Go fry a chicken o darn it , I'm cloaked in gravy balls for a couple hours but a lot more with me now and I have to deal of to listed above all that we will be a little concerned to ensure we are going ahead to make sure my work got finished by end up in a couple weeks and a little bit of the app to get the chance of a joke or not so confident in that now that you have a better understanding of the process and how to make this change but I will request that myself to say it last week because it still has me angry and I had been told by my manager that this information would be forwarded on to me for the past year was the best I could for the company after certain people had retired but I was wondering what the best I can see you in this regard as I'm a fan
That is so cool, and I'm jealous in the most spiritual, mental and psychological way, plus I was personally enriched by their free to learn class on chemistry, so I'm happy for you in the most altruistic way simultaneously grateful for the Institutes philanthropic endeavors!
How wonderful that the universe very occasionally creates by a series of accidents, a gifted science communicator able to deliver these staggering concepts on mainstream media and in RI talks. Thank you
Do you do any of the space projects on Zooniverse? there's a good community of people of all skill levels there. I have a current potential giant planet orbiting a low-mass star and supernova candidates and I've never owned a telescope.
A wonderfully easy and thoroughly engaging talk to listen to, even for those of us who may already be familiar with the examples shown here. I am consistently proud of the Royal Institution for showcasing scientific communication to the world.
I read the answer to the Fermi paradox just recently from a humble RUclips comment and I wish I could remember the name of the person that presented the solution. There is no Fermi paradox, life is out there, but the reason we don't know about them is because like us, they simply cannot get government funding to progress their civilisation.
Ummm....Yeahh....No. Just...No. You're honestly trying to say that there's all these advanced lifeforms just like us out there... but tragically, they just can't procure funding from their governments to come find us??🤔🤦🏼♂️
Thankyou Chris, I loved your presentation and your dry wit , especially the Just Wonderful Space Telescope 😂😂…it is quite humbling to realise how accidental some major advances in understanding have been
16:40 - pondering 'answers' to the Fermi Paradox is one of my favourite intellectual activities. It touches upon such deep questions....how we view ourselves, how we view humanity and our trajectory as a species.... what we suspect is the nature of the cosmos in relation to fostering life ... whether one thinks that consciousness, that strange and mysterious seeming trick of advanced life, whether THAT is in some way central to the cosmos .... what we think of time, etc, etc. The Fermi Paradox is a fun question to engage with.
Soon, they are working on that tech I'm sure. We just don't know about it yet. Look what we have done in just the last 15 years! Won't happen in my lifetime, but we will get there. Maybe even in a tourist capacity!
Neil de Grasse Thyson summed it up nicely on a Star Talk dissussion recently when he explained that most sicentific discoveries are preceded by the statement: "ooooh, that's weird"
55:45 f _They argued if the distant universe was like what we see around us, then Hubble would discover no new galaxies._ I don't understand this argument. If I stand midst of a forest which is not too dense but with roughly equally distributed trees, any gap between trees will reveal other trees behind it, shouldn't it? If there is a gap and I don't see any trees through it, this means that the region I'm looking at is not the forest any more, NOT something similar to my vicinity.
Honestly, it is precisely counterintuitive to focus the Hubble telescope at nothing in order to discover what is actually there and 100% new but a perfect example of thinking outside the box...like the double slit experiment changed by the observer which honestly is counterintuitive until you consider the observer needs to convert and capture light for the observers ability to report on what they observed!
The "evening star" is the term given to Venus but the bright star in the sky to me is usually Jupiter because it is higher over the horizon and easier to see. It depends on the latitude where the observations are being made.
57:50 _It's about as far from tge textbook method of science as I can imagine, there's no hypothesis here._ This is also weird to me. If we already assume that the universe is expanding, not in the steady state manner where matter is steadily created, we _should_ assume that the early universe was more populated by galaxies than the modern universe is.
There is no paradox in the search for life. The only paradox's are those that are invented. If we search with an open mind then we will find whatever we encounter.
The odds of finding and understanding something completely different are small. Even different human civilizations are so different that it is difficult, and the number of possibilities mean that our sun will burn out first
10:49 Billions of years or millions of years ??? How can Enceladus hold that much water and spray it out over billions of years to form Saturn's rings. Sounds implausible.
