Intergalactic Stars, Sun Switching Poles, A Second Sun | Q&A 264
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 26 июл 2024
- Can stars be born without a parent galaxy? Can quasars destroy life in an entire galaxy? Is there another planet in our Solar System after all? Did the Sun have a sibling star at some point? Answering all these questions and more in this week's Q&A show.
🦄 Support us on Patreon:
/ universetoday
📚 Suggest books in the book club:
/ universe-today-book-club
00:00 Start
00:51 Are there stars without a parent galaxy?
04:43 Can quasars sterilise their galaxies?
08:57 Did we find Dyson spheres?
13:04 Will I consider using LLMs in my work?
16:32 Is there a ninth planet?
19:19 If no Planet X is found, are black holes the only explanation?
21:25 If nothing spun, would there still be gravity?
23:41 Can telescopes at L2 see on the other side of the Sun?
27:07 Do we have a second star?
29:49 Is going to the Moon before Mars the right idea?
33:21 How do we know single pixel images aren't just noise?
36:44 Can the Sun switch its axis?
📰 EMAIL NEWSLETTER
Read by 70,000 people every Friday. Written by Fraser. No ads.
Subscribe for FREE: universetoday.com/newsletter
🎧 PODCASTS
Universe Today: universetoday.fireside.fm/
Astronomy Cast: www.astronomycast.com/
🤳 OTHER SOCIAL MEDIA
Mastodon: astrodon.social/@fcain
Twitter: / fcain
Twitter: / universetoday
Facebook: / universetoday
Instagram: / universetoday
📩 CONTACT FRASER
frasercain@gmail.com
⚖️ LICENSE
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)
You are free to use my work for any purpose you like, just mention me as the source and link back to this video. 
Наука
![Cordae - Saturday Mornings (feat. Lil Wayne) [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/z2GYJua09F0/mqdefault.jpg)
A cat living long term on a moon base is the cutest thing I've ever heard. This needs to be a NASA priority. It would be the greatest PR move in the history of space exploration.
Agreed!
"Oh, that would SUUUUUUUCK." That was *heartfelt*.
Best Black Hole Death Ray Animation ever.
6:18 I think
Hi Fraser, thank you so much for your show. Enjoy your hard earned break.
6:20 I didn't expect your death beam to knock me off my chair 🤣
favorite show on youtube!! what will we doooooo????? go outside? get hit by solar flares????
THANK YOU!! have a great summer, make the most of it!
As an amateur nerd, thank you, I love this channel.
Love your content. Been watching 10 years now 😊
Wow, thank you!
@@frasercain I feel I binged like 10 years straight in the last 2 weeks or so. :D
I'm totally blown away by the quality of communication. I am also inspired to look for opportunities in the industry as a web/cloud developer, as well as a photographer with astro aspirations.
That's amazing. There should be a lot of collaboration opportunities. So much of astronomy is programming and databases these days.
I’ve captured the most detailed image of Uranus ever seen, it’s magnificent.
I'm hoping the image artifacts I'm seeing are the result of Webb's hexagonal mirrors, otherwise I know a good doctor for you to call.
Thank you for another fabulous season of all your content! I hope your semi-hiatus time lets you enjoy the bright season.
Have a great summer break! Thank you for the content
A signal from a single pixel could be noise, but telescopes capture long exposures so that pixel receives multiple photons and the more photons it receives the more the signal to noise ratio increases.
Thank you Fraser & Crew.
imagine our solar system being alone out in intergalactic space....in the middle of nowhere.....imagine the technology and the courage required to "make the leap"...
When you look at something, always try to see the unseen - it’s much more important.
Thanks to you and your team for taking the time to relesase this
Omg, it doesn't seem long since the summer break last year. Year has flown by
33:27 More than just which elements are present, you can also get temperature measurements (if you can calibrate the measurement to account for the redshift caused by the expansion of the Universe); and rotation estimates (by how smeared the lines are due the rotation causing parts of the object to be moving away and other parts moving towards us, causing asymmetrical red/blueshift) and all sorts of other estimates based on statistical models of how different characteristics would cause different smears and spike intensities at different shifts etc. You won't get a perfect 2d image, but no only more than a single pixel, it's even more than just a single line; there would some level of educate guessing involved though, and results could be a bit ambiguous, compatible with multiple interpretations.
