True Darkness of The Universe // New MOND Evidence // SETI Symposium

[@captainboots]

The Tolkien link you were thinking of was Eärendil, the source of the light in the phial that Galadriel gave to Frodo (and Sam used against Shelob). If you'd like to know more (and there's a LOT) there's more than I can type here. It would be better to search the name than me spamming the comments. :)

[@TheJasonBorn]

If that is what you call spam, spam away, it is tasty.

[@Reyajh]

Indeed, but then, what merriment would be thus gained? Having you remind us (along with all those tasty details) is exceptionally more savory {:+:}

[@jimmyquigley7561]

ear... as in early

[@JarcoArt]

If I remember correctly then the Christian religion's bad guy Lucifer is often called The Morning Star. (?)

[@Reyajh]

@@JarcoArt That's correct. And he's seen as an angel of light, known as, the prince of the air, god of this world (Note the lower case 'g') among other things, but Jesus overcame him. If you receive Jesus no need to fear him. If you're referring to that symbol I just sporadically created (I could see it appearing as a star). It was in fact just a random thing I put together to ++ captainboots' post, and make it look like a juicy burger. If not, just ignore my silly ramblings.

[@steverafferty4114]

Tolkien lived 2 miles away from my house, Sarehole Mill, Moseley Bog, Client, Lickley and the Malvern Hills where he spent his childhood playing are where he based Middle Earth on. For such a global household name he is pretty much ignored locally, very strange.

[@rayfighter]

actually, maybe telling

[@paige-vt8fn]

"For truly I tell you, a man is not recognized (respected) in his own home town." -Jesus Christ

[@petersherratt]

Maybe they resent the middle Earth being based on them. But I would personally take it as a compliment

[@SanderHollebrand]

I really enjoy these episodes, and especially the enthusiasm and eagerness of the way you present them. Thank you!

[@mhult5873]

When reading you comment I realized that yes, you are absolutely correct. I agree with you, +1 on your comment. Br //M

[@petersherratt]

Totally agree. It’s a pleasure

[@jacobandthensomenumbers]

Finally I can answer a question for Friaser! How the turn tables... 😂 Eärendil was a Half-Elf from the first age of Middle Earth, and the father of Elrond. Reeeeally long story short, the Valar placed a silmiril on his brow and made him and his ship the brightest star in the heavens for all time as an honor. So he literally became "the Morning Star." But in Tolkien's elvish, the name Eärendil comes from "eäre" for sea and "ndil" for lover/friend, not old English, which of course didn't exist yet in Middle Earth. Obviously Tolkien was a linguist and took inspiration from the word éarendel, but I think it's super cool that he still gave it its own morphology.

[@bobinthewest8559]

There’s nothing wrong with releasing preliminary reports, findings, hypotheses, guesses, etc.. as long as you call them what they truly are, and maybe state something like, “we’ll update this after a more thorough analysis.” I think most people would rather enjoy feeling kind of like we’re looking over the shoulders of scientists as they work through the process of investigating the greatest mysteries. Sort of like watching an episode of “Law And Order: cosmic edition”.

[@eljcd]

Looks like estudies of Wide Binaries have the potencial of disproving MOND-like theories of gravitation... or give them a tremendous boost if their predictions are correct. Still these are early days. At the MOND at 40 conference, there were four talks about wide binaries. Two found Newtonian behaviour, and two MONDian behaviour, so the discussions were... lively. Some people even brougth popcorn!

[@dropshot1967]

The dark matter rant was my favorite subject. The rest was awesome but for me, the most important message is that people should stay curious and open minded about everything, means they can truly use scientific thinking to come to a conclusion and then happily accept that new evidence invalidates that conclusion and a new one needs to be agreed upon. People in general don't like uncertainty and like to think binary, true or false. But that is not how the universe works.

[@EricJW]

For dark matter, I think it's more of a failure of communication between the scientific community and the wider public. A lot of people seem to treat the "dark" part of dark matter (and dark energy) as more than its literal meaning. Think "dark magic" instead of what the "dark" actually means, not emitting EM radiation, thus making it invisible to the vast majority of ways we have to learn about the distant universe. (Gravity waves are really the only big exception.) There's a lot of journalism and sci-fi out there that's not helping the misconception.

[@jamesmoran7511]

That's the great thing. Nothing is certain. We're just along for the ride. Luckily the scenery is awesome.

[@JenniferA886]

Cheers for the update 👍👍👍

[@busybillyb33]

10:57 Can the effects of Zodiacal dust be removed from astronomical observations by sending observatories above the ecliptic of the solar system? How much of an effect does it have if you pointed the observatories 90 degrees to the ecliptic?

