I still think we should start building a second JWST. Not only will it extend the life of the program but also double the science. And bonus we already have all the engineering worked out. The technicians that built it are still alive and the work is fresh in their minds. It won’t cost 10 billion like the first one did. And we can even add some more filters or spectrograms for even more science. A second would benefit science so mooch.
There are many more projects to come that will surpass the capabilities of JWST. It would almost be redundant to recreate it considering the amount of time it will take to replicate it. Since technology has advanced so greatly since that project began, it only makes sense to put funding towards a newer more capable space telescope. I totally get your angle but it's not a practical idea
the questions that the JWST was created to answer will likely be answered so it will be better to just build something more powerful to answer harder questions, I understand where you're coming from but why stay stagnant when we can keep advancing, if anything we should build another JWST with more sensitive instruments.
Wow what a terrific interview, great questions, great answers. I had several questions going in and all of them were answered brilliantly. It's great to meet Ben Hord, and know that the proud tradition at Goddard is in good hands. Again Fraser, great questions, well done.
I really do think that JWST is the most successful piece of tech NASA has ever created, and I see it having it's mission extended several times! I haven't been this excited since Hubble.
38:58 Can a photographic block be created by subtraction of sequential images? Stuff that doesn't move gets erased, whereas the moving planets image as dotted lines?
Hello Dr Ben Hord. My name is Nafi and I'm 55 years old, so Speed up your research and discover life on any planet before I die and do not experience the joy of this great discovery.
Another great interview Fraser and some of the questions you asked were great as it gave out answers that I found both informative and fascinating. I drew 2 things from this interview and the first was easier in that I can see what Ben Hord is doing in trying to get the scientific community to work together in getting JWST time used more efficiently across the board. The second thing was far more thought provoking it causes me to ask who or how are the dice being rolled where the universe is concerned? Probably nothing at all other than the complexity of size etc., but anything that produces time and matter from nothing is more than just a passing thing! Due to the size and complexity of the universe we are almost operating with one eye and an arm behind our backs. The fact, as alluded to by Dr. Horm in that there is more than one way to skin a cat and in our case it is the size of the universe and its component parts. Because of that we need a myriad of different means to make our observations to understand what is going on. I also, the more I listen and watch the varying interviews, realise that whilst the world media might want astonishing and impacting things to report there are few of them. At the same time, however, there is a huge vat of bubbling work going on down under the surface of it all by the many varying facts of the science community. Ian B
So for the next big 'JWST' the project, we need to get the funding ahead to build 5 samples, or even 10. Then you don't need all these commissions, and scientists 'fighting' over telescope time, and valid projects get declined due to lack of telescopes.
Could we have the possibility to launch multiple satellites so the effective aperture would be like the distance between them? I imagine an aperture of 1 million km for example would be incredible. Or even the lenght between the Earth and the Moon
Totally agree that long period planets are a big knowledge gap in our understanding of other planetary systems. It's probably the biggest engineering challenge to characterizing planetary formation. Cool time to be working in this field.
Great interview, really interesting questions and answers, learnt alot about the domain in general. I was also wondering about a dedicated space (or ground) telescope to a particular exoplanet system, it may not make sense for an expensive highly sought-after telescope but what about a less expensive but still-capable telescope?
I believe a way to put a coronagraph in front of multiple stars in a large field view telescope could be staring us in the face as we read this on our computers. Is there any reason we can't attach an LCD screen aligned to the CCD sensor array so that by programming it pixel by pixel it would block the starlight from stars and achieve the effect we want in order to only allow light from exoplanets to reach the sensors? As for how to settle the riddle of where and how hot Jupiters are formed and migrate, it seems like extensive orbital modeling using various starting points of dust and gas in star systems on supercomputers along with AI would answer that question. Thanks Dr Ben Hord for your very interesting work in this field and telling us about it! Thanks Fraser for doing another great interview!
It's profound to consider that cosmologists denied the existence of exoplanets as resent as the mid-1990s, and Giordano Bruno was put to death for suggesting that exoplanets existed with life on these other worlds in the early 1600s.