I'm not 100% sure on all the details, this is just an assemblage of things I've heard over the years, and my memory is a bit flakey; I'm not anywhere near being a professional of the area. I'm sure there are people that could explain things much better and with less mistakes.
I still feel the need to vote
Andoria (the first one)
I feel better now
Great ! Explain things really well!
Fantastic show.
We have a binary companion, it's Pluto, it's not a planet with 4 moons, it is a broken up ash dwarf. They are all solid carbon , not simply dusted by carbon. Also gravity is acceleration not spin, here gravity is an acceleration of 9.2m per sec^2.
Happy holidays!
How close to a quasar beam would a galaxy already with life in it have to be, in order to be sterilized by the beam? Are there quasar beams intense and wide enough to either swipe thru a galaxy edge-on and still be at a deadly intensity as it reaches the other side, or that can just one-shot a whole galaxy at once from above still with enough density of energy to sterilize it thru the whole thickness of the disc?
@UniverseToday Team
Thank you and enjoy your holidays.
Wow, excellent musical narration.
RJ's question might have been related to the idea that gravity isn't a "force" but a curvature of spacetime. If we describe gravity as a curvature of spacetime, everything is in motion all the time and follows the curved spacetime lines "down" as if pulled by a force of gravity. But if nothing is moving, it doesn't take a curved path anymore, since it isn't moving at all. At that point, we would expect it wouldn't fall, since it wouldn't be following any curved spacetime lines "down" anymore.
If nothing is moving it would mean there are no massive bodies. If, however, you have a collection of massive bodies then that causes motion due to gravity.
@@tonywells6990 In relativity, why does gravity cause things to move? My understanding is that it just alters their movement to follow curved lines of spacetime. The reason this works is that everything is in motion. RJ's question was what happens if you could somehow remove that motion from the universe.
@@Beldizar If you stopped everything moving, for example all the planets and moons in our solar system, then the moons would fall towards the planets, and the planets towards the Sun. Gravity still exists. Over an entire galaxy it would cause everything to fall inwards and eventually you would have new orbits between stars, collapsing molecular clouds and a lot of new star formation. After about a hundred million years (typical crossing time of a galaxy) you would end up with the galaxy reforming itself, most likely into an elliptical galaxy from all the random movements of stars and chaotic new orbits.
@@tonywells6990 You aren't understanding the question. You are thinking of gravity as a force, and if it is a force, and everything stops moving, it starts moving again and falls towards everything else. The intent of RJ's question, I believe, is considering gravity, not as a force, but as curvature of spacetime which guides motion, rather than a force which causes motion. If warped space time only guides motion, and is not a force which creations motion, then if everything is stopped, then maybe gravity wouldn't be able to cause anything to fall. I don't know where I come down on the answer on this, but it is important to understand the question, and not just brush it off as "gravity is a force, everything still falls."
@@busimagen You know, that might be the answer. I think RJ's question had more legs than Fraser gave it in his answer. I'm not trying to answer RJ's question here, just clarify it.
Thank you!!
thanks again... see you next season ...
Have a great vacation !
Happy vacation!
Fraser, I envy your holidays! I haven't had any since 2021, am overworked, have postponed home and computer maintenance and hobbies. I've composed no complete piece of music in 4 years, haven't configured auto backups on the new workstations I bought in 2022, and… oh I'd better stop! I wish you have all the joy that I've missed in 3 years-here, please, I'm happy to give you all my unused fun, I dusted it and polished it to mirror shine!!! Love your channel so much! 😍
Enjoy summer!!!!
You can use a Dyson Sphere to power a Nicoll-Dyson Beam that would be more than capable of sterilizing every star system in it's own as well as neighboring galaxies. Such power is physically within the reach of man and that is SCARY.
