Top tier interview right here. Marshall Eubanks is one of the best guest scientists I've seen on one of these shows. I won't lie, a lot of these scientists aren't great speakers and I zone out pretty quickly trying to listen to them. This guy is great. I could listen to him go on about space for hours. And this was such a fascinating subject! I learned a ton from this video. Lots of things I'd never considered about the Breakthrough Starshot project and its implications.
Fraser, that was for many reasons, my favorite interview of yours I've seen. That's really saying something. It showed your talent as an interviewer and your knowledge of the field along with highlighting how interesting and incredibly smart your guest is. These guys putting craft into space are humanities greatest assets. Thanks for all the entertainment and education you send my way. Much appreciated.
Even just knowing the dimensions, albedo, rotation, and accurate orbit - and having a thumbnail - of every known object in the Solar System would be revolutionary for our understanding. You don't need megapixel images or interstellar distances for this to be revolutionary.
When imagining future human achievements. The idea that no matter how far we reach. there will always be an unattainable horizon, is somehow comforting. The universe is on a scale none of us can ever truly comprehend. 💚♾️
This is one of your most intriguing guests. Thank you for not talking over him too much Fraser, I know it's tempting because the subject matter is so fascinating.
I love this interview! So fun and engaging listening to this guest. Even if there was no specific subject, it'd be great just hearing you two talk about ideas and possibilities like in the first 13 mins 😅 Regular installments with Mr. Eubanks please!
Wow! 😮 Interstellar medium swarm drag steering control? Fraser oh boy you know some incredible people ✨. Yeah, these interviews are brilliant! Please keep them coming. You could see easily how much you enjoy this great man’s mind just like your audience 😂. Cheers! ✨🦋
2:40 re:space is big - on the beach at Melbourne there is a scale model of the solar system- the sun is a beachball. the earth is a few cm in size 150m away. Pluto is a bit over 3km away. Next to the sun is Proxima Centauri - it is within 10% of the correct location, if you go all the away around the circumference of earth. ...
I’m watching the Marshal Eubanks interview for the 5th time and I’m both totally entertained and learning new stuff every time I watch it. The idea of swarms of light powered swarms to SCOUT OUT exploration paths is brilliant - both intellectually and FISICALLY. That kind of pragmatism has LEGS because it politically warm and fuzzy.
Haha, finally another person but me in team Venus! :) Great interview. It's amazing how our perspective changes when we deal with interstellar probes. It's just amazing we can tackle this and send a missions that will take 40 years to travel. I wish we all lived much longer, so that we can witness such missions.
Fascinating interview, I am always totally amazed with some of the concepts that scientists are working on. Hope to hear many more interviews like this.
Thank you Marshall - No one has said this before and I’ve always thought ‘we see what they want us to see’. I have always thought that what we might NOT be seeing THE universe but one that is currently being presented to us. As our space telescopes get better we might one day figure out we’re being fooled, or better said we are like the baby in a crib with those toys hovering above them that she reaches out to play with. For her, that is the universe. Yet there is a full room beyond her crib that she will have to learn to walk to see.
@44:40 this seems like something that AI could do....be completely autonomous, figure out wat needs to be done within mission parameters, and send/receive data without worrying about time lag from controllers here on earth.
Yes. The "Fish don't know they are wet" theory. It's all around and we can't tell. I like it! Can we build a ML algo that can detect alien spacecraft if we don't have any alien spacecraft to show it? I'm not sure, because I'm a dummy, if we can train ML without samples... can we? We can train it to detect cancer, because we have samples.
Amazing interview, i actually learned alot from your conversations here. Thank you so much for not editing this down to conform to RUclips's matrix and actually leaving in the meat and potatos of the conversation. I always learn something new and exciting when i watch your channel , thank you!!
"collision induced molecular spectroscopy" might just be my new best phrase for describing an experiment - smack it real hard on the way past and see what glows and flys off ...
Yep, we just need to make sure we make it to the next century while exploring space however we can. That includes observing and preventing the biggest asteroid collisions.
We went from the Wright Brothers to the space shuttle in 80 years, and we did that with only brain power, no AI (not even CAD/CAM). It won’t be quick, but it won’t take 500 years.