[@nathanfausti9213]

I’ve watched a few of your videos, and have appreciated every one, but I often don’t take the time that I should for longer ones. This one caught me, though, especially what you said at the end about observation vs. theory, as well as the info that I can follow on patreon without committing $$ right off the bat. I’m now sifting through your past videos for topics I’m keen on, and I’ll likely start supporting you on patreon very soon here. Keep up the good work!❤

[@Vorador666]

I would like to submit a question for the next q&a session : if I'm not mistaken, the laws of conservation makes it that you cannot add or eliminate energy from the universe. But at the same time, the empty vacuum creates particules all the time. Isn't that a contradiction? I guess I'm missing something there!

[@LordTelperion]

Long may the thrones of the Valar endure!

[@michaellee6489]

i like the idea of releasing "cautionary" claims about new discoveries. this gives course for supposition, ponderance, and outside the lines thinking from many different arenas. important discoveries might be made that only marginally have anything to do with the intended subject...

[@X3MgamePlays]

The whole dark matter thing is starting to get more puzzle pieces in place. Soon the scientists can get a first proper theory about it. Yeah, you read that right. A proper theory. For now, it felt to me like they where just making assumptions. All theories should be put in a list. And then see what puzzlepieces fit.

[@denmaroca2584]

They're making hypotheses at the moment (two of which are particle and MOND) and are busy trying to disprove them.

[@justfellover]

You have done Ethan Siegel (and me) a big favor by linking to his article. I now follow him on twitter and soundcloud and almost forgot to come back for the last half of this video.

[@lucaslovesyouiii]

I thought for sure Maise was a Labrador retriever

[@antithese101]

The intro text really looks great

[@douglaswilkinson5700]

Seti Symposia are fun and interesting. However, the cold eye of science concluded that we are truly alone. Cf Dr. David Kipping, Isaac Arthur, et al.

[@Chris.Davies]

At this stage of the game, when anyone says how far away something is, or how old it is, I just smile and nod. Because we are most certainly wrong about redshift being a measure of recessional speed. And it appears that Dark Matter is garbage, Dark Energy is rubbish, the Big Bang is bogus, and theoretical physics has turned into philosophy, not science, which is why we haven't advanced practically at all since the 1930s. The Standard Model is terminally broken. Einstein's variable speed of light. Proper physics. New (testable!) theories... I can't wait to learn what kind of universe we actually live in - because the one peddled right now doesn't exist anywhere except the fever dreams of philosophers.

[@WthyrBendragon]

Along with the tiny bit of light from dust in the background darkness of the universe, I would not be surprised if it turns out to also include cosmic background glow from when the universe first became transparent.

[@markwrede8878]

To link Einstein and Newton, substitute escape velocity for the force of attraction. It is escape velocity which declines over the square of the distance.

[@michaelblacktree]

IMO the best way to release scientific data would be to make an initial press release just saying "Hey, we have some new data. But we need to analyze it. Stay tuned!" Then release the results after proper analysis. That way, they can avoid the backtracking (and reduced public trust) that results from rushing to get the story out.

[@weeasledude]

7:30 - a third possibility that gets less discussion is a property of the vacuum of space. Ala Lematre and Einstien's (independently authored but essentially the same) Theories of Dynamic Equilibrium. ie, a property of space itself (the quantum vacuum) which causes a change to the balance of entropy which in turn throws out our theories matching observations at large scales. The issue is observing a vacuum on a galactic scale proves as similarly challenging as observing dark matter / dark energy. Beyond my pay grade but interesting non the less....

[@towerofresonance4877]

If the Hubble went this far using gravitational variations, imagine what the James Webb will be doing.

[@frasercain]

Yeah, they looked at a star they already knew about.

[@icaleinns6233]

Love the take on Dark Matter. It's an unknown. We don't know WHAT it is, other than an observation, and observation isn't matching current theory, so we have some more observing to do and pencils to sharpen. Let's let the process work! Personally I'm not a fan of scientists releasing fantastical announcements about early observations such as Earendel. I don't mind if they give huge age range estimates, but they need to make sure to state that the error bars on those estimates are HUGE! And they need to be forthright and say they haven't had enough time yet to accurately analyze the data! Be forthcoming, but subdued! This is supposed to be science, not social media.

[@Starman_67]

Fraser, put your rant up in the poll. I'll vote for it!

[@frasercain]

Hah, that's a good idea. :-)

[@RJay121]

Where are they, Interviews??? Totally 😎 cool idea!