Fraser, some day I hope I can sit down and talk to you about space.
Sounds good. But definitely ask your questions if you've got them
_"What is turning? Compared to what?"_
Can't rotation be determined without reference to something else since it comes about from a centripetal force that can be measured? For example a spinning skater could be identified from a non-spinning one if they both held a scale in their hand attached to a rock with a string. The scale would read a higher weight for the spinning skater even if they were the only thing in the universe, and thus had no other reference. Wouldn't you only need a reference to define constant linear movement since no forces are being applied in that situation to measure.
I noticed you have pictures of galaxies overlayed on moving star fields. Just about always, when you see individual stars, they are much closer than galaxies. So the stars should not disappear behind the galaxies.
Thanks for your super show enjoy your sort of Holiday see you in the Autumn. PEACE AND LOVE TO EVERYONE ❤❤.
Don't worry, there's mountains of content coming. Just no live streams
I agree. The moon needs to be first. Going slow is not what I had in mind. We need to cooperate with all the space faring nations and start dropping tons cargo on the lunar surface. Some will fail, but doing so regularly will increase our knowledge and confidence. Then we will be in a far better position for long duration missions.
Thanks, Fraser.
Thanks for watching!
21:35 "Gravity doesn't come from movement"
That's right in Newtonian gravity. But in General Relativity, something which is rotating has _extra_ gravity, additional to the one which comes from its mass. (Lense-Thirring effect)
I lost it at 6:20 😂
Zzzaap.
I genuinely did not know you're not a physicist haha. The quality of this channel is right up there with all of my "science side of RUclips" channels that I watch. Thanks for the great journalism!
I knew, but I'm still impressed all the time by the depth of Fraser's knowledge. In his interviews with scientists there seems to always be this "phew!" moment where the scientists realize they use professional explanations of their work instead of the dumbed down version.
Hi Fraser, Do black holes look the same from every angle we look at them?
There is a lot of videos out there explaining how the stars die - going nova/supernova and leaving behind a white dwarf of neutron star of a black hole. But how long does it take for a typical star (e.g. Sun-like) to condense and ignite and become a proper star?
Have a great summer, see you in the fall
Fraser, I think you might have been mistaken when you said that rotation is relative. I was under the impression that under general relativity, movement is relative, but acceleration isn't. And rotation is a kind of acceleration, when you spin in a chair, you can feel a force flinging you outwards and this doesn't strike me as relative.
Hi Fraser and Team! Are there any stars going against the rotation of rest of the stars in the milky way? Could that even happen on a long term basis? If so do any of these stars host planets? Lots of love from Australia!
Great show but here's one last question...
How do the life cycles of stars, from their formation to their eventual death, contribute to the dynamic evolution and diversity of galaxies?
Hi Fraser! This question seemed quite interesting to me when it came about.
Let's say that there is a black hole at the center of a galaxy. When this galaxy is merging with another galaxy, it moves through space. If I am looking at a black hole now, there is a certain region of space that is inaccessible to me, behind the event horizon. But I can look at the black hole after some time when it has moved away a little bit. Now the region of space that was previously inaccessible to me is accessible (this region defined based on the spacetime distance from me and my clock). Some region that was previously accessible to me is not inaccessible. Isn't it magical that a black hole can pass through a region of space-time and the space-time just returns to its normal behavior once the black hole has gone away. The gravitational field (the metric g) and all the other fields can take the same values they could before this region of space was locked up behind the event horizon. Black holes can only isolate a region of space-time but do not alter the nature of the gravitational field once they move on. Isn't that non-trivial? This may be one reason to believe that the interior of the black hole could not be too crazy or it might have scarred that region of space once it passed through.
But maybe it does leave behind some scar. A graduate student at caltech Keefe Mitman presented during his talk (ruclips.net/video/97Fe3voDxnM/видео.html) that they have been working on trying to understand how much plasticity (memory) can gravitational waves leave behind in a certain region of space once they pass through. So, at the least when black holes move through a certain region of space they produce gravitational waves that could leave behind some change in the metric in that space.
