I still jaw drop every time I hear "Newton invented calculus." I could barely pass 3 semesters of it with a marginal understanding of what the heck I was looking at, and this dude, more or less on his own, INVENTED MATH! It's absolutely incredible.
I just loved how he dealt with Pluto with such affection. You can feel the fascination in his eyes, which is something that was transmited to me. Pluto, Ceres, Sedna, you name it: they're all mind-bogling and fascinating!
this is absolutely beautiful. im so enlightened and intrigued about the creation of our solar system and puting it into the perspective of how every single thing on earth is created from the matter of stars.. my mind is exploding and why the middle planets are so big while the closer planets are so small.. AMAZING!
He kinda simplified it a bit, but between Mars and Jupiter is the frost line. Water could not turn solid in the inner solar system early on and it was far more abundant than rocks and metals. So Jupiter was a mixed ice/rock/metal planet ten times larger than earth that grew to the point where it could capture the extremely abundant hydrogen and helium and then become super massive. There also this interesting idea that originally Saturn, Uranus and Neptune started closer to the sun and migrated outward and that Neptune was originally closer than Uranus but passed beyond it and along the way, gave the Kuiper belt objects their more eccentric orbits as they moved outward and tossing some of those icy objects to the inner solar system, causing the late heavy bombardment and bringing them water after formation when it was cool enough for the inner planets to hang on to it. Most of those models involving Saturn, Neptune, and Uranus migrating work better in the scenario where there was a 5th gas planet that got toss out of the solar system. Anyhow, keep following this series, astronomy is fascinating. I've known this stuff for years and I always enjoy new discoveries. We'll get to see Pluto up close in a few months, I expect surprises.
I've always considered Pluto a planet, obviously since that's what I was taught when I was in elementary school, but especially because I played Pluto in a play we did about the solar system! :)
This is a great episode that was well written, at least to my taste. Awesome work Phil! I understand more of the underlying factor of why its a pre-planetary disk. But also had a moment of "holy crap this makes so much sense" when you explained how the outer planets are more gaseous. You sir, have my sub. I love all astronomy, keep this series going please!
This is awesome. This is how we should be teaching ALL subjects at schools; fundamental knowledge conveyed by a captivating personality. Phil is a prime example of the best mentor anyone can get - a passionate one. Thank you, Phil.
Best crash course series ever! I've always wonderd why the planets are spinning in the same direction. And I got the answer to it now thanks to the angular momentum the cloud it was formed from.
Earth: Hey Sun! Today is Earth Day. The one day they celebrate me! Sun: Wow, good for you (rolls eyes) Earth: You must be jealous, huh? Sun: Nope. Earth: You are! You don’t have a day for yourself, ha! Sun: Hm, I wonder what day it is? Earth: Silly, you forget everything! Today is Sunda- Sun: 🌞
Seriously great point re: defining "planet", Phil. I'd love to read an astronomy article by you: "We've observed things doing some stuff. Who cares how I describe it? The universe is the universe, no matter what I say."
Be humble, for you are made of earth. Be noble, for you are made of stars. -Serbian(?) proverb EDIT: Apparently the source I found attributing this to Serbia may be incorrect?
Thank you very much for making this video, Phil Plait and the rest of the team at _Crash Course_ Astronomy. It was interesting to hear about the formation of our solar system, its content and how we thought about the universe in the past. By the way, didn’t the ancient people of Babylon know of 5 planets and that these are round? Anyway, I have a question about that illustration at 7:25: Is that illustration to scale? Are the planets to scale? If so, the distance between the planets are not to scale, right? I don’t think the planets are equally far from each other, as that image may suggest.
i've been following this series , my interest in astronomy was recently awaken by the book "a brief history of time".A lot that has been said in the book is present in this video. This greatly helped my understanding. Thanks
People say there is no CREATOR because they don't want to understand HIM. When mere men do things the world can't explain it's most often excused. It's considered understandable; it's made allowable... ...But GOD, OUR CREATOR is not allowed to do things too elusive to understand?? . People think there is no CREATOR because they can't understand HIM. Narcissism disables wisdom.
Anthony H. I studied this in my 11th grade astronomy class and it was one of the more interesting things that I learned this year, especially how that man Copernicos found out that the planets go around the sun in ellipses not circles.
Isn't a planet defined as - a celestal object large enough to be round - that isn't a star - (that orbits a star) - that cleared its orbit (not counting objects in Lagrange points or in orbit around the planet) of other objects ? Because I can't think of any celestial object called a planet that doesn't meet this criteria, nor any that do meet this criteria and aren't called planets. Mercury may be smaller than Ganymede, but it orbits the sun rather than a planet, like Ganymede does. And Pluto, Pallas and Ceres all fail at being planets because they haven't cleared their orbits.