[@kuingul]

kzbin.info/aero/PLbJ42wpShvmnK1xmCRad_8bn0uOcmLiIE

[@olencone4005]

20:25 I had a discussion with a friend of mine a few weeks ago that wandered into the subject of Dark Matter, which he was in complete and absolute denial of. At one point I told him something very similar to what you said here, that we know it's there from observations of its effect but we just don't know what it is, or even if it's a combination of multiple things. He nodded and seemed to accept that... which, in hindsight, should have been a huuuuuge red flag to me haha! A few days later, another friend of mine commented that he was surprised to hear that I would say something so contrary to what I normally say. When I asked him what he meant, he said our mutual friend from the previous convo had told him that I said scientists "just don't have a clue and don't know anything"... sigh.... 🤦‍♂ Clearly, some of my friends are not very good at the game "telephone." 😃If I'd know that was how his mind would interpret my words I woulda just blurted out something about Baldur's Gate to quickly change the topic as soon as Dark Matter was mentioned 😅

[@rayfighter]

superstition is our embarrassing virus of the mind 😢 and it gets so sad to see the people clinging to it, instead of throwing it away.

[@shawns0762]

There is no dark matter. Most people don't know that Einstein said that singularities are not possible. In the 1939 journal "Annals of Mathematics" he wrote "The essential result of this investigation is a clear understanding as to why the Schwarzchild singularities (Schwarzchild was the first to raise the issue of General relativity predicting singularities) do not exist in physical reality. Although the theory given here treats only clusters (he was referring to large clusters of stars) whose particles move along circular paths it does seem to be subject to reasonable doubt that more general cases will have analogous results. The Schwarzchild singularities do not appear for the reason that matter cannot be concentrated arbitrarily. And this is due to the fact that otherwise the constituting particles would reach the velocity of light." He was referring to the phenomenon of dilation (sometimes called gamma or y) mass that is dilated is smeared through spacetime relative to an outside observer. This is illustrated in a common 2 axis dilation graph with velocity on the horizontal line and dilation on the vertical. This shows the squared nature of the phenomenon, dilation increases at an exponential rate the closer you get to the speed of light. General relativity does not predict singularities when you factor in dilation. Einstein is known to have repeatedly spoken about this. Nobody believed in black holes when he was alive for this reason. Wherever there is an astronomical quantity of mass, dilation will occur because high mass means high momentum. There is no place in the universe where mass is more concentrated than at the center of a galaxy. According to Einstein's math, the mass at the center of our own galaxy must be dilated. In other words that mass is all around us. This is the explanation for the abnormally high rotation rates of stars in spiral galaxies, the missing mass is dilated mass. According to Einstein's math, there would be no dilation in galaxies with very, very low mass or galaxies with low mass in their centers. To date, 5 very, very low mass galaxies have been confirmed to have normal star rotation rates, in other words they showed no signs of dark matter. This is virtual proof that dilation is the governing phenomenon in galactic centers, there can be no other realistic explanation for this fact. It can also be shown mathematically that this is true.

[@olencone4005]

@@shawns0762 Oh, cool, problem solved then -- who knew that some random guy on the internet had all the answers and none of the proof saved in his little red herring copypasta? 🙄

[@shawns0762]

@@olencone4005 sweet mother of stupid, it's not new information, what's new is the recent discovery that very low mass galaxies have predictable star rotation rates exactly as Relativity would predict

[@brothermine2292]

​@shawns0762 : (1) High momentum of a large amount of mass does NOT imply high velocity, because velocity is momentum/mass. (2) Dilation is NOT expansion in 3-dimensional space. It's a decrease in the rate of aging (passage of time). It's usually called "time dilation." (3) A black hole singularity is NOT a point (or region) where mass density is "large." It's a point (or region) where mass density is infinite. Most physicists believe infinite density is impossible, and that singularities in General Relativity implies something is wrong with the equation of General Relativity at that limiting case, which occurs only inside the event horizons of black holes (and possibly at the moment of the big bang). But whether or not regions of infinite density exist inside black hole event horizons is irrelevant to dark matter observations.

[@olliverklozov2789]

Angela Collier!!! My spirit animal maybe. I find I can listen to her talk all day - and those subtle expressions. She has an episode about "You're a crackpot" or something similar where she basically explains that all of us who have stayed on top of space/physics news daily for years and years and think we have an idea but don't have the math are crackpots. Harsh but you gotta hear her.

[@GreenCurryiykyk]

I did listen to her pretty much all of one day when I discovered her channel. Six or so videos, and they're long and too information-dense to run at 1.5x. In the crackpot video she said something like "Retired engineers who don't understand the math keep coming up with crackpot theories to explain..." I think it was in reference to dark matter, but it probably applies to lots of astrophysics, climate change, politics... Seems to be a brilliant woman, she played a video game while describing String Theory, that's gotta take some intellectual horsepower! Great sci-nerd KZbin content.