Now imagine, early in the universe there were many small primordial black holes. A certain process caused them to move around in a manner that they ended up coaclescing and forming super massive black holes. As they moved through space, they left behind some change in the value of the graviatational field. Could this explain dark matter? For example, I am imagining a spherical shell region with lots of primordial black holes near the shell, all migrating towards the center and coalescing.
However, the assumption that a passing black holes does not leave behind any scar on the region of space it passed through does not seem trivial to me.
Is that a reasonable possibility?
"Isn't it magical that a black hole can pass through a region of space-time and the space-time just returns to its normal behavior once the black hole has gone away."
Err - no, this is not magical?!? The same happens when a star or a planet moves: As long it's there, spacetime is curved; when it moves away, spacetime in the same region is flat again.
"As they moved through space, they left behind some change in the value of the graviatational field. Could this explain dark matter?"
Interesting idea, but I don't see how that would reproduce the observed distribution of dark matter in a galaxy.
@bjornfeuerbacher5514 Right. What I am saying is that maybe black holes are somewhat different from planets or stars. I am speculating that when a planet or a star moves away, the gravitational field and all the other fields go back to behaving as they did before the planet or star passed through, but maybe the behavior of the fields is a little bit affected when a black hole passes because something was done to spacetime behind the horizon. Anyways, I am operating in the realm of science fiction. Thanks!
I don’t understand the obsession with Dyson Spheres. It’s a fantastical, extremely unlikely contraption that is almost certainly exists only in people’s imagination. But every time a cloud of dust dims a star, we get this speculation.
Are there other galaxies that the Milky Way has interacted with and which have wandered off as has occurred with the Sun and other stars, or has it only ever been Andromeda and the smaller galaxies captured by our galaxy?
Hi Frazier love your channel. I have 45 years of experience in aviation. And electronics. Well done, sir.
I have a question regarding the ice in the fuel tanks problem and how it will relate to rapid reuse in the future.
The ices, are freezing out of the autogenous pressurization gases. ?
Even if SpaceX manages to keep them out of the way long enough to land the booster, how are they ever going to remove the contaminants from the of the tank.
I don’t need to mention that this thing is a monster and the quantities of ice that we are talking about are going to be significant the time required to melt alone could be days. CO2 ice causes enough problems. When the water ice melts, the inside of the fuel tank is going to be covered in sweat. The scenario makes the hair on the back of my neck stand up.
I predict this is going to be a headache for on orbit refueling as well. Putting ice contaminated fuel in space will leave you stuck with it. Literally!
19:05 Could it be possible that Planet 9 did exist at one time, but this body was what we now call Thea?
19:20: I'm much less sceptical about the planet 9 shepherding the TNOs than Fraser. We've got a lot of them planets, a whole Kuiper belt with maybe a hundred or more Plutos. Nothing is so unusual about having one more, even if a large one on a weird orbit: the Solar System has likely ejected much more large planets during its formation than the 8 large remaining ones, so having one (or even more!) that was almost kicked out but managed to hold on a long elliptical orbit shouldn't be surprising. But I would rather disagree that if we don't find it, then it's not there. The problem with its orbit is that it's predicted to a wide range of a scaling factor, it may be larger or smaller by a few times, and the model also doesn't tell anything about its phase, i.e. where it could be right now. Hubble or JWST could spot it, but we don't know where to look.
Neptune is nearly pitch black, it reflects so little sunlight that it's barely visible. Remember that beautiful ringed Neptune from JWST? I's a little fragment of its whole field. A planet 10-20 times further away of smaller size and similar composition has little chance to be seen by a wide-field telescope, it would be tough even for JWST, many hours of light collection. If it's a frosty super-earth with a high albedo, maybe we'd be lucky, but if it's a smaller Neptune, chances of detection without knowing where to look are slim to none. An object on a highly elliptical orbit spends most of its time closer to its aphelion, if I remember Kepler's laws. It's a conundrum, but what can we do, when it's orbital period may be in some thousands of years? Maybe it will be discovered in a few millennia, on its closer approach. Astronomical distances and times are, well, astronomical, and space is vast, dark and empty. The B&B model just fits the observations too good to say it's not there and put a period at the end. There are alternatives, sure, it's a job of theoreticians to theorise, but they are rather falling short or predict no observation in their support (e.g., what can you make of a random interaction with a random star?), compared to the original B&B model.