That would include half of the asteroids in both belts, but as some people already pointed out, the standar definition often includes " has cleared the neighbourhood around its orbit",if there is other matter baside it in the orbit, i has to be orbiting the planet, snot orbiting the star alongside it. so, not esteroid belts basically. its still a fuzzy definition, but its something
Tobias Azpiazu I do believe I included "has cleared its orbit" and "large enough to be round", both of which would exclude asteroids... Unless, of course, you don't know what clicking on "Read more (X lines)" does.
yep lol here is something to cheer us up! Earth: Hey Sun! Today is Earth Day. The one day they celebrate me! Sun: Wow, good for you (rolls eyes) Earth: You must be jealous, huh? Sun: Nope. Earth: You are! You don’t have a day for yourself, ha! Sun: Hm, I wonder what day it is? Earth: Silly, you forget everything! Today is Sunda- Sun: 🌞
The definition can be vague but it makes sense: a celestial body earns the title of "planet" if it has "attracted" at least 51% of the mass revolving the Sun in it´s orbit. Thats why Pluto is not a planet, it shares orbit with many other bodies and it even crosses Neptune´s orbit, hence not a planet btw, isn't the continent called Oceania, not Australia?
I was hoping this video would contain some explanation of star system formation in light of the "hot Jupiters" being discovered by Kepler. It seems the idea that only small rocky worlds can form close to the star because the heat and solar wind pushes away light gases needs adjustment. Are there simply no hypothesis besides the idea that those large gas giants somehow migrating into the inner star system in which they formed?
I came to these videos via a search about how heavy elements are made. Watched a few of the later ones, and then started over from the beginning. These are absolutely wonderful.
A planet is any celestial body that has cleared it's orbital field. Pluto has other asteroids relatively close to it so it hasn't cleared it's orbital field and as such, is not a planet. There are 8 celestial bodies in our solar system that HAVE cleared they're orbital fields. Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune.
Great video! So, if the growing proto sun took all the hydrogen/helium from Earth and the closer planets, does that mean the sun will pull the outer planet's gases when the sun gets really big on its way to being a red giant? Could that break the orbits of the outer planets?
I love this series, and hope one episode comprises of Phil debunking some of the controversies about the Moon Landing. Not all my friends have read about the scientific responses to common beliefs.
Anyone know of a good video that shows things as seen by the naked eye and then zooms into it really close? I would love to see that but cant find anything like it
Actually, we are *the* solar system. If planets are orbiting around Alpha Centauri, that is the Alpha Centauri system. We have the only star named Sol.
Frankly, I think there is a larger category than "planet" -- there are four "compositional zones", each with four representative objects for convenient reference. Rocky objects (Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars); icy rock objects (Ceres, Vesta, Pallas, Hygiea); gaseous objects (Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune); and rocky ice objects (Pluto, Eris, Makemake, Haumea). My preferred way of defining a planet: 1) For objects orbiting a star, a non-fusing object that possesses more than 50% of the mass when grouped with all objects smaller than itself shall be designated a planet. 2) All objects larger than the smallest object to meet the first requirement shall be designated as planets, even if they don't meet the first requirement themselves (a precaution in the event of near-twin objects). 3) When it is clear that the examination has entered the "long tail" of smaller objects, we stop testing and define everything else as "subplanets." This process, when applied to our solar system, produces eight planets out of the couple dozen largest objects independently orbiting the sun, all eight of which meet the first requirement (although Neptune/Uranus and Earth/Venus demonstrate the value of having the second rule for ambiguous relationships in other star systems).
They are *former* planets, defined by their presumed past, not their present. Whether they were major or minor planets would depend on the particular history of the system they formed in ... but given that our technology can currently only detect rogue planets in the "gas giant" category, it's a fair assumption that they are former major planets of their parent system.
Space has no fixed direction; just turn it upside down, and you get it right again. Oh wait! There is no up or down in space, it is all about your reference system...
Well, I believe you meant to say revolve, but it is because when there is a trend in a set of objects any trend that gains a sort of advantage will eliminate those objects going against the trend by random collisions and either knock them out of orbit or absorb them into their own mass. This is why all major bodies in the solar system revolve around the sun in the same direction.
Hey guys so it's pretty hard to get noticed on youtube but I was really hoping that you guys would give my channel a shot. I make educational videos in hopes that it will help students. You don't even have to subscribe if you don't want to but it would mean a lot to me if you took a look! Thanks so much in advance for your time!
omg man i'm loving this series! i know a lot of things about all of this, but the way you explain it is really cool, i would like it if they were translated to spanish so my little brother could understand them, i'll try translating it myself !
Could you please do a video which explains how our solar system fits into the rotation of the milky way galaxy. I find that difficult to visualize how things don't collide. Thanks.