[@MrCoxmic]

thank you for using generation 2 and 3 stars versus pop 2 and 1; I never understood why the oldest stars are pop 3

[@denmaroca2584]

I think it's because when they first identified pop 1 & 2 stars (and before identifying pop 3 stars) they didn't realise there was an age difference so they inadvertently got them the wrong way round.

[@MrVeryfrost]

Did I miss or that the furthest star is not in any galaxy?

[@faolitaruna]

12:22 Laughing out loud!

[@hitchensghost]

Maybe its about time that people accept the notion that there was more than one big bang. It blows my mind that somehow the universe is expanding from just one big bang, and yet we are on a collision course with andromeda. Collisions with other galaxies is how we get spiral shaped galaxies. If the universe is big enough, one could imagine regular occurrences of big bangs for a certain mass 'limit' of black holes.

[@brucekinghorn4961]

Are there currently any observations being made into the red shift in the gamma ray, x ray and ultra violet ends of the spectrum where for example some of the UV light has been shifted into the visible light spectrum? It seems to me that all the research is into visible light being red=shifted into the Infra red range. Is there some reason for this?

[@NoNameAtAll2]

intergalactic gas consumes certain frequency as lights gets redshifted, more and more light gets eaten by that single frequency on large enough distance it becomes a sharp cutoff in the infrared range

[@georgabenthung3282]

Question: Wouldn't it be possible, that instead of having dark energy and an accelerating expansion of the universe, that all the particles everything is made of simply shrink? Some kind of miniaturization basically which lets the space between objects seem to grow. This would also let our measurement-devices shrink in the same rate and could trick us in the believe of an expanding space. Even the redshift could be explained. The electromagnetic waves have been sent out when the atoms where bigger and the wavelength was longer. In the end it's simply gravitation, that's pulling everything together even within atoms. No need for dark energy.

[@THIS---GUY]

@frasercain When is the question show back? Hope the team enjoyed summer hiatus. Chandrayaan-3 rover will leave an Ashoka Emblem imprint on the Lunar surface embedded within its tracks Will the marks left by the rover in the lunar regolith stay intact and remain identifyable? if so, for how long? What forces may disturb the marks?

[@Jesus.the.Christ]

Level headed reporting about the potential MOND result. It is a nice change of pace from the rampant particulate dark matter ravers.

[@BradMurray]

Great episode, Fraser! Nice to see your name around again -- seems like a million years since G+.

[@poneill65]

Instead of telescopes out beyond Pluto to avoid zodiacal dust, how about one inclined to the ecliptic. I'd assume that most of the dust has congregated roughly in the plane of the ecliptic. Would it take more energy to raise an orbit out of the plane than to get a craft out to the Kuiper belt and beyond? (Maybe a solar sail or ion drive could help that inclination raise)

[@denmaroca2584]

Yes. Brian May (better known as the guitarist of Queen) showed this in his PhD thesis.

[@goyya888]

Thanks!

[@thedenial]

12:21 "Taking Fire, Need Assistance!"

[@makeitreality457]

Modified gravity is a patch. It should remind us that we don't understand the underlying mechanism of quantum gravity. Or how it arises from the tendency of energy and light waves to bend around obstructions, which also send out virtual waves. Light waves will bend around a human hair. They don't need modified gravity to bend. The energy of inertia also exists as waves. As well as the energy of the mass itself. Virtual waves, bending each other. It's as if our inertia is being constantly bent towards mass. As if gravity is being modified by diffraction and refraction.

[@frasercain]

You're attempting to explain the observations. This is the same thing that MOND and WIMPS are trying to do. Whatever can best explain the observations will win.

[@PeterKnagge]

If a black hole is so dense that not even light can escape, how can the big bang exist and why is the universe continually expanding? I'm not a genius whatsoever, but something in my mind about the current theories of gravity doesn't make sense.

[@frasercain]

Those are great questions, and nobody knows why the Big Bang happened and what caused it to accelerate so quickly. But we're here, so whatever happened... works.

[@abc_xyz_is_me]

a SETI question: how much larger can a planet be compared to the Earth to allow space-travel with combustion fuels and rockets built of common materials? a planet {not so much) larger than the Earth may not allow space travel as the weight of the fuel needed, combined with common material strength would not allow to reach/leave the orbit.

[@PetraKann]

"You do not need oxygen to make things burn. There are other elements such as fluorine and chlorine that can drive combustion just fine. Hydrazine is the most commonly used monopropellant. Hypergolics are combinations of two materials that ignite spontaneously without the need for an ignition source, and therefore do not require any oxygen."