A primordial BH, on the other hand, is about as likely as aliens having arranged these TNO orbits out of their pure alien aesthetics, I totally agree with that! :-) There was a systematic survey search for primordial BH optical effects on apparent star positions in the Andromeda Galaxy that found no candidates; I can't find the reference, unfortunately, anyone please chime in. AFAICR, it discovered a few intergalactic stars with which the Milky Way and Andromeda play beach volleyball against each other out of cosmic boredom, which is important in itself.
Imagine being an intelligent life form, that develops on a planet around a star in intergalactic space...
It seems like it would be an exceptionally lonely experience...
No nearby stars around which other life might arise... Beings living on such a planet might justifiably believe that they are the only living beings in the universe...
Has there been any plots done on these intergalactic stars on a HR plot? Any deviation from the norm?
Just a random question. Are there any alternative theories about why we observe red- and blue-shifted light in the universe? So much is built on this and I'm curious about whether could be other interpretations.
see you in the late summer
Hi
Hello Fraser! The north pole of the sun, where is it directed, inside the galaxy?
re - Dyson Spheres
You'd think that such an advanced race as could build a dyson sphere, could also find a use for all that "waste" heat, so that it's not waste at all, but used instead to perform work. Of course, this would mean that we'd need to find some other way to detect them...
You can't break the laws of thermodynamics. Eventually you have to let the heat out.
Can a regular old nova make elements?
If a civilization was advanced enough to create a Dyson sphere could they also extract and use all the generated heat making it difficult to spot them in the infrared?
We could well be here because the Milky Way had a disproportionate small black hole seeding our galaxy. Small galaxy means we were quenched not all the resident star forming nebula messed up with the electromagnetism from Hades.
I think the guy who thought that spin made gravity might have made that mistake after hearing about simulating gravity using centrifugal force.
6:20 on repeat...
23:50: If I had to put my chips on the next close up supernova, I'd bet on η Car. Betelgeuse steals all the thunder, but Eta is probably much closer to going off.
Betelgeuse is probably surprisingly stable because it possible swallowed a white dwarf. Hence there's a massive inward pull. It's definitely an outlyer
@@Roguescienceguy What has "it swallowed a white dwarf" to do with "there is a massive inward pull"?
@@bjornfeuerbacher5514 well, when you look at Betelgeuse it is like it is constantly nova'ing(if that is even a word😅) but with the extra gravity from the white dwarf inside it doesn't quite happen
@@Roguescienceguy "it is like it is constantly nova'ing"
Err - no? A nova means that on the surface of a white dwarf, a thermonuclear reaction happens and hydrogen is "burnt" which was accreted from a companion star. That is nothing like what happens at Betelgeuse.
Did you perhaps mean a supernova instead of a nova? If yes, then that's wrong, too. A supernova means that a star explodes. But Betelgeuse is not constantly exploding.
"but with the extra gravity from the white dwarf inside it doesn't quite happen"
??? Sorry, I can't follow your logic at all. Extra gravity does not stop a star from going nova - it's more the other way round: when a white dwarf has more gravity, it can accrete more matter from a companion star and hence _more_ easily can go nova.
The same is true for supernova: A star with more mass will have a supernova explosion _earlier_ than a star with less mass, not later.
Additionally, even if Betelgeuse swallowed a white dwarf, that did not increase its mass by much. Betelgeuse has a total mass of at least 16.5 solar masses; a white dwarf has at most 1.4 solar masses. So the white dwarf that was swallowed makes up less than 10% of the total mass of Betelgeuse, i. e. it can't have a big effect on its behaviour.