The most important reason is that space is mind-numbingly empty. In about 2 billion years, the Milky Way is predicted to impact the Andomeda galaxy. Over a trillion stars will be involved in the collision. It's estimated that a total of a few dozen stars will actually hit each other in the process. Add to that the entire galaxy is rotating in roughly the same direction and there's not much opportunity for things to hit each other.
isiart.net beauty and lifestyle time is the answer to everything......the reason things dont collide more like you would expect because they do but its just happen a billion years ago which is like 10 years in space time... also....we are so small in relation to the universe//// we are just crumbs of the sun we in total control of the sun as well as the rest of the bodies around us....collision for us small crumbs are rare ...the bigger your are the more likely you will collide with something....
In a very loose sense, if you look 'down' at the spinning solar system, the sun and everything orbiting it is moving directly toward you; The 'lines' drawn by the orbiting planets would make a huge helical spiral.
Lots of space between things. Also, everything is orbiting in the same direction mostly. Take a handful of marbles and throw them at someone who is also throwing a handful of marbles at you. Fat chance of any marbles hitting in mid air. Now contemplate that if the sun were the size of a marble, the closest star system would be three other marbles in the Alpha Centauri system 210 miles away. Probability just doesn't allow collisions to happen often. Even when the Andromeda collides with us and merges, you can see how there will be very few collisions, outside the cores merging.
You are living in the 21st century, with thousands of years worth of knowledge heaped on you. Aristotle was brilliant, he made a logical guess, which I am sure you made also when you were in kindergarten. His model, which you can see if you Google it, was very accurate at predicting the positions of stars and planets. Back then, astronomers didn't have telescopes and they didn't have the scientific method. Careful observation and blind studies were completely foreign to them. What would you have thought, being one of the first astronomers, looking up at the sky?
"How'd the moon get there? How'd it get there? How'd the sun get there? How'd it get there? You can't explain that." -Bill O'Reilly Well, Bill... It seems you're wrong... Again. #science
***** last i herd it was black holes. the idea that there are massive black holes in ow universes so big that thay could have universe's inside of them and that this universes is inside of a massive black hole in side another universes in side another universes in side another universes in side another universes in side another universes.........
***** Thing is, universe at the very beginning only had one kind of matter in it - Hydrogen. This hydrogen somehow had to be transformed into all the other elements.
There's a lot of advanced vocab in this so I don't know how good an intro it would be. Who's the target audience? Also, that's not what the star-stuff phrase refers to. We are star stuff because we contain elements that could only be formed during supernovae. You didn't mention that in this video. Otherwise, nice, succinct overview of our solar system. I'd never really stopped to think about the definition of a planet that carefully. It got me thinking.
I don't think anybody is having any trouble understanding the vocabulary, especially if they watched the other episodes. But I do agree on the point about not mentioning why we are star stuff. That would have been better saved for the episode about stellar evolution.
Scott89878 I haven't watched the prior videos in this series so I don't know how much some of these have already been explained. In the UK, children can expect an introduction to the solar system in year 5. By this point they should know what mass means, diameter would most likely be a new word, they may have been taught about percentages, philosopher would probably be new to most of the kids in year 5 at the school where I work. They should know sphere, would probably have to guess what unweildy means from context. They should be able to infer what geocentric and geocentrism means but I wouldn't expect it. I'm just trying to figure out where most 9-10 year old kids would turn off and stop listening. 2:10 in and I've found so many references that they'd probably need to stop and think about.
6:17 Wouldn't a good angular momentum analogy also be a gymnast doing a double/triple tuck? The athlete pulls their legs in to make themselves flip faster. Not flipping fast enough could make one fall on their butt or flipping too fast could cause a transfer of kinetic energy on landing and cause one to go off the matt, etc.
Why are stars always in the center of the system? Is it possible for a system to form where an object with planet-like properties is in the center of it instead of a glowing ball of gas?
Gravitational interactions would make them "chaotic" as the objects (planets) pulled on one another by varying degrees as they got closer or farther away from each other in their orbits, so essentially their orbit would change every time they interacted. Over time these forces would either tend to throw things out of the solar system, cause them to drop into the sun or crash into each other, or flatten out their orbits into a flat ring-shape, with the forces diminishing the closer to a ring shape they got. Later! OL J R :)
Planet has a definition: it's an object orbiting a star or stellar remnant that is massive enough to be round under its own gravity, not massive enough to start fusion at its core, and has cleared the neighbourhood around its orbit. That you might not like that definition or think its more poetic without it is irrelevant. Your explanation of solar formation postulated that the increased solar wind closer to a star prevented the formation of close gas giants, but many (most?) of the exoplanets we have found are gas giants close to stars (because they're easier to see).
I was about to say something similar too. I am pretty sure planet has more or less a good definition, and the reason Pluto was unclassified as a planet was because its moon was found to affect its rotation too much or something like that.
Pluto was demoted because it hasn't cleared its orbit so it doesn't have the 3 criteria for a planet set by the IAU (1: massive enough to be round, 2: orbit the Sun, 3: massive enough to clear its orbit) The hot Jupiters (that's what the gas giants close to their stars are called) did not form that close to their stars. At least we don't think they did. Current models suggest they formed further out and then spiraled inward to their current orbits.