[@frasercain]

Feel free to write a counter paper to theirs. arxiv.org/abs/2308.01160

[@michaelallen2971]

I think that there should be a balance between review of the data and public release. Sitting on potential information for years is not okay with me nor should be anyone else. Give us some kind of idea about what's being looked for and how that might happen and then we will know something and they will have time to study the data

[@MarinCipollina]

Thanks for this one, Fraser !!

[@frasercain]

Thanks for watchiing!

[@ponyote]

Love the show! I think you might have mixed up population 3 and population 1 stars. It is counterintuitive, to say the least.

[@frasercain]

I think I said "generation 2 and 3" not Pop.

[@iagle]

I'm wondering if two blackholes eclipse or align with an observable telescope. Shouldn't we get even more gravitational lensing?

[@BitcoinMeister]

F- On Isaac's channel (his most recent video) he links to a petition that all of us can sign to encourage NASA to extend the New Horizons Mission. It would be great if you could link to it and mention it on your show. Thanks.

[@JenniferA886]

Ok, I’ll go check this out… thanks for the info

[@arlisnarusberk]

thank you

[@idodekkers9165]

Hey Fraser, when will new horizons get further then the voyagers?

[@anthempt3edits]

Just a heads up, that interview with Dr. Sutter about the g-2 experiment did not appear in the video for me, I had to go search it up.

[@frasercain]

It didn't pop up as a little card in the corner? Do you normally not get them?

[@Djfmdotcom]

Love your channel and the interviews you do...FINALLY joined you on Patreon. Had to be done 👽😎

[@NerdishNature]

4 weeks late but hey I so enjoyed your de_dust reference 😅😂❤

[@davidboettcher1900]

At about 1 minute in, you said that a gravitational lens multiplies the light from a distant star by a factor of 4,000. I'm sure that, like a normal lens, the gravitational lens isn't outputting 4,000 photons for every 1 photon it receives, so is it really multiplying the light, or is it, like a lens, focussing (concentrating) it?

[@frasercain]

Yes, it's focusing the light just like a lens.

[@TimelineDunkley]

I want to come off this subject for a moment but still talk about gravity do meteors or asteroids have gravity?

[@brothermine2292]

Yes, everything with mass or energy has gravity. But gravity is the weakest of the 4 fundamental forces, so for small masses it isn't easy to detect. I think it was Lord Kelvin who measured the gravitational constant by hanging two balls made of lead very near each other.

[@frederickherrmann9719]

Fraser, did you add this to the wrong playlist?

[@Raz.C]

Re - Missing Mass I've said it before - Astronomers need to check behind the fridge and underneath the rug, before making statements about missing matter!

[@frasercain]

What about that ring inside the door of the washing machine. I've found socks stuck in there.

[@WestOfEarth]

Curious how astronomers isolate a single star to examine its spectrum. Earendel for example seems to have quite a number of light sources in its neighborhood. So how are these eliminated or accounted for?

[@victorbellew3759]

I have a question. If everything before the Big Bang was a singularity, wouldn’t that mean the entire universe is made up of entangled particles? And also what ramifications would that singularity have on time dilation? Did the entire Big Bang last under a second but also all of eternity?

[@jamesmoran7511]

It's all interesting. However, I must point out we still don't really know much. As time goes on and our instruments improve, we'll determine what we thought is incorrect. Still fun to make guesses and look at the pretty lights.

[@frasercain]

All you can do is remain humble and curious. The Universe doesn't give up its secrets easily.

[@janweyers2801]

Hey Fraser I have a question for the QandA Show: We have a couple of martian asteroids on earth. But what about venusian asteroids? Or even debris from further out like Europa or Titan? Thanks for answering and keep the great work up I love your channel

[@jona_KardCiv1]

Boom to the point of o2. How can you develop tech without fire? How can you have fire without o2? That is a fantastic point.

[@whatthefuck1011]

Bless you for trying to cater to your audience as much as you can. But the charming and interesting part about your channel is the unpredictable variety of topics. Maybe that's why the mono topical interviews are not gibing you the same numbers. Love your hard work

[@frasercain]

I appreciate the feedback, but I'm constantly amazed at how many people are choosing to watch the interviews. Although they're more focused, it's real journalism, getting the latest information out of the researchers. I'm grateful people are enjoying them as much as I enjoy conducting them. :-)

[@jaimes5716]

This episode was really good

[@frasercain]

Oh great, I'm glad you enjoyed it.

[@mrln247]

You've an interesting take on "free to all" content, rather than hiding stuff behind paywalls. Some of us simply don't have the funds to pay for everything, I definitely could not afford patreon for every video I have seen asking for it.

[@frasercain]

The patrons support it so that you can watch it. It's a great system, in my opinion, because I think that educational content should be freely available.