One of the problems of our 'understanding' of astronomy is that we use earthbound measures. 4.5 billion years is only 'a long time' is you're a human and use a time scale that is designed by and for humans. If you were simply to recalculate everything using an equivalent Neptune-based set of measurements where 1 year is 164.8 earth years long, the whole situation would look completely different.
It's not a problem of understanding. You and I have an idea of what 4.5 billion years is because we know what our Earth year feels like. And we are numerate.
Wouldn't it be amazing to have a 'POV' view of an ultra-sturdy melting-swimming probe as it descended through the icy layer of a moon and into its ultra-deep ocean. It would be so fascinating ... would we see anything macroscopic life? Would ANYTHING live? It's so hard to imagine vast amounts of water and NOT imagine life, but that's due to our Earth-centric view where every where we find liquid water, we find life. I'd LOVE to have these outer moons explored ....
Is it possible that we don't see signals bouncing around the cosmos, because of the distance other exoplanets are away, as an example just say we were trying to send a signal to a planet revolving around a star in a distant galaxy, we could track the planet, and make adjustments for how long it would take the signal to get there. But even then if the planet we are targeting is the same size as earth, how would we know where on the planet to aim the signal to the receiving antenna. Even if we did know exactly where the rx antenna was, the chances landing that signal on that antenna would be infinitesimally low, any signal that landed would be unexpected/fleeting and written of as an fluke which is an accurate description of what it would be.
I cant remember who said it originally, but once I heard it, it became my goto way of explaining how science usually works: Scientific discoveries are rarely made with a cry of "Eureka!" But most often with a mutter of "Hmm, that's interesting..." The discovery of Uranus being one such example, someone looked at the orbit of Saturn, realised there was an anomaly and said "That’s interesting..." and that lead to the discovery of a new planet.
When I think about the origins of life on earth I assume that a certain set of special conditions existed on the planet for limited period of time, and could not have taken hold any earlier or any later, but I don’t know exactly what those conditions were. What I do know is that in our 4.3 billion history, this happened exactly one time. That fact leads me to believe that life is extremely rare in the universe and is therefore more precious than we know.
I think they have a lot of Crystals which could be used in higher frequency settings and the lowers ones as well that becomes a Tallow flow without destruction of itself in a way we can find out how much they can transmit and resonates with other ones atoms heat up or freeze in place for a long term relationship of resonance. Imagine that all vibrations are stronger or weaker in certain areas and the floating density is measured as a different environment than the same planet or moons in each state of gravity recordings in crystal caverns or surface space that was in a very distant way
I love the story behind the The Hubble Deep Field image and I have the Hubble _Ultra_ Deep Field taken over 11.3 days total exposure between September 2003 and January 2004 as the background for my computer monitors. I do wonder what the - carefully unnamed - _Eminent Astronomers_ who said there'd be nothing there thought on first seeing the images. 🤣
11:57 - "an underwater ocean" - now that's something I have never heard before! Other than that - a brilliant lecture. (But my niggle does show that I was paying attention!)
When you think about it, every ocean is >99% underwater. I think he meant "underice", but that didn't sound like a real word, so his mouth replaced it with "underwater".
Cassini / Huygens was launched on top of a Titan IV B / Centaur rocket and not from the Space Shuttle. Hubble was kind of launched from the Space Shuttle.
You know, even the info concerning penguin poo is a valuable serendipitous knowledge that plausibly lends itself to alien detection especially when one considers that everything alive with exception to the human face mites, does in fact poo!
Little correction: Cassini wasn't launched from the Space Shuttle (anymore). It was launched (fittiingly) on a Titan rocket. The concept of launching probes and satellites with the Shuttle died with Challenger. Sadly not before seriously crippling Galileo. Doing a "mundane" transport job that could be done with a much, MUCH cheaper rocket, saved costs and pointless risk for astronauts.