Jacob The Earth is slightly bulged because of its spin and the Moon's/Sun's gravitational pull. If those effects were not there, it would be spherical. That's what that criteria is saying. That an object is massive enough to pull itself into a sphere, if there were no other effects (spin, gravitational pulls, etc.) acting on it.
Last time I checked India is considered a sub-continent. And there are obviously a lot more than just plates that go into how we define the continents, such as history, but I am just saying, Australia is on its own continental plate, while Greenland is not.
Are you going to talk about "Hot Jupiter" type exoplanets in later episodes? I'm curious how they reconcile with the planetary formation model you presented here.
Regarding the gas giants that we've seen in the inner orbits of stars: did they originally form in the outer orbit of their star and were then pulled by their star's gravity to where they are now, or did they form that close to their star? I'm guessing the former?
There was no mention of planetary migration in this video (i.e. wandering Jupiter which falls close to the sun due to friction, but it and Saturn resonate and throw eachother back out before finding their current orbits, possibly ejecting another gas giant in the process). Is the absence because CrashCourse is not a proponent of the theory or is it to simplify down the how we got where we are story?
I still jaw drop every time I hear "Newton invented calculus." I could barely pass 3 semesters of it with a marginal understanding of what the heck I was looking at, and this dude, more or less on his own, INVENTED MATH! It's absolutely incredible.
I just loved how he dealt with Pluto with such affection. You can feel the fascination in his eyes, which is something that was transmited to me. Pluto, Ceres, Sedna, you name it: they're all mind-bogling and fascinating!
I just love how Crash Course is available to give us so many information in so many different areas of knowledge for free. You're just amazing!
I loved astronomy before this course, but this is making me love the universe even more!
this is absolutely beautiful. im so enlightened and intrigued about the creation of our solar system and puting it into the perspective of how every single thing on earth is created from the matter of stars.. my mind is exploding
and why the middle planets are so big while the closer planets are so small.. AMAZING!
He kinda simplified it a bit, but between Mars and Jupiter is the frost line. Water could not turn solid in the inner solar system early on and it was far more abundant than rocks and metals. So Jupiter was a mixed ice/rock/metal planet ten times larger than earth that grew to the point where it could capture the extremely abundant hydrogen and helium and then become super massive.
There also this interesting idea that originally Saturn, Uranus and Neptune started closer to the sun and migrated outward and that Neptune was originally closer than Uranus but passed beyond it and along the way, gave the Kuiper belt objects their more eccentric orbits as they moved outward and tossing some of those icy objects to the inner solar system, causing the late heavy bombardment and bringing them water after formation when it was cool enough for the inner planets to hang on to it. Most of those models involving Saturn, Neptune, and Uranus migrating work better in the scenario where there was a 5th gas planet that got toss out of the solar system.
Anyhow, keep following this series, astronomy is fascinating. I've known this stuff for years and I always enjoy new discoveries. We'll get to see Pluto up close in a few months, I expect surprises.
I've always considered Pluto a planet, obviously since that's what I was taught when I was in elementary school, but especially because I played Pluto in a play we did about the solar system! :)
This is a great episode that was well written, at least to my taste. Awesome work Phil! I understand more of the underlying factor of why its a pre-planetary disk. But also had a moment of "holy crap this makes so much sense" when you explained how the outer planets are more gaseous. You sir, have my sub.
I love all astronomy, keep this series going please!
"We are, quite literally, star stuff"
I don't know about you but that statement makes me happy.
i know right!
9C ?
........... I don’t know how to tell him that Australia is not a continent
Smh
Ella Barrett Australia is in the continent Oceana. But ok
This is awesome. This is how we should be teaching ALL subjects at schools; fundamental knowledge conveyed by a captivating personality. Phil is a prime example of the best mentor anyone can get - a passionate one. Thank you, Phil.
Best crash course series ever! I've always wonderd why the planets are spinning in the same direction. And I got the answer to it now thanks to the angular momentum the cloud it was formed from.
Earth: Hey Sun! Today is Earth Day. The one day they celebrate me!
Sun: Wow, good for you (rolls eyes)
Earth: You must be jealous, huh?
Sun: Nope.
Earth: You are! You don’t have a day for yourself, ha!
Sun: Hm, I wonder what day it is?
Earth: Silly, you forget everything! Today is Sunda-
Sun: 🌞
Seriously great point re: defining "planet", Phil. I'd love to read an astronomy article by you: "We've observed things doing some stuff. Who cares how I describe it? The universe is the universe, no matter what I say."
I learn more from RUclips and the comments in 10 minutes than in 6 years in school
Me to
you were in school for only 6 years?