I flip flop on my opinion of that. 100 years is a long time. We went from no airplanes to landing on the moon in 70 years. Who knows what breakthroughs await us in the next 100.
@@blakeb9964we are still using chemical launched rockets to get into space that were first developed in the 1200’s. It’s going to take a lot more than 100 years to come up with something that far surpasses what we have now.
if the air -> interstellar medium analogy kind of works... Is there a "photonic" boom, when you exceed the capability of the spacetime medium? :) And if there could be one - could we extrapolate it's signature based on the air analogy? Btw. what happens when you exceed the limits of water? some kind of a bubble of superheated/phase transitioned water forms around the object, I presume?
@@frasercain ;) yea, most probably - even had to poke and prod my paid friend - chatgpt until he spat Cherenkov radiation as one more phenomena, when the capacity of a medium is exceeded. Anyway, I'm still fascinated about the eerily effectiveness of water->electromagnetic phenomena analogies. Although I think I'm pushing it too far here ;)
On the subject of signal relays, the complaint of "single point of failure" is only true for a limited set of conditions. In particular, while the bandwidth will necessarily be undermined due to minute misalignments, the concept of a "distributed amplifier" could just as well be applied to multiple objects pointing in the same direction as to a single object. Set aside perhaps three frequencies, one for the initial (fairly high power) "local" signal, one for a lower power "full chain" signal (derived from the local signal, used to provide the data signal to every member of the chain by every _earlier_ member of the chain), and medium-power one for a "to Earth" signal (derived from the full-chain signal), and if the probes all along the chain actually _can_ contribute, then you can get enough signal strength that there isn't a single point of failure anywhere except the immediate area of the signal's origin.
I begin to wonder whether the cause of the Fermi Paradox is that settling other stars flies in the face of economics and politics. Interstellar trade is unfeasible as there's nothing out there we can't get locally; and even if successful settlers that far away would soon mutate into aliens, socio-economic at first, genetic eventually. They might even decide that the distant home-world is responsible for their sorrows and declare war, open or covert. That's for the nearest star-system. Even more so for the others. Add to this the high likelihood that anyone wishing to settle so far away is likely to be weird and therefore dangerous beyond our sight, you can see why no species would want to risk all this for so little reward.
I also think that the answer to Fermi's question "Where's everyone" is "On their own planets." Why trying to settle on a faraway world? What's the gain? Unless you have FTL or discover some unobtanium wich you absolutely need to mine whatever the cost, the cost/risk/gain equation is so ridiculously unbalanced that space travel is just not something a pragmatic civilization pursues... And I've yet to see a technological non-pragmatic civilization. Why should a politician wish to invest an incredible quantity of time and resources to send around a swarm of probes that will take centuries, millennia to give useful feedback? Who's to benefit from that? Would have Emperor Otto or Pope Urban opened their coffers to send probes in deep space to allow _us_ to get the first news of a maybe inhabitable planet and the decision about what to do with said info? So yes, enhancing our knowledge about exoplanets and neighbouring stars is cool and useful and I'm all for it, but thinking to colonize outside of our planet is just a fantasy and we shouldn't be too surprised that no alien civ did it, either.
We absolutely have no idea what is there in vastness of space and what we might need in future, so gaining knowledge is resource in itself. Saying that there is nothing there that we can get locally is logical fallacy. We simply don’t know.
@@Cardan011 We know what's out there via light spectra and there's nothing we don't have already. No point at all.in spending tens of billions of dollars and hundreds of years in a tin-can.
@@tonytaskforce3465 so according to you we 100% know what’s out there in 100% of universe? Sorry but that absolutely makes zero sense, we might know 0.000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001% even that is super optimistic. We are literally in infancy of space exploration.
39:40 I doubt that would be a huge problem. Getting to those extreme speeds seems far more difficult. Protecting the spacecraft from all the hazards of going a big fraction of light speed for several years would be far more difficult too. New Horizons probe autonomously aimed cameras for the Pluto flyby and 2014 MU69 flyby in a tiny fraction of the time it took light to communicate with Earth. New Horizons was given software updates down to the last few days before reaching them but that's more likely because they could rather than that they really needed to do that. As a software developer, I don't see a big problem programming that type of software to turn camera data into into directions to the planets, moons, or other areas of interest. A pretty crude way would be take images in random directions and then just throw out the blackest of them.
