't it?

[@hogg4229]

Yes it is nuclear, which is technically a type of chemical reaction

[@aku7598]

Why tell the biggest star in the universe when the star is in the Milky Way galaxy. Billions of other galaxies in the universe.

[@larslarsen7457]

Actually Trillions😊

[@user-hy4hm4fm9s]

@@larslarsen7457 or even more

[@hexus4342]

Beetle juice reaching the asteroid belt really !!?😒

[@pennsylvanian66]

Betelgeuse is over 900 million km in diameter, the asteroid belt at it's closest to the Sun is about 330 million km. Betelgeuse would actually reach nearly 3x the distance to the closest part of the asteroid belt. It would even engulf Jupiter!

[@adamhughes4442]

Won't happen next week though 😊

[@Space_Library]

As someone who's always been intrigued by astronomy, I found this documentary to be a goldmine of knowledge. It not only delves into the characteristics of different types of stars but also touches on their potential impact on our own planet. Engaging, informative, and visually stunning!

[@ahhongng9916]

5:26 BeetleJuice, i can see you [In boggo's voice]

[@ahhongng9916]

6:18 HERZHELLZGARNETTZSDARR

[@ahhongng9916]

6:45 VY cMa

[@ahhongng9916]

8:00 too small

[@PaulHigginbothamSr]

I think 5 billion grains of san on earth beaches is a tremendous undervalue. Maybe 5 trillion sand grains. A billion would probably cover our local river. If ya'll look at avegadrose number of atoms it is much larger than that.

[@theccpisaparasite8813]

Avogadro en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amedeo_Avogadro

[@MF-kr4hf]

Probably a lot of atoms per sand grain..

[@McLKeith]

This site needs to fact check.

[@daniels6276]

I love learning about the universe.

[@Snailmailtrucker]

Better get ready to Unlearn and then Relearn some real facts !

[@dougieh9676]

Try a different channel. This one has too much misinformation. Try "Cool Worlds" or "The Entire History of the Universe"

[@stephenanderle5422]

Just listen. This is a kid talking! What do you expect?! Info is all wrong.

[@officialgreenhero1435]

20:27 the new calculation says only about 40 years.

[@ExplorersCellstoSingularity]

Did you repost a video as copyright issues?

[@komolkovathana8568]

I don't know their Density, but if approximated Volume and "mass" is nearly proportionally SIMILAR.. Billion times of (our) Solar mass : {billion}^(1/3)= 1,000 Meaning, billion times of mass is only thousand times of size (diameter), which is already large enough: 1.4 million km. of sun's diameter x 1,000 =1.4 billion km. The larger Star (boundary)will be extended to (around) Saturn Orbit..!!

[@lylecraig-eq7jk]

I've not ever believed a black hole is what they said it is. That the centers of spherical celestial bodies have zer gravity. 😮😅

[@kathrin-mariasamarrastehle6538]

Very Interesting

[@HE-pu3nt]

28:00. I noticed you used Lr to denote a heavy element. I'd be very surprised if Lr, lawrencium, existed in the distant universe. Do you know why? No of course you don't. You just copied the bottom of the periodic table without realising many of those elements are man made only. Many of them only last milliseconds, some only nanoseconds.

[@hogg4229]

We’ll, considering you said existed in a different Universe. You have no idea if there is even a multiverse, let alone if it had/has this element. Don’t correct others while throwing none sense out there yourself.

[@HE-pu3nt]

@hogg4229 distant, different, well I guess they almost mean the same thing.

[@philipculver2719]

Speculation, conjecture guess work. No proof for what they say. Just string a group of theories together to make it look like they know what they are talking about. It is not wise IMO to just accept this stuff out of hand. Sure there may be a few actuals facts to try and add credibility.

[@GamerDave1974]

I heard Astronomers say Betelgeuse going boom in the 10's of years, not10k or 100k!?! So much debate in these issues lol.

[@michaelharrington75]

13:40 "We have to wiggle and constantly dodge space rocks." Lol. That isn't true. The rocks in the asteroid belt are spread so far apart we probably wouldn't even see one while traveling through the belt.