Yeah true 👍👍👍👍
True
@@Nina-gg2be he means since grade 7 cuz this starts at grade 7 till grade 12
I almost get tears in my eyes everytime someone says that we are starstuff, the way Phil did at the end. Ah, Carl, you are missed.
Be humble, for you are made of earth. Be noble, for you are made of stars.
-Serbian(?) proverb
EDIT: Apparently the source I found attributing this to Serbia may be incorrect?
Love it!
That's an amazing proverb.
That is cool, I'm remembering that one
I like it! Thanks for sharing.
Here...I'm from Serbia,and I've never heard of that...BS much?
Delightfully clear, direct and full of the necessary details. Thanks! It was a joy to watch!
Thank you very much for making this video, Phil Plait and the rest of the team at _Crash Course_ Astronomy. It was interesting to hear about the formation of our solar system, its content and how we thought about the universe in the past. By the way, didn’t the ancient people of Babylon know of 5 planets and that these are round?
Anyway, I have a question about that illustration at 7:25: Is that illustration to scale? Are the planets to scale? If so, the distance between the planets are not to scale, right? I don’t think the planets are equally far from each other, as that image may suggest.
for the first time I read so many helpful comments on youtube ! Thanks to the discussions in the comments I understood the topic better !
I got really emotional when Carl Sagan crawled on your shoulder at 8:57.
i've been following this series , my interest in astronomy was recently awaken by the book "a brief history of time".A lot that has been said in the book is present in this video. This greatly helped my understanding.
Thanks
Who's the author of the book?
@@heee302 Stephen Hawking
8:56 Yay, tiny Sagan!
fowlfables You tooked me comment! :)
fowlfables e
People say there is no CREATOR because they don't want to understand HIM.
When mere men do things the world can't explain it's most often excused.
It's considered understandable; it's made allowable...
...But GOD, OUR CREATOR is not allowed to do things too elusive to understand?? .
People think there is no CREATOR because they can't understand HIM.
Narcissism disables wisdom.
There should be billion and billions. 😊
Anthony H.
I studied this in my 11th grade astronomy class and it was one of the more interesting things that I learned this year, especially how that man Copernicos found out that the planets go around the sun in ellipses not circles.
“When you see a trend in something, nature is trying to tell you something. “ I love this.
Isn't a planet defined as
- a celestal object large enough to be round
- that isn't a star
- (that orbits a star)
- that cleared its orbit (not counting objects in Lagrange points or in orbit around the planet) of other objects
?
Because I can't think of any celestial object called a planet that doesn't meet this criteria, nor any that do meet this criteria and aren't called planets. Mercury may be smaller than Ganymede, but it orbits the sun rather than a planet, like Ganymede does. And Pluto, Pallas and Ceres all fail at being planets because they haven't cleared their orbits.
That would include half of the asteroids in both belts, but as some people already pointed out, the standar definition often includes " has cleared the neighbourhood around its orbit",if there is other matter baside it in the orbit, i has to be orbiting the planet, snot orbiting the star alongside it. so, not esteroid belts basically. its still a fuzzy definition, but its something
That's why there is no clear definition of a planet
You just named a heck of a lot of objects....I'd like to see the mneomic for that.
haha Good, pick your planets out of those objects
Tobias Azpiazu I do believe I included "has cleared its orbit" and "large enough to be round", both of which would exclude asteroids... Unless, of course, you don't know what clicking on "Read more (X lines)" does.
THE EXCEPTION !!!! OMG. nice touch. haha. a mongol looking through a telescope
for those who dont get it, watch crash course history.
Who else is here in quarantine getting this assigned by ur science teacher?
......
me, I am
I have not had "real class" in like two weeks.
just assignments like this!
honestly could be worse.
@@tacoeateryumyum Wow
Me
yep lol
here is something to cheer us up!
Earth: Hey Sun! Today is Earth Day. The one day they celebrate me!
Sun: Wow, good for you (rolls eyes)
Earth: You must be jealous, huh?
Sun: Nope.
Earth: You are! You don’t have a day for yourself, ha!
Sun: Hm, I wonder what day it is?
Earth: Silly, you forget everything! Today is Sunda-
Sun: 🌞
Gavin Hensley no u
Ha ha! I loved the cartoon Sagan on Phil's shoulder. Awesome!! Indeed, all of us on this pale blue dot are made of star stuff.
shut up you self absorbed creatan
You earned my attention in another series but got me to like with that "tell me what a planet is" statement . keep up the good work👍
Hello there, mr. Sagan! 8:56
Time for the weekly chant: Best Crash Course series! Phil Plait is awesome!
The definition can be vague but it makes sense: a celestial body earns the title of "planet" if it has "attracted" at least 51% of the mass revolving the Sun in it´s orbit. Thats why Pluto is not a planet, it shares orbit with many other bodies and it even crosses Neptune´s orbit, hence not a planet
btw, isn't the continent called Oceania, not Australia?
i just love astonomy
I was hoping this video would contain some explanation of star system formation in light of the "hot Jupiters" being discovered by Kepler. It seems the idea that only small rocky worlds can form close to the star because the heat and solar wind pushes away light gases needs adjustment. Are there simply no hypothesis besides the idea that those large gas giants somehow migrating into the inner star system in which they formed?