@@mpmpm read and understand.... Launching a satellite or probe with he Space Shuttle is a pointless risk for astronauts, because it is not science! It's a transport job. And doing it with the Shuttle has absolutely NO benefits over doing it with a rocket. So putting multiple people at risk for that makes no sense. Hence "pointless". And as i said it was also insanely expensive compared to a rocket. So you have high costs, risking a whole crew for a needlessly complicated launch job, for no benefit. It was stupid and after challenger the Shuttle was reserved for actual science work, deemed worth the risk. The Shuttle is worth reading (or watching) up about. It was the result of budget cuts ,politics and design by many committees, making it much less than it could have been. Why Nasa missions and even commercial satellites were launched on it was also political. It's history is complicated. And interesting. And to explain the Galileo thing (years before Cassini) : it was supposed to launch on a Shuttle. But after Challenger, the Shuttle was grounded for 2 years and Galileo put in storage. It is likely that the greasing of various bearings suffered from that and that's why Galileos big main antenna never unfolded. Limiting it to a few low bandwidth engineering antenna to send data back. Despite some engineering magic by Nasa it limited Galleos bandwidth for the entire mission. Lessons for Cassini, directly from Galileo: Fixed main antenna, no fancy unfolding business, and DON'T launch it on the Shuttle. Making Cassini a unqualified success.
It's interesting, isn't it, that one can make all sorts of assumptions, and yet the most obvious assumption - that it was made - seems so objectionable to so many.
@@Safetytrousers NASA found the ring material showering into the surface clouds of Saturn... so *STABILITY* would require a source of *NEW* ice material.
@@brookestephen Infall of rings is proposed to be due to electrically charged water ice being drawn down magnetic lines. How would an inner ring of ice be preventing the other rings from all scrunching together against it?
18:40 - I disagree that intelligence took a long time to form on Earth. COMPLEX life took a long time to form. For most of Earth's history, the only form of life was microbial, single-celled or at least far from the complex macroscopic creatures we tend to call 'animals'. I'd argue intelligence may yet exist on it's own, separate 'rung' of a ladder, but that MOSTLY, the challenge seems to have been life advancing beyond the simple and microbial.
Giant impact of large bodies or variable size bodies of significant sizes could indeed modify a regular dipping event into a rather odd wtf type scenario! It's only a theory but these events did and have occurred multiple times within our own solar system, along with planetary ejection, etc, thus these somewhat irregular events can or could be attributed to spacial body events that we are currently aware of within our own galactic/solar neighborhood, history!
The microphone is saturating. Either turn down the sensitivity or bend it away from the mouth some. It's disappointing... you'd want to think of the Ri as being world-class, but they fail to adequately soundcheck.
Would it not be easier to test for Life on Enceladus by gathering samples of the Icy Ring and looking for Frozen life that had been ejected there by the Water Spouts? Rather than attempting to drill into the surface!
Recently I have been doing a lot of thinking about the "accidental" universe idea. I do agree that our discoveries occur in that fashion but it seems as though the universe unfolds in increasing levels of complexity. It appears as though it is centered around the acquisition and transmission of information. Firstly, the organization of particles into atoms then into matter, allowing gravity to take center stage. Gravity is the mechanism with which the universe takes its form and function. Stars, planets, galaxies and cosmic web come to be. When certain conditions are met, higher levels of universal complexity occur on these planets; life and consciousness. Our discovery of AI seems to be a further level of complexity. AI is a tool that will allow us to gain a level of knowledge we may not have been able to obtain on our own. Maybe not, just my two pennies.
I enjoy Chris Lintott's communication style; interesting, humorous and laid back. Good lecture. Thanks :)
Agreed. He's definitely a gifted scientific public speaker.
What an enthralling lecture, I was thoroughly captivated for the entirety of the hour, what a fascinating universe we all live in. 😀
I was fortunate to have been one of the attendees - this was a wonderful event!
Lucky you! And congrats too!
Go fry a chicken o darn it , I'm cloaked in gravy balls for a couple hours but a lot more with me now and I have to deal of to listed above all that we will be a little concerned to ensure we are going ahead to make sure my work got finished by end up in a couple weeks and a little bit of the app to get the chance of a joke or not so confident in that now that you have a better understanding of the process and how to make this change but I will request that myself to say it last week because it still has me angry and I had been told by my manager that this information would be forwarded on to me for the past year was the best I could for the company after certain people had retired but I was wondering what the best I can see you in this regard as I'm a fan
That is so cool, and I'm jealous in the most spiritual, mental and psychological way, plus I was personally enriched by their free to learn class on chemistry, so I'm happy for you in the most altruistic way simultaneously grateful for the Institutes philanthropic endeavors!