@@bjornfeuerbacher5514 you are right on a lot of things, but there is a paper that does suggest it. I am merely giving one reason for its odd behaviour. Aren't you mixing up nova and type 1a supernova? Type 1a is the one where a white dwarf collects matter from its binary companion. Anyway, the suggestion is that a white dwarf is still orbiting within Betelgeuse and drags matter along somehow creating a swirl that basically prevents Betelgeuse from blowing of his outer mantle. It's a bit far-fetched, but stranger things have been observed
Wait, if gravity is the warping of spacetime, isn't the effect of gravity moving objects towards each other actually exactly from the movement of these objects across spacetime? So, even if the spacetime was warped, the planets wouldn't fall to the sun without their motion right?
Woah
??Does the JWST or any other telescope plan on taking "Time Lapse" or "stop motion" images of the Pillars of Creation so we can see the movement of these clouds???
No, that would be considered a waste of telescope time. The telescope has a limited lifespan and if a proposal for an observation doesn’t teach us anything new or doesn’t disprove something, it won’t get any telescope time. Even if it was just a short exposure every day, it would use up a considerable amount of propellant
Plus, there are a bunch of other telescopes that could take a timelapse of something that bright.
Not sure anything moves quickly enough there to see movement. The Crab nebula on the other hand has quick enough movement to see over the years.
The movement could already be made by the images that have been taken over the years IF it moves fast enough to see in this extremely short time span
They could also look for planet nine out side the plane... The planet at that distance would have orbit on the thousands of years.
Any spacecraft observing the Sun should be able to observe the supernova behind it. Not really the best option. I concur thought. That scenario would suck.
If Betelgeuse goes of and its energy burst is pointed at us it might be just a little bit better if the sun is ruining our view , hmm maybe ?.
Here's a question - not sure if it's silly, but here goes.
If one day in the future we launched a craft to some distant target, should that craft be fitted with a telescope?
I realise we can see a long distance with 'scopes, but surely over time and with sufficient velocity, said craft would deliver increasingly clear views of vistas in the direction of its travel!
Think of it this way. If you want to observe a star 10 lightyears away and send the spacecraft 5 lightyears in that direction. Sure, that might help a little. But even with future technology that would take decades.
And our galaxy is 100.000 lightyears across, not to mention all the other galaxies millions of lightyears away. Unless faster than light travel is possible (which it almost certainly is not) we might as well build our telescopes closer to home.
And don't be afraid to ask silly questions. The best way to learn is to keep asking questions.
It's always a balance between how difficult it is to send a telescope far away and communicate with it. Especially when you're talking about light-years. We couldn't send a 1 kg telescope light-years away. For now, we're stuck at home using bigger and bigger telescopes to make the distant places look closer.
@@frasercain I'm honoured with your reply, Fraser. *Genuflects deeply*
Quick question about Beetlejuice - how long is the worst case timing scenario window? Days, weeks?
I wouldn't give it more than 150,000 years at the longest, and unlikely more than 100,000. No kidding. Any day between now and then! The problem is, nobody knows what happens at a red supergiant core. It may be burning helium, or already neon. It's impossible to tell looking at the surface. On the last day of its life, it will be fusing silicon, and still look bloated and red, as it always had. It may be belching carbon, as it recently did, but the core is pretty much an isolated region, a fusion reactor which lives its own life, and exchanges matter with the rest of the star only in a thin surface layer.