I came to these videos via a search about how heavy elements are made. Watched a few of the later ones, and then started over from the beginning. These are absolutely wonderful.
A planet is any celestial body that has cleared it's orbital field. Pluto has other asteroids relatively close to it so it hasn't cleared it's orbital field and as such, is not a planet. There are 8 celestial bodies in our solar system that HAVE cleared they're orbital fields. Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune.
Great video! So, if the growing proto sun took all the hydrogen/helium from Earth and the closer planets, does that mean the sun will pull the outer planet's gases when the sun gets really big on its way to being a red giant? Could that break the orbits of the outer planets?
At 8:53, are you calling me dense?
We're all dense here.
RusticKey this is true.
RusticKey your dense im dense were all dense (im squidward your squidward were all squidword)
Nolan Thiessen "Why are you so dense"? "Because I'm heavy". Get it?
Dott lol i love bad jokes
I love this series, and hope one episode comprises of Phil debunking some of the controversies about the Moon Landing. Not all my friends have read about the scientific responses to common beliefs.
I love that shirt.
Anyone know of a good video that shows things as seen by the naked eye and then zooms into it really close? I would love to see that but cant find anything like it
It is your shirt right?
Concise yet thorough. Great work.
3:46 EXCEPTION
This is one of the best crash course videos ever - keep it up.
Actually, we are *the* solar system. If planets are orbiting around Alpha Centauri, that is the Alpha Centauri system. We have the only star named Sol.
I absolutely love you guys!!! My courses for college have gone so well since I watch these videos after I study my notes.
new favorite word: Planetismals. As defined by Phil: 'Wee baby planets.'
0:49 bottom right
YES, hitchhiker's guide to the galaxy reference!!! so happy right now =D
Frankly, I think there is a larger category than "planet" -- there are four "compositional zones", each with four representative objects for convenient reference. Rocky objects (Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars); icy rock objects (Ceres, Vesta, Pallas, Hygiea); gaseous objects (Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune); and rocky ice objects (Pluto, Eris, Makemake, Haumea).
My preferred way of defining a planet:
1) For objects orbiting a star, a non-fusing object that possesses more than 50% of the mass when grouped with all objects smaller than itself shall be designated a planet.
2) All objects larger than the smallest object to meet the first requirement shall be designated as planets, even if they don't meet the first requirement themselves (a precaution in the event of near-twin objects).
3) When it is clear that the examination has entered the "long tail" of smaller objects, we stop testing and define everything else as "subplanets."
This process, when applied to our solar system, produces eight planets out of the couple dozen largest objects independently orbiting the sun, all eight of which meet the first requirement (although Neptune/Uranus and Earth/Venus demonstrate the value of having the second rule for ambiguous relationships in other star systems).
rouge planets dont orbit stars
Marie Belfond Agreed. Hence the "rogue" in front of their name.
+Len Arends rouge planets are planets
They are *former* planets, defined by their presumed past, not their present. Whether they were major or minor planets would depend on the particular history of the system they formed in ... but given that our technology can currently only detect rogue planets in the "gas giant" category, it's a fair assumption that they are former major planets of their parent system.
I love how Phil talks and explains things!
Why does every planet in the solar system rotate counter clockwise?
And is there planets in the universe rotating clockwise?
Yes- Venus and uranus. I'll get to them!
Space has no fixed direction; just turn it upside down, and you get it right again.
Oh wait!
There is no up or down in space, it is all about your reference system...
Well, I believe you meant to say revolve, but it is because when there is a trend in a set of objects any trend that gains a sort of advantage will eliminate those objects going against the trend by random collisions and either knock them out of orbit or absorb them into their own mass. This is why all major bodies in the solar system revolve around the sun in the same direction.
Russell Payne It's also why the solar system is *almost* planar
Hey guys so it's pretty hard to get noticed on youtube but I was really hoping that you guys would give my channel a shot. I make educational videos in hopes that it will help students. You don't even have to subscribe if you don't want to but it would mean a lot to me if you took a look! Thanks so much in advance for your time!
I am truly mesmerized by your vast intellect.
Well he IS the BadAs(s)tronomer.
This is the best channel on youtube. Really nerdy, its great
omg man i'm loving this series! i know a lot of things about all of this, but the way you explain it is really cool, i would like it if they were translated to spanish so my little brother could understand them, i'll try translating it myself !
Could you please do a video which explains how our solar system fits into the rotation of the milky way galaxy. I find that difficult to visualize how things don't collide. Thanks.