[@mrln247]

@@frasercain Yes I definitely agree it's good to use some benefactors to assist in the production of freely available educational/informative content.

[@alexisdespland4939]

can you get the person who did the gravity exprements with binary stars please.

[@tobyihli9470]

Some claim that the gyroscopes in satellites sun differently than those on Earth. So “time” is making the mechanics work differently according to how fast one travels? Bullpucky. Then we’d have to constantly make adjustments to machinery as space capsules travel through space. Baloney.

[@crawkn]

So what does it mean that there is more dust than predicted? How much mass would that total? And why did we imagine we knew how much dust there was?

[@davidalldred9392]

Counter Strike reference: gold!😂

[@pauldavis1943]

Are there potential risks of some kind of unky extrapolations happen when we image using these gravitational lenses?

[@frictionhitch]

glowing dust How much mass are we talking about? How much dust per square meter? How big is the average dust particle? What elements would be in this dust? Dust's largest spotlight moment since the Dust Bowl? Lookin good dust. Lookin good

[@Chris.Davies]

Even if LK99 was a superconductor - it would be useless to us. Ceramic superconductors are functionally useless. We've had them for decades.

[@YousufAhmad0]

So is that a lone star not part of any galaxy?

[@tonywells6990]

The funny thing about the 'Evidence for MOND' to 5 sigma statistical significance is that similar observations of binary stars suggests that the opposite is true at 16 sigma statistical significance. I don't think there's anything in it!

[@hangmann747tinmann8]

Sabine has a video where she goes Into great detail over how both "partical" dark matter and "mond" could both be true at the same time. And asks, "why is everyone trying to find just one answer to the gravity issues we see". Looks like to me this new proof lean's us to "Mond" in this long distance cases, but partical dark matter fits better with like the "bullet cluster" and Einstein rings. So why not both?

[@frasercain]

This is why I mentioned at the end. I wouldn't be surprised if it turns out to be a whole bunch of factors.

[@briancurrie2897]

Are there any other atmospheric conditions that could replicate oxidization? Ie sulphur?

[@BaryNusz]

Announce the data and the first impressions as soon as possible. That'll make life more interesting!

[@peterbroderson6080]

The moment a particle is a wave; it has to be a conscious wave! Gravity is the conscious attraction among waves to create the illusion of particles, and our experience-able Universe. Max Planck states: "Consciousness is fundamental and matter is derived from Consciousness". Life is the Infinite Consciousness, experiencing the Infinite Possibilities, Infinitely. We are "It", experiencing our infinite possibilities in our finite moment. Our job is to make it interesting!

[@doncarlodivargas5497]

Must be horrible to have consciousness and not be able to speak, not have arms or legs or nothing, what do they do all day?

[@brothermine2292]

Who were the jerks whose consciousness created relative time, noncommuting quantum operators, dust from Mars, etc, and ruined reality for the rest of us? Can the rest of us outvote them?

[@doncarlodivargas5497]

@@brothermine2292 - and what jerks are confusing us with that entanglement bs?

[@normanhairston1411]

This is maybe more of a biological question than astronomy, but I have heard that astronauts passing overhead claimed that they could see roads in Tibet, which would be beyond the presumed resolution limit of a human eye. Spy satellites can see fine detail on the ground because of synthetic aperture imaging. Might the brains of the astronauts also be doing synthetic aperture imaging as they pass overhead?

[@michaelkahn8744]