[@Snailmailtrucker]

Everything that you said in the first 2 minutes was pure horseschit !

[@MF-kr4hf]

*HorseShit

[@aduboi1534]

the reaction inside a star is not chemical.

[@frankorosz901]

Hydrogen molicles being smashed togeather to form heavier atoms up to iron atoms is called fusion. That is not a chemical reaction but a nuclear reaction.

[@buggsy5]

Elements heavier than iron are also formed by fusion - it just requires the pressures and temperatures of a supernova to do so.

[@neilfoss8406]

Referring to the energy from a star coming from chemically converting hydrogen to helium. Could there be a bigger mistake? It's not chemical. Its not atomic. IT'S A FUSION REACTION. As in our sun fuses 700,000 tons of hydrogen(approximately) into 695,000 tons of helium every second. The missing 5000 tons became energy. Oh and another significant thing about fusion is its directly related to the production of super novas and the elements. How many other things will I learn incorrectly by watching this?

[@nicolasolton]

30 seconds of commercials atvthe start and 3 minutes into this video a 55 second commercial break? No thanks.

[@Universallaws776]

Actually the North Star is not at the very tip of the big dipper’s handle. If you follow The last two stars at the dipper’s bowl , the first star is in the line is Polaris the North Star.

[@buggsy5]

Correct, it is the end of the Little Dipper's handle.

[@davemason1010]

Stars shine because of NUCLEAR reactions, not chemical.

[@ABCD-tq7si]

Not chemical reactions (intact at atom-level). Nuclear reactions instead.

[@user-td9rr1op8e]

All stars are suns so there is no stars they are actually suns themselves independent

[@SY-sk3xj]

Totally agree, scientists have the fundamental basics all wrong. If you skin the outer layers of the earth enough, then you'll see miniature sun. Probably very small sun but it's all the same.

[@two6520]

It's not chemical reaction, it's called fusion!

[@23pravesh]

I like to read and learn about the astronomy. Only experts in this field should post videos that are factual. Too many discrepancies!!

[@TWOCOWS1]

The information is great, but the vid is haphazadly assembled/organized. it jump all over the place, back and forth. for example, it is talking about a magentar, but suddendly hops over to a supernova, back to magnetar, then space travel and rockets, then our asteroids, Voyeger space craft... the kitchen sink... Pls redo this and organize it better, then repost it

[@cowasakiElectronics]

I’m a minute into this twaddle… NO they are NOT chemical reactions they are nuclear and don’t compare things with other things when one of those doesn’t have a size! Pencil eraser? They can vary in size by more than a magnitude. Bye

[@patrickbennett439]

49th!

[@hogg4229]

No car goes 5 MPS dude. Not even close

[@danieleminardi4465]

Chimical reaction?? Please. Atomic fusion!!

[@NewToronto]

It's not chemical reactions. It's nuclear fusion.

[@tagorechandmeah425]

Not chemical reaction. Fusion is a nuclear reaction.

[@duncan3144]

Nuclear reaction. Not a chemical reaction.

[@abelardlindsey7579]

The star that burns twice as bright lives half as long.. And B416 has burned very very bright.

[@stpetersprayergroup4175]

How to learn science 100% cos here in kerala? The tamil-africans are distributed my family 500 years

[@AndrewJSy]

So it’s larger than the Milky Way Galaxy?

[@Idonotsleep1979]

Sana meron tagalog dubbed para mas maitindihan ko

[@alexanderorourke123]

10 billion times larger than the sun the only thing i know that is larger than this is my Ego 😂😂😂

[@MF-kr4hf]

Uranus.

[@alexanderorourke123]

Your a brainie person eh

[@CChoonNg-i5m]

Knowledge given in the video is flawed. Nuclear reactions in the stars are not chemical reactions!!

[@jabe3780]

It's too bad they decided to make this video like it was for 8 year olds.

[@kylecanovas]

I swear this is a rerun

[@J91589]

A star cannot be 10 billion times bigger than the sun… it would have became a black hole a long time before it got this big. Idk how they got so much wrong in this video.