@@martinlaird9712ok gptv1
It's unfortunate that the audio in this recording is so distorted. Is that something that was noticeable at the lecture?
How wonderful that the universe very occasionally creates by a series of accidents, a gifted science communicator able to deliver these staggering concepts on mainstream media and in RI talks. Thank you
I love Chris Lintott! I have been watching “The Sky at Night” for years 😍
It's one of my earliest TV memories, watching Patrick Moore in black and white on The Sky at Night! Chris was Sir Patrick's hand-picked successor.
@@gerryjamesedwards1227Mine too! 🙂
Same here, absolutely loved that show.
Do you do any of the space projects on Zooniverse? there's a good community of people of all skill levels there. I have a current potential giant planet orbiting a low-mass star and supernova candidates and I've never owned a telescope.
And the Sky has been watching you since you were born (wink) !
A wonderfully easy and thoroughly engaging talk to listen to, even for those of us who may already be familiar with the examples shown here.
I am consistently proud of the Royal Institution for showcasing scientific communication to the world.
Such an inspiration!
The style may still be there but lucid clarity is seldom heard.
Engaging, interesting, never dull. Bravo!!
I read the answer to the Fermi paradox just recently from a humble RUclips comment and I wish I could remember the name of the person that presented the solution. There is no Fermi paradox, life is out there, but the reason we don't know about them is because like us, they simply cannot get government funding to progress their civilisation.
Ummm....Yeahh....No.
Just...No.
You're honestly trying to say that there's all these advanced lifeforms just like us out there... but tragically, they just can't procure funding from their governments to come find us??🤔🤦🏼♂️
Ummm it's called 'humour', maybe an alien concept for you? 😆
Bingo! Coruption and lies prevent them comunicating with us!
Like humans they're too busy fighting wars.
@@Billybobble1But humour, traditionally, is amusing.
I didn't think it was possible for learning about our universe to be more fascinating than it already was but he's done it.
Thankyou Chris, I loved your presentation and your dry wit , especially the Just Wonderful Space Telescope 😂😂…it is quite humbling to realise how accidental some major advances in understanding have been
16:40 - pondering 'answers' to the Fermi Paradox is one of my favourite intellectual activities. It touches upon such deep questions....how we view ourselves, how we view humanity and our trajectory as a species.... what we suspect is the nature of the cosmos in relation to fostering life ... whether one thinks that consciousness, that strange and mysterious seeming trick of advanced life, whether THAT is in some way central to the cosmos .... what we think of time, etc, etc. The Fermi Paradox is a fun question to engage with.
Royal Institution is the gift keeps giving to humanity. I am amazed and I awe of these magnificent talks. Thank you!
This was spectacular…thank you
Stellar talk!
Punny 😏
I have the attention span of a toddler, and even I had no problem sticking with this. Great talk.
Wonderful. I'm so glad I ran across this.
Engaging talk, would love to see more! Thx for the upload!
These lectures are brilliant, thanks💚💚💚💚
Superb talk by one of the great science communicators of our time. Thank you for making the talk available for all to watch and enjoy.
Found Lintot’s alt account.
Excellent presentation, Prof.
Great talk. Almost stream-of-consciousness-like. Super.
Amazing lecture! Thank you for sharing it
Oh my goodness! This was so beautifully explained that I am moved to tears. Seriously. It reminds me to stand in awe of my own existence.
Oumuamua is a good example of a surprising discovery rather than planned observation with a definable intention ✌️❤️🇬🇧
I've just bought the book, looking forward to reading it.
I LOVE DR. T!! I was an astrophysics major at LSU for 2 years and took her for a few classes!
Very grateful.
The universe, what a concept
And the award for most pleasing speaking diction goes to .... Chris Lintott!
A very engaging speaker.
What a great talk!
Brilliant delivery of very interesting thoughts, wonderful production!
I wish we could fly around and visit these places.
That will never happen unfortunately.
Soon, they are working on that tech I'm sure. We just don't know about it yet. Look what we have done in just the last 15 years! Won't happen in my lifetime, but we will get there. Maybe even in a tourist capacity!
I have
You _can_ visit the Royal Institution, and you might not even need to fly.
We already can. But you need to be alive for a few million years to get to the destination.