One of the things that I am interested in is about our own Solar System. We don't know much about the outer reaches of our own. We don't know anything about the Oort cloud, we can't even confirm it's existence by seeing them. We just infer it by it's existence by it's Gravity on other Objects.
Hey Fraser, I heard that you needed more questions son here's one that came to mind listening to this video: When the star light goes through an exoplanet's atmosphere, how do scientists know wich elements of the atmosphere absorb energy and wich ones emit energy? what does influence this result❓ Or, in other words, and a close to home example, ¿if a telescope is in LEO around the earth and points to the sun the elements in the sun besides hidrogen emit energy or absorb energy as seen in the sunlight spectrum❓
My answer to Fraser's money is no object question: what's the cheapest space scope that we could make would be merely "good enough"? Maybe we could send up a few hundred telescopes in just a few batches and be able to watch so many more parts of the night sky all at once!
It all depends on the launch platform. Right now, it costs about $3,000/kg to launch payloads into orbit. But Starship could bring those prices down to $300, or less.
Hi Fraser, given the limited telescope time the researchers get in order to make observations on the exoplanets, does that introduce an inherent bias towards discovering only those exoplanets that have a shorter orbital duration around their stars? Could this be the reason behind majority of the confirmed exoplanets having only days worth of orbital time around their stars?
Question: once starship is finished, would they be able to accelerate smaller probes to insane speeds? For example, launch a small probe to Saturn w/ starship, and use the leftover fuel to get it there quicker than normal?
Question: I wonder if NASA even think of what happens when we find a planet with a civilization. Do we hand ourselves restrictions, as in certain privacy or engagement regulations, laws, remedy. Since we don't really all like it, to be observed possibly by aliens, interfering and studying us, but what do we grand other possible civilizations as for rights on behalf of how we might study them, or just their planet...etc.
Major paradigm shift in cosmology. Sometimes I just spellbound the long jump happened JWST with. I am sure with available data in coming data will be great scientific progress in Astronomical physics.
We need a whole fleet of JWST level telescopes. To scan as much as possible. Someday... We will develop a super drive of some kind. If we can achieve even 5% or 10% of light speed... That's more than enough for 'generation" ships to settle galaxy. Sadly, At my age ... I won't live to see even the first lunar base. That sucks.
JWST needs one upgrade: A fuel tanker / maintenance spacecraft. The optics will be good forever and the instruments should be almost as durable. Upgrading the computer might not be required for some time, but repairs to existing systems would be in order.
I wonder what fraction of exoplanets detected so far are detected by carefully examining the star's light curve during transits. Given how small the planet is relative to its star and to its orbit, there must be a whole lot that aren't detected this way. I did a back-of-the-envelope calculation there's less than a 0.5% chance that any aliens looking our way would be in the narrow band where such events would occur. If it weren't for the gas giant planets, I think that Earth would be unlikely to be discovered at all.
It is about 1% or so, which doesn't sound like much, but there are 60,000 stars within 100 light-years of us, so imagine 600 stars capable of detecting us purely with the transit method.
@@frasercain Thanks. Looking a a plot that I found since I posted that (at the top of en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methods_of_detecting_exoplanets), I wonder if I wasn't clear in my question. That plot seems to indicate that transit is, in fact, the dominant method by which we detect exoplanets. Now, admittedly, our planet is a puny planet fairly far from its unremarkable star but if the Earth would transit the Sun for only 0.5% of the potential viewers, there's likely a *WHOLE* lot more exoplanets out there where the planet doesn't not transit its star (as seen from Earth)
I found the data source for the diagram. Here are the counts of the detection methodologies: 4122 Transit 1065 Radial Velocity 204 Microlensing 69 Imaging 25 Transit Timing Variations 17 Eclipse Timing Variations 9 Orbital Brightness Modulation 7 Pulsar Timing 2 Astrometry 2 Pulsation Timing Variations 1 Disk Kinematics [Total: 5524] 75% involve either transit or eclipse.