[@adamhughes4442]

I know. 10 billion times greater than our sun. Complete nonsense.

[@bobbybob3865]

Even Donald Trump wouldn't stare at this star.

[@tint6625]

@11:00 one scope equal billion tons ? I call that bs

[@aliayyad4342]

1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000° Beetlejuice ☀️☀️☀️☀️☀️☀️☀️☀️☀️☀️ 2000s suns

[@gmat5586]

Is this a documentary for children because your narration makes it sound that way. I couldn't get past 10 minutes because of it. Too bad.

[@GamingSquadY]

This is giving me more knowledge

[@buggsy5]

Gaining knowledge is nice - but it is even better to know if what you learn is factual or in error.

[@GamingSquadY]

Ok

[@JosephJLopez-bo3jr]

ASAP!!!!!!

[@johnhause7150]

Its all speculation, not fact. Nobody was there in the beginning and nobody has ever seen what or how it all goes down.

[@ezemack8662]

They need to go back to the drawing board.

[@vv.prabhakaran9942]

Pls translate it to Malayalam

[@marcparkinson4118]

Note, to be a star, you have to have nuclear fusion. A brown drawf does not. Therefore, IT IS NOT A STAR.

[@MF-kr4hf]

Uranus is a Brown Dwarf..

[@Lousy-Looter]

Try tellem that in Hollywood....I want to be a star 🌟 😅

[@buggsy5]

@@MF-kr4hf Is it? I would think that Jupiter comes much closer - and even it is about an order of magnitude too small.

[@ramakumarak]

99.8% of the mass actually xd

[@MF-kr4hf]

Y'all taking fact checking to a whole nother level..

[@user-or5zb7su5x]

I think there's some AI

[@user-oe7fx4uk2l]

You can't fit a million half size pencil erasers in a basketball.

[@jamesabbate]

This video is full of incorrect information

[@Himanshujoshi-bk2tg]

Jisko🎉vo ❤

[@nicolescuff]

14:16 Saturn is less dense then water so what you just said was false

[@richard1835]

A wonderful video on our magnificent universe.

[@LovelyBeetle-pf4zk]

easy to make money by resposting the same knowledge every week

[@JamesLine-uz5bh]

I bet none of you have witnessed any of this that you are trying to tell us!

[@brucemccheyne4699]

Speculative BS mixed with CGI and computer models gives you utter BS

[@JosephJLopez-bo3jr]

The time to get ready is noW!!!!

[@vv.prabhakaran9942]

pls translate to Malayalam Language

[@patrickFielding-g5w]

All nuculu

[@invista4134]

The slow commentary also adds to the confusion. They might be talking to millennials.

[@ladygumshoe7402]

Thanxs for the video but i have to hive it a thumbs down. Too many mistakes, that its ridiculous!!!!!

[@douglasennis7291]

That star doesn't look 10 million times larger than our sun 🌞 maybe 10millionntimes the size of the 🌎

[@terrauncebowie6712]

They luv to overexaggerate for views.

[@ericchin739]

No, its not. It is physically impossible for an object to be that massive - unless it were in a part of the universe that has a lower force of gravity. Not even going to watch this garbage.

[@Mike61259]

👎👁 🤑

[@nicolescuff]

12:41 not true beatlejuice is not one of the biggest stars anymore it’s losing mass

[@mohammadnadeem9564]

James web telescope , Archimedes and Hubble telescope all are unraveling the glory and greatness of the creator of this universe, whom muslims call as ALLAH.

[@warakpawairakpam270]

Wdym Allah is not real.

[@euclideureka1142]

bullcrap science

[@bojandimitrieskimilenkovic9226]

This thumbnail is one of the dumbest I've seen this year, I mean that star isn't even a 1000 times bigger than the sun.......not up to scale maybe? And why is that? Just draw a curve in the middle of the thumbnail and put a dot next to it FFS.....

[@hom23jk87]

HEY!!!! Trump LOST!!

[@boostedunderwraps4238]

Trump won Cope more

[@dazzassti]

Way way too much misinformation and outright wrong info in the vid.

[@brianstephen5392]

If you believe this utter nonsense you need help!