We've spent almost a century to find Dark Matter and Dark Energy but still there's no sign of them. No matter what we try, a thing which doesn't exist can't be found. May be it is time to find an Alternative Way to Explain Dark Matter and Dark Energy. 4-D Hypershere model of Universe can easily explain Dark Matter, Dark Energy, Void and even the reason why the measurement values of Expansion Rate are around 70 km/sec-Mpc. Dark Matter, Dark Energy, Gravity, Void and Antigravity, ... all these are same phenomena. They just look different. I agree to the idea that the interaction between mass and space must be explained with quantum mechanics. But that doesn't mean gravity is the QM phenomena. That's because gravity is not a force. Dark Matter, Dark Energy, Gravity, Antigravity, Void... all these are just joint effects of the expansion of the Universe and the curvature of spacetime. Details are given below. Einstein’s theory of General Relativity states that spacetime is curved by the presence of mass. This curvature influences the motion other objects with mass and gives rise to gravitation. Thus, gravity is a result of geometric features in spacetime. However, we also observe gravitational effects - curvature of spacetime - in areas without any detectable mass. This has given rise to the concept of dark matter, which is matter that does not interact in any detectable way with normal matter, except through gravity. So, there is some large quantity of dark matter scattered throughout the universe, which curves spacetime and causes gravitational effects just like normal matter, but we cannot see or detect it with any known method. An alternative theory to the identity of dark matter is proposed - it is not matter at all, but rather an intrinsic curvature of spacetime. In other words, spacetime is not naturally flat. Even in the absence of matter, we observe some inherent curvature of spacetime. So, the question is now - why is spacetime naturally curved? Why is it not flat in the absence of mass? The universe is 4-dimensional, with 3 spatial dimensions and one dimension in time. Rather than consider time as a linear dimension, we can consider it as a radial one. Therefore, rather than describing the universe with a Cartesian coordinate system, we describe it with a 4-dimensional spherical coordinate system - 3 angular coordinates, φ1, φ2, φ3, and one radial coordinate in time, t. We live on the 3-dimensional surface of a 4-dimensional bubble which is expanding radially in time. Thus, the Big Bang represents t=0, the beginning of time. The crucial point is that the expansion of the universe is not homogeneous in all directions. The expansion rate at one point on the bubble’s surface may differ slightly from another point near it. The universe is only roughly spherical in 4 dimensions, the same way that the Earth is only roughly spherical in 3 dimensions. The same way we observe local mountains and valleys on the surface of Earth, we observe local “mountains” and “valleys” on the surface of the universe bubble. The inhomogeneity of the expansion of the universe has given rise to natural curvature of spacetime. This natural curvature causes the phenomenon of “dark matter”. “Valleys” in spacetime pull matter in, similarly to the warping of spacetime of massive objects. So “dark matter” is really “valleys” in spacetime that are expanding slower than the regions surrounding it. These valleys tend to pull matter in and create planets, stars, and galaxies - regions of space with higher-than-average densities of mass. Conversely, “mountains” in spacetime will repel matter away, an “anti-gravitational” effect, which gives rise to cosmic voids in space where we observe no matter. Each point on the surface of the universe bubble traces out a time arrow in 4-dimensional space, perpendicular to the surface. These time arrows are not parallel to each other since the universe is not flat. This causes points to have nonzero relative velocity away from each other. It is generally accepted that the universe is expanding faster than observable energy can explain, and this is expansion is believe to be still accelerating. The “missing” energy required to explain these observations has given rise to the theory of dark energy. The time dilation caused by non-parallel time arrows can be proposed as an explanation for dark energy. Alternatively, dark energy is real energy coming from potential energy gradients caused by non-parallel time arrows. As a sanity check, we can calculate the expansion rate of the universe based on the universe bubble model. Since the radius of the universe bubble is expanding at the speed of light in the time direction, it increases at 1 light second per second. Therefore, the “circumference” of the 3-dimensional surface increases by 2π light seconds per second, or about 1.88*10^6 km/s. This expansion is distributed equally across the 3-dimensional surface, so the actual observed expansion rate is proportional to the distance from the observer. At present, the age of the universe is estimated to be 13.8 billion years, so the radius of the universe bubble is 13.8 billion light years, or about 4233 megaparsecs (3.26 million light years to 1 Mpc). Thus, we can calculate the expansion rate of the universe, per megaparsec from the observer, as: Expansion rate = ((d(circumference))/dt)/radiusofuniverse=(1.88*〖10〗^6 km⁄s)/(2π*4233Mpc)=(1.88*〖10〗^6 km⁄s)/26598Mpc=70.82(km⁄s)/Mpc The popularly accepted empirical expansion rate is 73.5 +/- 2.5 km/s/Mpc, so our calculated value is close. There may be some additional source of expansion (or observed red shift) to make up for the discrepancy. For example, if two adjacent points have some gravitational gradient due to non-parallel time arrows, then light passing through these points will be red-shifted. - Cited from www.academia.edu/82481487/Title_Alternative_Explanation_of_Dark_Matter_and_Dark_Energy

[@MaxBrix]

I love the blue beard.

[@Pat19997]

Someday we will find a galaxy a trillion light years away and everyone will go oh oh let’s rethink this big bang thing.

[@SirLothian]

How does MOND provide the missing mass if it is used to explain our observed differences from Einstein?

[@frasercain]

It makes the need for missing mass go away. You can explain it with gravity instead.

[@Czeckie]

I admit I don't know anything, but huge statistical computation giving us accelerations in the range of nanometers/s^2 in the wide binaries paper is suspicious. If the result is so small I don't believe you can be sure you accounted for all the errors.

[@doncarlodivargas5497]

Isn't mars spinning up in speed now? I read in the newspaper mars is rotating faster, how come? Can it be that ice on the surface melt reducing the diameter?

[@frasercain]

Yes, tiny little bit. They don't know why, but it could be the center of mass changing a bit as it's cooling. I thought the lowering of Phobos might have the same effect too.