The most important reason is that space is mind-numbingly empty. In about 2 billion years, the Milky Way is predicted to impact the Andomeda galaxy. Over a trillion stars will be involved in the collision. It's estimated that a total of a few dozen stars will actually hit each other in the process.
Add to that the entire galaxy is rotating in roughly the same direction and there's not much opportunity for things to hit each other.
I see. Thank you!
isiart.net beauty and lifestyle time is the answer to everything......the reason things dont collide more like you would expect because they do but its just happen a billion years ago which is like 10 years in space time... also....we are so small in relation to the universe//// we are just crumbs of the sun we in total control of the sun as well as the rest of the bodies around us....collision for us small crumbs are rare ...the bigger your are the more likely you will collide with something....
In a very loose sense, if you look 'down' at the spinning solar system, the sun and everything orbiting it is moving directly toward you; The 'lines' drawn by the orbiting planets would make a huge helical spiral.
Lots of space between things. Also, everything is orbiting in the same direction mostly. Take a handful of marbles and throw them at someone who is also throwing a handful of marbles at you. Fat chance of any marbles hitting in mid air. Now contemplate that if the sun were the size of a marble, the closest star system would be three other marbles in the Alpha Centauri system 210 miles away. Probability just doesn't allow collisions to happen often. Even when the Andromeda collides with us and merges, you can see how there will be very few collisions, outside the cores merging.
You guys are wonderful! You work so hard.
Aristotle: wrong about literally everything
True
No. His metaphysics is still valid
You are living in the 21st century, with thousands of years worth of knowledge heaped on you. Aristotle was brilliant, he made a logical guess, which I am sure you made also when you were in kindergarten. His model, which you can see if you Google it, was very accurate at predicting the positions of stars and planets. Back then, astronomers didn't have telescopes and they didn't have the scientific method. Careful observation and blind studies were completely foreign to them. What would you have thought, being one of the first astronomers, looking up at the sky?
@@sofiacummings5574 This is the basis of science: You´re right until proven wrong.
Lol
That's my new favourite show on RUclips. Thanks.
"How'd the moon get there? How'd it get there? How'd the sun get there? How'd it get there? You can't explain that." -Bill O'Reilly
Well, Bill... It seems you're wrong...
Again.
#science
Phil, I could listen to you for hours !
Thank you very much.
"Hydrogen fused into helium, which makes a LOT of energy."
"A LOT OF ENERGY!"
Freaking awesome episode haha
KEEP THE SERIES GOING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I think the "you are made of star stuff" point is made better if you add that the original cloud was the result of previous star explosions.
***** last i herd it was black holes. the idea that there are massive black holes in ow universes so big that thay could have universe's inside of them and that this universes is inside of a massive black hole in side another universes in side another universes in side another universes in side another universes in side another universes.........
***** Thing is, universe at the very beginning only had one kind of matter in it - Hydrogen. This hydrogen somehow had to be transformed into all the other elements.
Amazing! Thank you very much!
There's a lot of advanced vocab in this so I don't know how good an intro it would be. Who's the target audience?
Also, that's not what the star-stuff phrase refers to. We are star stuff because we contain elements that could only be formed during supernovae. You didn't mention that in this video.
Otherwise, nice, succinct overview of our solar system. I'd never really stopped to think about the definition of a planet that carefully. It got me thinking.
I don't think anybody is having any trouble understanding the vocabulary, especially if they watched the other episodes. But I do agree on the point about not mentioning why we are star stuff. That would have been better saved for the episode about stellar evolution.
Scott89878 I haven't watched the prior videos in this series so I don't know how much some of these have already been explained.
In the UK, children can expect an introduction to the solar system in year 5. By this point they should know what mass means, diameter would most likely be a new word, they may have been taught about percentages, philosopher would probably be new to most of the kids in year 5 at the school where I work. They should know sphere, would probably have to guess what unweildy means from context.
They should be able to infer what geocentric and geocentrism means but I wouldn't expect it.
I'm just trying to figure out where most 9-10 year old kids would turn off and stop listening. 2:10 in and I've found so many references that they'd probably need to stop and think about.
mooxim USA is well... different, as to not insult
TheSignetGamer We don't have the brightest intake in the school I work at to be fair.
Recently, Oklahoma tried to ban AP American History because it included jim crow and historical racism.
Am I the only one who things the opening to this series is amazing?
3:44 Shoutouts to Mongolian Exceptions!
A star is born. We stan
Who else is here in quarantine getting this assigned by your science teacher?
I EFFIN LOVE THIS ASTRONOMY CRASH COURSE!!
Was that a little Carl Sagan that popped up on his shoulder when he said star stuff?
Yup!
it is a Carl Sagan quote
It's one of his more renown quotes.
Yuppp
I thought it looked like Francis Bacon lol
Astronomy, the best Crash Course.