Us as an accident makes life rare in the universe, life with purpose makes it abundant
Our seasons show the narrow band that we as life can exist in
Is that lost in translation?
@@Safetytrousers
Thanks, fixed
Thank you for this royal instatuion literaly every video has been beautiful
Thank you
Please tell me why we use test charge always positive.???????..?
Excellent !!! 🙂
That was excellent. Thanks Chris
Synchronicity and human brilliance is amazing. Wonderful talk!
Excellent lecture. 🙂
Brilliant, Many Thanks Chris Loved it!
💚🏜️💚 lovely presentation
I was there, but just watched through again 😁👍
So my question is why no one tested the hst on the ground and detected the flaw. Could something be done about it for future missions? Thanks.
the RI likes repeating lecture topics, i've seen this topic a dozen times or more! but, it is always interesting none the less
Well, the topic is vague enough that you can have very different lectures on it.
should be showing these in schools - i certainly would have paid more attention
Thank you enjoyed your presentation 🐺
Neil de Grasse Thyson summed it up nicely on a Star Talk dissussion recently when he explained that most sicentific discoveries are preceded by the statement: "ooooh, that's weird"
55:45 f
_They argued if the distant universe was like what we see around us, then Hubble would discover no new galaxies._
I don't understand this argument.
If I stand midst of a forest which is not too dense but with roughly equally distributed trees, any gap between trees will reveal other trees behind it, shouldn't it?
If there is a gap and I don't see any trees through it, this means that the region I'm looking at is not the forest any more, NOT something similar to my vicinity.
That was great. Thank you.
Prof. Lintott has a whole series of lectures over at Gresham's web site
I do like this lecturer- on a level with the Andrew Szydlo
This is very interesting! Fun stuff too!
Honestly, it is precisely counterintuitive to focus the Hubble telescope at nothing in order to discover what is actually there and 100% new but a perfect example of thinking outside the box...like the double slit experiment changed by the observer which honestly is counterintuitive until you consider the observer needs to convert and capture light for the observers ability to report on what they observed!
Sounds like you misunderstand what exactly is mean by “observer” has nothing to do with a conscious being
33:39 - _"It's a perfectly normal middle-aged star, it shouldn't be doing this."_ - I guess astronomy isn't that different from showbiz.
Great presentation! 🖖
The evening star on earth is venus, not jupiter. The cassini probe was launched by a titan rocket, not the space shuttle.
Or Mercury.
The "evening star" is the term given to Venus but the bright star in the sky to me is usually Jupiter because it is higher over the horizon and easier to see. It depends on the latitude where the observations are being made.
Intelligence here on Earth is quite rare I feel. One only has to sit back and observe..........🙂🙂
58:52 If there's not a sci-fi novel with the title "The fountains of Enceladus" it should be written immediately!
57:50
_It's about as far from tge textbook method of science as I can imagine, there's no hypothesis here._
This is also weird to me. If we already assume that the universe is expanding, not in the steady state manner where matter is steadily created, we _should_ assume that the early universe was more populated by galaxies than the modern universe is.
I think that the size of the cosmos is amazing so if we are here there must be others also out there of some sort or another.
Going to Pitt Community College really had me ready for College Education moving forward.
My personal favorite is, each time a civilisation gets noisy they have been eaten..
🤫
There is no paradox in the search for life. The only paradox's are those that are invented. If we search with an open mind then we will find whatever we encounter.
The odds of finding and understanding something completely different are small. Even different human civilizations are so different that it is difficult, and the number of possibilities mean that our sun will burn out first
I thought HST’s “glasses” were called COSTAR for Corrective Optics Space Telescope Axial Replacement.
10:49 Billions of years or millions of years ??? How can Enceladus hold that much water and spray it out over billions of years to form Saturn's rings. Sounds implausible.
DOPE 🔥
One of the problems of our 'understanding' of astronomy is that we use earthbound measures. 4.5 billion years is only 'a long time' is you're a human and use a time scale that is designed by and for humans. If you were simply to recalculate everything using an equivalent Neptune-based set of measurements where 1 year is 164.8 earth years long, the whole situation would look completely different.
It's not a problem of understanding. You and I have an idea of what 4.5 billion years is because we know what our Earth year feels like. And we are numerate.