All we see is due to heat exchange between core and higher layers of hot gas, and red giants are balls of puffy, boiling, roiling plasma (a gas with electrons torn off nuclei). Streams of free charges are electric currents, so this plasma is interspersed with magnetic fields, which in turn direct the plasma streams. Modelling a start is a horrifically complex task: in addition to already complex hydrodynamics (a study how hot fluids, e.g., gas, move), accounting for electromagnetic forces on the fluids turns the problem into a magnetohydrodynamic one. It's not solvable mathematically, only amenable to supercomputer numeric modelling. Simply speaking, you chop the star into cubes, as if space were discrete, and chop time into discrete timesteps. Then you compute how these cubic volumes tug on each other to compute pressure, flow, currents, magnetic fields etc., to get the numbers for each cube on the next timestep. Then rinse and repeat. Stuffing a whole Betelgeuse-sized star into even a huge supercomputer is not a simple task: if you chop it into cubes 1000km in size and time into 1 day steps, your computation will be very imprecise, rubbish, really. If you go with cubes of 1cm in size (how many do you'll get if you slice a supergiant into cheeseboard-sized cubes?) and slice time into 1 second steps, you'll get an excellent model, but it will take longer than your lifetime to run it to evolve the star. And worse, we don't know what to put into the model, we run a model for a month, compare the result with observation, get nonsense, tweak parameters, run it for another month, get less nonsense if we're lucky-it's an informed trial and error guessing and years of work of many people and supercomputers till the model starts to reproduce real star evolution.
And, of course, we can't peek even into the Sun below its photosphere, visible "surface"-this is what the Parker Solar Probe is for, namely to measure other, non-light stuff, like magnetic fields and particle fluxes. But we cannot launch a probe to Betelgeuse... All we see is a few pixels, and that's the _only_ star except the Sun we have more than one pixel of. As Fraser said, spectra give much more info, but even that by far not all there is-it's only what we can glean from the Earth. This is why we suck at predicting the final evolution of a supergiant.
Luckily, there are also Antares and η Carinae which are also going to go supernova within this time frame. η Car may go off much sooner. The main star in this multiple system is a huge, ~100MSol wildly pulsating LBV which had two recent supereruptions in the 19c. We don't know if supereruptions predict an imminent supernova, LBVs are rare stars, but there was an LBV supernova that blew up only 6 years after a similar supereruption event.
The Carinae nebula, a huge stellar nursery (one of the first JWST images, if you recall), has quite a few supernova candidates. Betelgeuse, Antares and Eta are not the only stars which may give us a nearby supernova to study. As you already understand, their "when" may also happen today. There's about a dozen stars like that, Betelgeuse just stole the thunder thanks to the media feedback.
@@cykkm Uhh, thank you for a detailed response but you totally missed the point within the context of the question that was asked in the video.
The question was - if Betelgeuse goes supernova at the time when our Sun is between our planet and Betelgeuse, how bad is it for our observation?
Fraser said it's pretty bad because most of our instruments are boud to Earth (including JWST) and will have oversaturation from our Sun (or be outside of observation cone for JWST) to properly observe all the astro-science goodness that's happening in the first hours of the supernova event. He added it's not the end of the world (unless you're orbiting Betelgeuse) because we have a couple of backup options on or around Mars that could take a few pics, however, we would miss out on a lot of good science due to the position of the Sun.
So, my (rephrased) question now is, what percentage of the year (time in general) is the Sun's position interfering with our best effort to observe the event?
Extra question: how much of an advance notice do we get from neutrino detection and can we pre-program some contingency subroutines into our assets around other planets to point their eyes to Betelgeuse during those periods of occlusion (either automatically every year, or on command once we get a neutrino burst indication that something's going on)?
Spectroscopy: Produce The Rainbow🌈
if we didn't already predict these "dyson sphere" candidates, then that means we haven't predicted there is that much dust in the universe (or even oort clouds that are bridging between stars)...right?
Have a nice hiatus! Shouldn’t you have it in zero gravity to maximize its length compared to us?
The problem with the whole "planet 9" thing is - will this planet have "cleared it's orbit"? It seems like it will not have, meaning it is not a "planet" based on the definition which excludes pluto. So in other words, who can "planet 9" be a planet while pluto is not?
We'll let the IAU sort that out. First, it needs to be found.
👍
Psalms 19:1
Is there a possibility of heaver or different element's, than we know of, in other galaxies that could of had more massive nova's?
There's a limit to supernova size to avoid collapse into a black hole. I doubt other galaxies will have more massive novas, but they might have more of them.