Learned more from your channels than 6 years of highschool
6:17 Wouldn't a good angular momentum analogy also be a gymnast doing a double/triple tuck? The athlete pulls their legs in to make themselves flip faster. Not flipping fast enough could make one fall on their butt or flipping too fast could cause a transfer of kinetic energy on landing and cause one to go off the matt, etc.
Random question, have we ever sent a probe into a "polar" orbit around the sun?
Mind blown over morning coffee.
Nice cameo by Carl ;)
Why are stars always in the center of the system? Is it possible for a system to form where an object with planet-like properties is in the center of it instead of a glowing ball of gas?
Are there solar systems that aren't flat?
Jackrabbittt Productions no, but electron's orbits are not flat which makes it different from the solar system's orbits
Gravitational interactions would make them "chaotic" as the objects (planets) pulled on one another by varying degrees as they got closer or farther away from each other in their orbits, so essentially their orbit would change every time they interacted. Over time these forces would either tend to throw things out of the solar system, cause them to drop into the sun or crash into each other, or flatten out their orbits into a flat ring-shape, with the forces diminishing the closer to a ring shape they got. Later! OL J R :)
The little Carl Sagan on his shoulder at the end! This is a really descriptive video, and simply discussed.
Planet has a definition: it's an object orbiting a star or stellar remnant that is massive enough to be round under its own gravity, not massive enough to start fusion at its core, and has cleared the neighbourhood around its orbit. That you might not like that definition or think its more poetic without it is irrelevant.
Your explanation of solar formation postulated that the increased solar wind closer to a star prevented the formation of close gas giants, but many (most?) of the exoplanets we have found are gas giants close to stars (because they're easier to see).
I was about to say something similar too. I am pretty sure planet has more or less a good definition, and the reason Pluto was unclassified as a planet was because its moon was found to affect its rotation too much or something like that.
Pluto was demoted because it hasn't cleared its orbit so it doesn't have the 3 criteria for a planet set by the IAU (1: massive enough to be round, 2: orbit the Sun, 3: massive enough to clear its orbit)
The hot Jupiters (that's what the gas giants close to their stars are called) did not form that close to their stars. At least we don't think they did. Current models suggest they formed further out and then spiraled inward to their current orbits.
PajamaMan as well as the fact it isn't in the same plane
Define round. The earth is not round. so earth is not a planet?
Jacob The Earth is slightly bulged because of its spin and the Moon's/Sun's gravitational pull. If those effects were not there, it would be spherical. That's what that criteria is saying. That an object is massive enough to pull itself into a sphere, if there were no other effects (spin, gravitational pulls, etc.) acting on it.
Best ever explanation I've heard to date. Carl Sagan would shake your hand. :)
Plus points for that Carl Sagan cameo on your Phil's shoulder!
when i found this channel.. i cried tears of happiness
Ganymede = most lovely named object in the universe.
can't hold a candle to Io or Europa
What about Elara or Amalthea?
then there's what some people decide to pronounce as *BEETLEJUICE* (Betelgeuse)
I Just like the way this guy explains things.
I still believe in Pluto
Wow all that in just 7 days.. amazing!
But Australia is on its own tectonic plate, Greenland is not.
So is India on that argument, also some plates have no great landmass.
Last time I checked India is considered a sub-continent. And there are obviously a lot more than just plates that go into how we define the continents, such as history, but I am just saying, Australia is on its own continental plate, while Greenland is not.
By that logic, Hawaii would be its own continent. It sits in the middle of the Pacific plate.
Yeah but it doesn't encompass the majority of the plate. And there's a difference between continental crust and oceanic.
yea, so is india
Phil is the absolute man. Even though this is rehearsed and scripted... his enthusiasm and wonder is still so prevalent. Yeah Science.
8:56 Hello Carl Sagan!
Enterprise-E on the left for the win!
"Lot's of exception"
*a Mongol is looking through a telescope*
Aha! I have indeed seen what you've done there!
There is always an exception, the Mongols
Crash course World history fan here :)
Are you going to talk about "Hot Jupiter" type exoplanets in later episodes? I'm curious how they reconcile with the planetary formation model you presented here.
"A LOT OF ENERGY!" hahahahaha cracked me up
Thanks for talking about Aristarchos!
7:04
_I'm off the deep end watch as I dive in_
I love the analogy of the pizza dough. Great explanation that I hadn't heard before.
Who else is here cuz this was sent by your teacher??
Regarding the gas giants that we've seen in the inner orbits of stars: did they originally form in the outer orbit of their star and were then pulled by their star's gravity to where they are now, or did they form that close to their star? I'm guessing the former?
3:58 Can we do away with Europe's status as a continent and just call it part of Eurasia?
No
There was no mention of planetary migration in this video (i.e. wandering Jupiter which falls close to the sun due to friction, but it and Saturn resonate and throw eachother back out before finding their current orbits, possibly ejecting another gas giant in the process).
Is the absence because CrashCourse is not a proponent of the theory or is it to simplify down the how we got where we are story?