Use dinoflagellate Liquid crystalline DNA with its liquid crystal characteristics to make a programmable adjustable monofilament layer of this material sandwiched into your lens design. Stare at sky for long time, the DNA will become a natural interferometer. Continue with survey.?????? not sure though really, on second thought DNA would not be good as part of lens design? hmmm, not transparent, molecules too large, dunno, might be possible, have to modify the available bases in the strand to include more than the 5 bases that Dinoflagellates employ. 5'hydroxy methyl uracil along with the other 4 common bases. But their are plenty of other alternate bases that compose DNA, or are DNA compatible. then they form a natural crystal when condensed. light is polarised when it passes through. very dependent on orientation of dinoflagellate DNA in it's giant chromosomes, and this quality is of course encoded for by the same substance it is comprised of. hence programmable.
Big data? Bring it to CCP games and project discovery. We citizen scienc-ed planetary transits and mapped genomes already. We’ll munch through that data too for our ship skin rewards in no time. ❤😅
18:28 "nah!" Not interesting enough ! A couple of years after we have been in contact with alien civilizations we say the same thing, nah! They do not know the meaning of life! They have not been to the end of the universe! No good food! Nah! Not very interested actually, they don't even have pizza or lasagne, give me something else!
The sooner humanity realizes how little they matter or next extinction event or whatever the better. Just let the universe do its thing it's trying to do. The birth of a star is alone is more significant in the grandest of schemes than you or anyone ever could ever be. Get over it.
Why are people so proud? Humanity has only managed to develop slaves who rush to their dutys for whatever carrot the masters dangle. All desperate to lobotomize themselevs with fucking tick tock. We made james webb! Meta lost more failing to make us even dumber. Thats what our best minds, and most powerfuls efforts lay. exploitation, suffering, greed. Good work.
What’s the point of *verbally* referring to it as “JWST” when that has the same number of syllables as “James Webb space telescope” and more than 2x the syllables as just saying “James Webb?” makes no sense
Many things have several designations. Especially technical devices. Abbreviations, combinations of product names, product series and manufacturers etc. Nicknames... This is nothing new.
There are trillions if not quadrillions of exoplanets. We will never ever visit one of them. I don't see what the big deal of "discovering" another one or another thousand or another million, etc. Of course, at some point we might confirm the existence of life on a planet outside the Solar System. Has to be of course. Other than that, I don't see what the big deal is of "discovering" some more.
As Dr Hord says, with more data we can get a better understanding of exoplanets as a group and that can help us to reason about planetary formation and how that relates to the formation of our own solar system. Biosignatures are a special facet to look for, and maybe different mineral profiles are too
I still think we should start building a second JWST. Not only will it extend the life of the program but also double the science. And bonus we already have all the engineering worked out. The technicians that built it are still alive and the work is fresh in their minds. It won’t cost 10 billion like the first one did. And we can even add some more filters or spectrograms for even more science. A second would benefit science so mooch.
Brilliant idea!
.
I got 5 on it
There are many more projects to come that will surpass the capabilities of JWST. It would almost be redundant to recreate it considering the amount of time it will take to replicate it. Since technology has advanced so greatly since that project began, it only makes sense to put funding towards a newer more capable space telescope. I totally get your angle but it's not a practical idea
the questions that the JWST was created to answer will likely be answered so it will be better to just build something more powerful to answer harder questions, I understand where you're coming from but why stay stagnant when we can keep advancing, if anything we should build another JWST with more sensitive instruments.
Wow what a terrific interview, great questions, great answers. I had several questions going in and all of them were answered brilliantly. It's great to meet Ben Hord, and know that the proud tradition at Goddard is in good hands. Again Fraser, great questions, well done.
Fraser is such a good interviewer, he really knows how to keep the conversation going. Its a special talent.
Thanks for the ad free vids guys
Thanks!
Super Interview! Thank you Fraiser, thank you Ben Hord! All the best!
Great interview with an excited scientist! What more can you ask for? Thanks Ben and Fraser!
I really do think that JWST is the most successful piece of tech NASA has ever created, and I see it having it's mission extended several times! I haven't been this excited since Hubble.
The big issue is the amount of fuel it had on board. Once it runs out of fuel(coolant) there’s nothing we can do.
38:58 Can a photographic block be created by subtraction of sequential images?