How do you know I'm human? Don't make assumptions.
Wouldn't it be amazing to have a 'POV' view of an ultra-sturdy melting-swimming probe as it descended through the icy layer of a moon and into its ultra-deep ocean. It would be so fascinating ... would we see anything macroscopic life? Would ANYTHING live? It's so hard to imagine vast amounts of water and NOT imagine life, but that's due to our Earth-centric view where every where we find liquid water, we find life.
I'd LOVE to have these outer moons explored ....
Yes! I'm in the video!!! I will be, a young white star, forming a eye in the HorseHead nebula
Is it possible that we don't see signals bouncing around the cosmos, because of the distance other exoplanets are away, as an example just say we were trying to send a signal to a planet revolving around a star in a distant galaxy, we could track the planet, and make adjustments for how long it would take the signal to get there. But even then if the planet we are targeting is the same size as earth, how would we know where on the planet to aim the signal to the receiving antenna. Even if we did know exactly where the rx antenna was, the chances landing that signal on that antenna would be infinitesimally low, any signal that landed would be unexpected/fleeting and written of as an fluke which is an accurate description of what it would be.
I cant remember who said it originally, but once I heard it, it became my goto way of explaining how science usually works:
Scientific discoveries are rarely made with a cry of "Eureka!" But most often with a mutter of "Hmm, that's interesting..."
The discovery of Uranus being one such example, someone looked at the orbit of Saturn, realised there was an anomaly and said "That’s interesting..." and that lead to the discovery of a new planet.
Maravilha!!
When I think about the origins of life on earth I assume that a certain set of special conditions existed on the planet for limited period of time, and could not have taken hold any earlier or any later, but I don’t know exactly what those conditions were.
What I do know is that in our 4.3 billion history, this happened exactly one time.
That fact leads me to believe that life is extremely rare in the universe and is therefore more precious than we know.
40.02 _So this is a story about planets eating stars._ Quite a mouthfull, beats eating hot peppers!
Actually, planet-eating stars. It's the stars that are eating the planets, not the other way around.
Why are we still seeing Galaxies from the first hundred million years of the Universe? Why hasn't the light stopped?
I think they have a lot of Crystals which could be used in higher frequency settings and the lowers ones as well that becomes a Tallow flow without destruction of itself in a way we can find out how much they can transmit and resonates with other ones atoms heat up or freeze in place for a long term relationship of resonance. Imagine that all vibrations are stronger or weaker in certain areas and the floating density is measured as a different environment than the same planet or moons in each state of gravity recordings in crystal caverns or surface space that was in a very distant way
I love the story behind the The Hubble Deep Field image and I have the Hubble _Ultra_ Deep Field taken over 11.3 days total exposure between September 2003 and January 2004 as the background for my computer monitors. I do wonder what the - carefully unnamed - _Eminent Astronomers_ who said there'd be nothing there thought on first seeing the images. 🤣
They were probably pleasently surprised. They knew they would have just been giving their best guess.
Didn't the phosphorus thing on Venus turn out to be a mistake?
11:57 - "an underwater ocean" - now that's something I have never heard before! Other than that - a brilliant lecture. (But my niggle does show that I was paying attention!)
When you think about it, every ocean is >99% underwater.
I think he meant "underice", but that didn't sound like a real word, so his mouth replaced it with "underwater".
Cassini / Huygens was launched on top of a Titan IV B / Centaur rocket and not from the Space Shuttle. Hubble was kind of launched from the Space Shuttle.
WOW
Our existence is a product of "chance contingencies of existence"
You know, even the info concerning penguin poo is a valuable serendipitous knowledge that plausibly lends itself to alien detection especially when one considers that everything alive with exception to the human face mites, does in fact poo!
Space telescopes have superpower, they can see the whole universe unfold on time even when they stare at the emptiest part of our universe
Little correction: Cassini wasn't launched from the Space Shuttle (anymore). It was launched (fittiingly) on a Titan rocket.
The concept of launching probes and satellites with the Shuttle died with Challenger. Sadly not before seriously crippling Galileo. Doing a "mundane" transport job that could be done with a much, MUCH cheaper rocket, saved costs and pointless risk for astronauts.
"...pointless risk for astronauts": What astronauts do, is not pointless. They practice science. Which give scientific results.