[@doncarlodivargas5497]

@@frasercain - OK, so, basically, while earth is rotating slower and slower are Mars speeding up, what a strange place we live

[@frasercain]

And we're rotating more slowly because our Moon is drifting away.

[@ianmatthews7385]

@Fraiser Cain, thanks for the great content. I have a question for you. How far away do you think we are from working out ehat dark matter/energy is? Do you think this is crucial in becoming a type 1 civilization? Thanks appreciated 🙏

[@frasercain]

We don't know how far away we are. And we might never figure them out. But no, I can't see how that would stop us from becoming Type 1. If our energy use continues to grow, we'll be there in 100-200 years or so.

[@VeteranVandal]

I read a bit about it and I'm not really on board yet. I simply think they need another experiment done for such a thing to be an acceptable conclusion. Modified gravity seems like a big claim, so I'd like more evidence with a different methodology. I'm still thinking there might be a simpler explanation for the observations. Like, he cherry picked or mishandled data, even if unintentionally.

[@apolloeosphoros4345]

Excited to see stuff coming from the SETI symposium I am highly amused that dark matter is such a contentious topic in the community lol

[@frasercain]

I don't think it's that contentious, but there's an active group that dunks on dark matter whenever they can. I suspect this is because they have an alternative theory they'd like to propose.

[@31415dow]

Hey Fraser, off topic but I just had a thought. What would Castle Bravo or the Tsar Bomba look like to 'aliens'? At what distance could someone observing our Sun, still see the flash? Would that be humanities strongest 'signal' that has been sent out? Has anything been 'stronger'?

[@frasercain]

Here's a paper that goes into it: arxiv.org/abs/1507.08530

[@garetclaborn]

imo data dumps should be released immediately for citizen scientists, but then have a separate results release date when constraints have been met

[@larscarter7406]

Sea ice loss. Water goes thru phase changes. Ice can turn into vapor without needing to turn into water first maybe. Anyway, if the air gets warmer it can hold more water, that's just a natural thing I reckon. It's not that earth is losing water somewhere, it's just that the air holds more water than it did before because the air is warming up maybe.

[@mmenjic]

13:14 I told that and knew that immediately so you and everybody else could but unfortunately it is not only wrong thing which is published and is wrong or pure scam and we will have more of them just sit and watch. I dont get the point of doing it and I dont believe they did not know what they are doing, instead I think they are not only one doing it intentionally, I can not understand why?

[@andrewclimo5709]

Scepticism is good... the problem is that the scepticism displayed by protagonists of Dark Matter or MOND is inversely proportional to their prior belief in which theory is correct. Right now the evidence seems to favour each one depending on the distance scale concerned. As I understand it Dark Matter seems to hold out at the galactic super cluster and cosmic filament scale where MOND seems to fail, but poorly for predicting spiral galaxy rotations, for which MOIND is bang on the money. I wouldn't be at all surprised if it turned out that either both are implicated in the evidence or there turns out to be entirely different explanation that trumps both. Personally I'd like to see much more open-mindedness 🙂

[@frasercain]

That's what I mentioned in the rant, that it could easily be a combination of both in the end.

[@andrewclimo5709]

Yes, and it’s a breath of fresh air to hear more openess in discussion - so thank you. It’s tiresome that JWST or other observations are being hijacked to ‘support’ a particular theory rather than following the evidence. Where did cosmology go so badly wrong?

[@stuartcarter7053]

I love all thing space but the search for extra-terrestrial life is my favourite...oh that and an actual image of an exo-planet. Hope I stay alive long enough to witness one of these things

[@Kadath_Gaming]

Don't axions produce diffuse light by self annihilation? New Horizons might be looking at that. Or it could be dust...😅

[@bravo_01]

2 more weeks until the live Q & A ?

[@frasercain]

Yep

[@craigsimpson9561]

Remember when phlogiston was an "observation", not a theory? Exquisitely measured to precision, yet how long did it take everyone to realise that we were looking at things backwards? How many educated minds seriously considered such outlandish proposals, such as negative mass, rather than stop and reassess their fundamental assumptions? Everything about the dark matter dilemma feels oddly reminiscent....

[@archielundy3131]

Great show as always, but I'm just gonna say it: I miss the Hangout.

[@frasercain]

Two weeks away.

[@jameshoffman552]

Modified gravity is one of the biggest crocs, perhaps the biggest crock, since cosmic inflation. All the phenomenal attributes of dark matter are easily explainable, as very large, i.e. galaxie sized gravitational waves

[@frasercain]

Whoa, I've never heard this theory before. Have you got a science paper on it?