Stuff that doesn't move gets erased, whereas the moving planets image as dotted lines?
Fraser,
You are killing it lately.
Just so you know and could be deservingly chuffed about it😉
Thanks a lot, but buckle up, we've got so many cool interviews coming.
Wow!! This video deserves so much attention!! Wonderful information, and wonderful ways of explaining.
Hello Dr Ben Hord. My name is Nafi and I'm 55 years old, so Speed up your research and discover life on any planet before I die and do not experience the joy of this great discovery.
Another great interview Fraser and some of the questions you asked were great as it gave out answers that I found both informative and fascinating. I drew 2 things from this interview and the first was easier in that I can see what Ben Hord is doing in trying to get the scientific community to work together in getting JWST time used more efficiently across the board. The second thing was far more thought provoking it causes me to ask who or how are the dice being rolled where the universe is concerned? Probably nothing at all other than the complexity of size etc., but anything that produces time and matter from nothing is more than just a passing thing! Due to the size and complexity of the universe we are almost operating with one eye and an arm behind our backs. The fact, as alluded to by Dr. Horm in that there is more than one way to skin a cat and in our case it is the size of the universe and its component parts. Because of that we need a myriad of different means to make our observations to understand what is going on. I also, the more I listen and watch the varying interviews, realise that whilst the world media might want astonishing and impacting things to report there are few of them. At the same time, however, there is a huge vat of bubbling work going on down under the surface of it all by the many varying facts of the science community. Ian B
So for the next big 'JWST' the project, we need to get the funding ahead to build 5 samples, or even 10. Then you don't need all these commissions, and scientists 'fighting' over telescope time, and valid projects get declined due to lack of telescopes.
Could we have the possibility to launch multiple satellites so the effective aperture would be like the distance between them? I imagine an aperture of 1 million km for example would be incredible. Or even the lenght between the Earth and the Moon
Love from India ❤
Totally agree that long period planets are a big knowledge gap in our understanding of other planetary systems. It's probably the biggest engineering challenge to characterizing planetary formation. Cool time to be working in this field.
Such a great interview, thank you Fraser and Dr. Hord. 🖖
Another great interview! This is my favorite subject.
Great interview, really interesting questions and answers, learnt alot about the domain in general. I was also wondering about a dedicated space (or ground) telescope to a particular exoplanet system, it may not make sense for an expensive highly sought-after telescope but what about a less expensive but still-capable telescope?
I believe a way to put a coronagraph in front of multiple stars in a large field view telescope could be staring us in the face as we read this on our computers. Is there any reason we can't attach an LCD screen aligned to the CCD sensor array so that by programming it pixel by pixel it would block the starlight from stars and achieve the effect we want in order to only allow light from exoplanets to reach the sensors?
As for how to settle the riddle of where and how hot Jupiters are formed and migrate, it seems like extensive orbital modeling using various starting points of dust and gas in star systems on supercomputers along with AI would answer that question.
Thanks Dr Ben Hord for your very interesting work in this field and telling us about it!
Thanks Fraser for doing another great interview!
It's profound to consider that cosmologists denied the existence of exoplanets as resent as the mid-1990s, and Giordano Bruno was put to death for suggesting that exoplanets existed with life on these other worlds in the early 1600s.
One of the things that I am interested in is about our own Solar System. We don't know much about the outer reaches of our own. We don't know anything about the Oort cloud, we can't even confirm it's existence by seeing them. We just infer it by it's existence by it's Gravity on other Objects.
Hey Fraser, I heard that you needed more questions son here's one that came to mind listening to this video:
When the star light goes through an exoplanet's atmosphere, how do scientists know wich elements of the atmosphere absorb energy and wich ones emit energy? what does influence this result❓ Or, in other words, and a close to home example, ¿if a telescope is in LEO around the earth and points to the sun the elements in the sun besides hidrogen emit energy or absorb energy as seen in the sunlight spectrum❓
How far can JWST accurately look at a planets atmosphere, is it only for planets inside our galaxy?
Yes
My answer to Fraser's money is no object question: what's the cheapest space scope that we could make would be merely "good enough"? Maybe we could send up a few hundred telescopes in just a few batches and be able to watch so many more parts of the night sky all at once!