Supernova create huge amounts of very unstable elements. It's possible that these are available long enough after the explosion to be incorporated into a planet, but decay quickly enough to be essentially gone from Earth. Look at the Wikipedia article "List of radioactive nuclides by half-life" for elements below about 10^16 seconds.
@@ericsmith6394 Thx M8
hey guys, can someone tell me where to ask the questions?
You just did it
@@frasercain hehe thanks. There is a 2 month break so i can ask later but if you can note my question for later, my real questions is:
I have lately checked that most of the rocket first stages (not SpaceX) splash in water and sink beneath the ocean. Is it not a long term problem to accumulate space junk beneath the ocean bed?
Thanks Fraser. Love your shows ❤️
The oceans are huge, and there are thousands of boats that have been sunk across the planet. In fact, many boats serve as places where reefs can form. We definitely want to move towards rocket launches that don't get discarded into the ocean.
Doesn't Jupiter count as a second companion as well as maybe Saturn since they orbit each other rather than Jupiter orbiting the sun? We only claim that the sun is the only one to feel special lol
Any interview with someone from CHAPEA-1 Mars simulation mission coming up? They need publicity because I just learned about it.
I was just thinking of that. I'll see what I can do.
@@frasercain Great! The video from when they came out didn't give any details, it was just "thank you to our families" etc.
Okay, I emailed their press office
@@frasercain Hopefully that gets the ball rolling. Ariane 6 went well, except for having the 2nd stage staying in orbit for possibly a decade or two.
When was the last earth magnetic flip??? 😮😅
We're overdue, actually.
How large would an asteroid need to be to send tidal waves into both Canada and the United States after striking the center of Lake Superior?
Hi fraser, i have a friend thats working for the Australian space agency, its a very new organisation for our country. Are you someone that could possibly be a contact for her? If so what would be a good option, i have u on steam from memory if we need a direct line.
Sure, like for an interview?
@@frasercain not really an interview per se, as its government related she cant speak specifics but would be a great way for her to find out new information for briefings etc. Was just a thought
Is it just me or does that book sound a lot like the plot for the Bruce Willis movie "Cosmic Sin"?
Could the sun’s gravity be used as a lense, or is it not big enough?
Sure. The focus is a bout 550 AU or so away, Fraser has interviewed Slava Turyshev who is working on sending a telescope there to take advantage of the solar gravitational lens effect.
Have stars been seen forming?
It takes a few million years for the entire process. But they've been seen at each stage of formation.
Imagine a civilization fully encompasses it's star in a Dyson swarm. It becomes dependant on that energy. Bamm! supernova. Decimating the civilization if not into extinction.
Probably best to just find a younger star or old dwarf stars with planets.
Definitely full lunar base with self sustaining water/ oxygen/ fuel/ generation, ai and robotic systems, habitat systems, mineral mining refining manufacturing production autonomous system, mini nuclear power generation cells and rocket thrusters.
Only the largest stars will go supernova. You'll want to avoid them.
If a star gets ejected from the galaxy, would the entire solar system go with it?
You may want to address why the neutrinos from a supernova will arrive before the light.
I've talked about it many times on the channel. Neutrinos aren't hampered by matter so they escape immediately while photons get held up by the infalling matter.
Have you read Peter F Hamilton? 🎉❤
I'm reading one of his books right now. It's pretty tough and slow to get through, but it definitely fits the genre I'm into.
Could dark matter just be lots of gravitons?
LOL. death star fraser.
I will be missing the show.
Don't worry, mountains of content still coming...
@@frasercain you were not wrong sir.
When will the Earth have precisely a 24 hour rotation??? Right now its at 23 hours 56 minutes and 4 seconds. I googled this and NO ONE has an answer, isn't that totally bizarre?
A quick Google search reveals that the day is now 47ms longer than it was 3200 years ago. at tthat rate of slowing it will take about 15 million years for the rotaion period to increase to 24 hours.
@@rogerphelps9939 Thanks, I couldn't find that answer anywhere.