@@mpmpm read and understand.... Launching a satellite or probe with he Space Shuttle is a pointless risk for astronauts, because it is not science! It's a transport job. And doing it with the Shuttle has absolutely NO benefits over doing it with a rocket. So putting multiple people at risk for that makes no sense. Hence "pointless".
And as i said it was also insanely expensive compared to a rocket. So you have high costs, risking a whole crew for a needlessly complicated launch job, for no benefit.
It was stupid and after challenger the Shuttle was reserved for actual science work, deemed worth the risk.
The Shuttle is worth reading (or watching) up about. It was the result of budget cuts ,politics and design by many committees, making it much less than it could have been. Why Nasa missions and even commercial satellites were launched on it was also political. It's history is complicated. And interesting.
And to explain the Galileo thing (years before Cassini) : it was supposed to launch on a Shuttle. But after Challenger, the Shuttle was grounded for 2 years and Galileo put in storage. It is likely that the greasing of various bearings suffered from that and that's why Galileos big main antenna never unfolded. Limiting it to a few low bandwidth engineering antenna to send data back. Despite some engineering magic by Nasa it limited Galleos bandwidth for the entire mission.
Lessons for Cassini, directly from Galileo: Fixed main antenna, no fancy unfolding business, and DON'T launch it on the Shuttle. Making Cassini a unqualified success.
It's interesting, isn't it, that one can make all sorts of assumptions, and yet the most obvious assumption - that it was made - seems so objectionable to so many.
Then you have to explain a) how it was made, b) why it was made, and c) what made the thing that made it. Good luck with that.
Make the cosmos great again.
Always keep RS
is this how Saturn's rings survive - through near constant contributions from the ice blowing off Enceladus?
Why and how would a watery ring make rings made of solid material more stable?
@@Safetytrousers NASA found the ring material showering into the surface clouds of Saturn... so *STABILITY* would require a source of *NEW* ice material.
@@brookestephen Infall of rings is proposed to be due to electrically charged water ice being drawn down magnetic lines. How would an inner ring of ice be preventing the other rings from all scrunching together against it?
18:40 - I disagree that intelligence took a long time to form on Earth. COMPLEX life took a long time to form. For most of Earth's history, the only form of life was microbial, single-celled or at least far from the complex macroscopic creatures we tend to call 'animals'. I'd argue intelligence may yet exist on it's own, separate 'rung' of a ladder, but that MOSTLY, the challenge seems to have been life advancing beyond the simple and microbial.
National Park hypothesis seems my type of hypothesis! 😂❤
Giant impact of large bodies or variable size bodies of significant sizes could indeed modify a regular dipping event into a rather odd wtf type scenario! It's only a theory but these events did and have occurred multiple times within our own solar system, along with planetary ejection, etc, thus these somewhat irregular events can or could be attributed to spacial body events that we are currently aware of within our own galactic/solar neighborhood, history!
So enthusiastic, how come the UK education system fails to create this in kids when teaching us the sciences at school?
The sound quality seems to get worse and worse at the royal institute, this is on par with a laptop mic, they really need to fix this.
The microphone is saturating. Either turn down the sensitivity or bend it away from the mouth some. It's disappointing... you'd want to think of the Ri as being world-class, but they fail to adequately soundcheck.
What did I see when I stood on Mars? I saw my home - among the stars!
Would it not be easier to test for Life on Enceladus by gathering samples of the Icy Ring and looking for Frozen life that had been ejected there by the Water Spouts? Rather than attempting to drill into the surface!
Recently I have been doing a lot of thinking about the "accidental" universe idea. I do agree that our discoveries occur in that fashion but it seems as though the universe unfolds in increasing levels of complexity. It appears as though it is centered around the acquisition and transmission of information. Firstly, the organization of particles into atoms then into matter, allowing gravity to take center stage. Gravity is the mechanism with which the universe takes its form and function. Stars, planets, galaxies and cosmic web come to be. When certain conditions are met, higher levels of universal complexity occur on these planets; life and consciousness. Our discovery of AI seems to be a further level of complexity. AI is a tool that will allow us to gain a level of knowledge we may not have been able to obtain on our own. Maybe not, just my two pennies.
My most surprising discovery was that our universe is not ours.