It all depends on the launch platform. Right now, it costs about $3,000/kg to launch payloads into orbit. But Starship could bring those prices down to $300, or less.
@@frasercain that's what I'm counting on!
Thanks Dr. Hord for such an important groundwork. It's not the sexiest science, but it leads to many, many great discoveries.
Great interview
Hi Fraser, given the limited telescope time the researchers get in order to make observations on the exoplanets, does that introduce an inherent bias towards discovering only those exoplanets that have a shorter orbital duration around their stars? Could this be the reason behind majority of the confirmed exoplanets having only days worth of orbital time around their stars?
145 co-authors is quite a few. Right up there with the NANOGrav paper (some of which had over 100 co-authors.).
Nice reference, TIL thx
Question: once starship is finished, would they be able to accelerate smaller probes to insane speeds? For example, launch a small probe to Saturn w/ starship, and use the leftover fuel to get it there quicker than normal?
Question: I wonder if NASA even think of what happens when we find a planet with a civilization. Do we hand ourselves restrictions, as in certain privacy or engagement regulations, laws, remedy. Since we don't really all like it, to be observed possibly by aliens, interfering and studying us, but what do we grand other possible civilizations as for rights on behalf of how we might study them, or just their planet...etc.
19:00 Fraser saying he'll be excited if we find an exoplanet doing jazz hands
Yay a new video!
Hi Fraser, a question, what's happens next, if we discover life on an exo planet? Is there a plan?
Nope, no plan.
Are they also using orbital resonance when two planet orbits are known
Major paradigm shift in cosmology.
Sometimes I just spellbound the long jump happened JWST with.
I am sure with available data in coming data will be great scientific progress in Astronomical physics.
We need a whole fleet of JWST level telescopes. To scan as much as possible.
Someday... We will develop a super drive of some kind.
If we can achieve even 5% or 10% of light speed... That's more than enough for 'generation" ships to settle galaxy.
Sadly, At my age ... I won't live to see even the first lunar base. That sucks.
How do you always look directly in the camera even during interviews lol its impressive
Practice. 😀
@frasercain Haha, it's reminiscent of news reporters, honestly I love it. Love your channel by the way brother
What would we need to see an Earth- sized planet around a G or K star with an orbit of about a year: The orbital plane is not aligned with us....?
JWST needs one upgrade: A fuel tanker / maintenance spacecraft. The optics will be good forever and the instruments should be almost as durable. Upgrading the computer might not be required for some time, but repairs to existing systems would be in order.
I wonder what fraction of exoplanets detected so far are detected by carefully examining the star's light curve during transits. Given how small the planet is relative to its star and to its orbit, there must be a whole lot that aren't detected this way. I did a back-of-the-envelope calculation there's less than a 0.5% chance that any aliens looking our way would be in the narrow band where such events would occur. If it weren't for the gas giant planets, I think that Earth would be unlikely to be discovered at all.
It is about 1% or so, which doesn't sound like much, but there are 60,000 stars within 100 light-years of us, so imagine 600 stars capable of detecting us purely with the transit method.
@@frasercain Thanks. Looking a a plot that I found since I posted that (at the top of en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methods_of_detecting_exoplanets), I wonder if I wasn't clear in my question. That plot seems to indicate that transit is, in fact, the dominant method by which we detect exoplanets. Now, admittedly, our planet is a puny planet fairly far from its unremarkable star but if the Earth would transit the Sun for only 0.5% of the potential viewers, there's likely a *WHOLE* lot more exoplanets out there where the planet doesn't not transit its star (as seen from Earth)
I found the data source for the diagram. Here are the counts of the detection methodologies:
4122 Transit
1065 Radial Velocity
204 Microlensing
69 Imaging
25 Transit Timing Variations
17 Eclipse Timing Variations
9 Orbital Brightness Modulation
7 Pulsar Timing
2 Astrometry
2 Pulsation Timing Variations
1 Disk Kinematics
[Total: 5524]
75% involve either transit or eclipse.
Office desk plate reads: Dr. Ben Hoarder - Collaborator and collector of knowledge.
Oh, hah, I didn't notice that.
I know I’m getting old when the guy with the PHD who wrote the paper looks like he’s 14.
Same here.
I am a co-author of this paper))
Nice work!
Strange new works. NASA already knows how to build a telescope like James Webb. Here's an idea make more of like it
Cool
Confirmed biosignatures by 2035! I've got $50 on it ^_^
I'd rather have it zooming in on exoplanets nearby. Atleast until they get a dedicated satellite with comparable tech up there to do it.
❤
Use dinoflagellate Liquid crystalline DNA with its liquid crystal characteristics to make a programmable adjustable monofilament layer of this material sandwiched into your lens design. Stare at sky for long time, the DNA will become a natural interferometer. Continue with survey.??????
not sure though really, on second thought DNA would not be good as part of lens design?
hmmm, not transparent, molecules too large, dunno, might be possible, have to modify the available bases in the strand to include more than the 5 bases that Dinoflagellates employ. 5'hydroxy methyl uracil along with the other 4 common bases. But their are plenty of other alternate bases that compose DNA, or are DNA compatible. then they form a natural crystal when condensed. light is polarised when it passes through. very dependent on orientation of dinoflagellate DNA in it's giant chromosomes, and this quality is of course encoded for by the same substance it is comprised of. hence programmable.
I Really , Really, Really , ..Hope that we're Looking at Solar aystems Within OUR GALAXY...????
That's all we can see.
@@frasercainhow far away do you think we are from tech that can see exoplanets in ANOTHER galaxy?
Instead of hot jupiters, these may be liquid giants.
🎉
Hai
I feel that the formation of hot Jupiter's and the like is the least interesting astronomy research right now. Am I alone?
Big data? Bring it to CCP games and project discovery. We citizen scienc-ed planetary transits and mapped genomes already. We’ll munch through that data too for our ship skin rewards in no time. ❤😅
18:28 "nah!" Not interesting enough !
A couple of years after we have been in contact with alien civilizations we say the same thing, nah! They do not know the meaning of life! They have not been to the end of the universe! No good food! Nah! Not very interested actually, they don't even have pizza or lasagne, give me something else!
The sooner humanity realizes how little they matter or next extinction event or whatever the better. Just let the universe do its thing it's trying to do. The birth of a star is alone is more significant in the grandest of schemes than you or anyone ever could ever be. Get over it.
Why are people so proud? Humanity has only managed to develop slaves who rush to their dutys for whatever carrot the masters dangle. All desperate to lobotomize themselevs with fucking tick tock. We made james webb! Meta lost more failing to make us even dumber. Thats what our best minds, and most powerfuls efforts lay. exploitation, suffering, greed. Good work.
Nah
What’s the point of *verbally* referring to it as “JWST” when that has the same number of syllables as “James Webb space telescope” and more than 2x the syllables as just saying “James Webb?” makes no sense
Many things have several designations. Especially technical devices. Abbreviations, combinations of product names, product series and manufacturers etc. Nicknames... This is nothing new.
If, like me, you're hoping people start pronouncing it like a word as "juiced", I support you
@@SebSN-y3f Hubble is called just Hubble, why not James Webb
There are trillions if not quadrillions of exoplanets. We will never ever visit one of them. I don't see what the big deal of "discovering" another one or another thousand or another million, etc. Of course, at some point we might confirm the existence of life on a planet outside the Solar System. Has to be of course. Other than that, I don't see what the big deal is of "discovering" some more.
We'll also never visit the past, but studying it can tell us a lot about the present
As Dr Hord says, with more data we can get a better understanding of exoplanets as a group and that can help us to reason about planetary formation and how that relates to the formation of our own solar system. Biosignatures are a special facet to look for, and maybe different mineral profiles are too
What the f is the reason to call planets exoplanets all of a sudden. Why the f do we have fashion in words to describe science lol. Pathetic and sad.
What would you prefer to call planets orbiting other stars?
We don't, it's just for planets outside our solar system
For some reason, scientists want to differentiate planets in our solar system from planets in other star systems. Pretty crazy, huh? 🙄
What an incredibly stupid thing to get upset about.