@10:44 "buckle up.." lol .... i got my 5 point harness on for this show ...😂 Edit: Wow! Using ol' Sailing techniques, 'tacking into the wind' for interstellar travel.....yeah totally Bonkies !!!
I really like the way Eubanks explains things that even I thought I had a reasonably firm grip on already. He was able to make a lot of this information even more understandable. Good stuff. Example: human's really don't (or at least this human) understand the scales space works at, 60k kilometers/s still has travel times of up to a year for stuff in our solar system..just .. wow.
Now we can't stop the probes in and reasonable matter but is there any hope of slingshotting it somehow to cause it to move laterally relative to its normal trajectory such that the relative distance between us and the probe slows giving us more time to transmit the data? Surely 100km is more than close enough to swing it around the star at least a tiny bit or smack into its atmosphere really slowing it down assuming we had like 1 in idk, 100 or so capable of withstanding the temperatures to act as a Relay .
I always thought a staggered swarm might work best. So they'd basically be able to relay back the information. Send a small swarm out initially, and then another swarm every 12 months or something, with the last swarm being sent after the first swarm gets there and completes its mission. The other swarms can also take data and send it back but we would get the data much later
Even if you did push limits of speed while exploring local system planets etc. Would the local stellar medium be too dense to fly through? And would walked from local probes cause noise for telescope observations?
Lovely interview!! A few question that I might have missed but didnt hear the answer to: What happens to these jelly pancakes when they are blasted with 100gw laser cannons? Wouldnt they just burn up? Love the idea but definitely need to see some tests ! Also since the laser is a point and not a field, wouldnt it be hard to push the pancakes in a particular direction? Do you have to continually blast them for 20yrs? Or is this an initial burst of energy and then they coast?
Lasers cannot make perfect point beams. A couple of decades ago I read something about how much a laser spread from Earth to the moon, and I think it was in the miles. A quick search shows that a cheap laser pointer has a beam a meter wide at a kilometer distance. Even a perfectly constructed laser runs into Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. You cannot know the direction of every photon precisely.
I think there's a chance that the distances are shorter than we think. Most relativistic arguments assume the dielectric permittivity and permeability of empty space are constant. It does so because the postulate of special relativity is that the two-way speed of light is constant for all observers, not the one-way speed of light, which may be different in different directions, for example to and from a star. It would be interesting to see how that subtle but important reasoning plays out in distance measurements.
What about Robert L Forward's Rocheworld described light sail deceleration idea? The 'ship' is in 2 parts. 1 part bounces light back to the payload to decel it, while going past the target itself.
Top 3 on my all time favorites right here. Only found one discrepancy that is we're taught that closer missions and data supercedes going for the biggies. I was surprised his passion was with lunar commerce after he said we need more smaller steps first. So, what I've learned from Frasier over my first year of this new passion of mine is investing in telescopes, getting data from interferometors sp? and chronometers. So valid we need to understand the waters in interstellar mediums. Fast is evidently not the only nor most important part in our equations.
Fraser, when talking about asteroid mining, you seem focused on the cost of launching material to the asteroid. That is mostly a one time fixed cost. The mine would use on site materials to create return pods (including fuel) to return the product. Assuming it can work autonomously, the continuing cost is small. It just needs occasional SMALL resupply flights of consumables that can not be created locally. Just like a big mine on Earth, it takes several years to pay back the investment. After that it becomes a cash cow. There are multiple industrial use metals with current or near future supply issues. In some cases it is known sources. In others it is political. Cobalt is an example where both apply.
question at these sworm speeds can u say use a supersmall lazer or device turned in and act like a mini hydronclider enough to make its own partical fuel/energy ? and a question about are we geting reading on micro noise from things out there are we able to add a reverberation of sorts from these as a communications carryer? booster
Love this guy, I look at it like we’re already building from Voyager, rather than running to a dedicated Proxima mission, we can (and are) making a swarm of retired Kuiper craft; I imagine if we can keep an old school craft like Voyager alive so long we ought to be able to design modern electronics to survive on a micro trickle of decay power for several or many times as long, working their way in a final useful direction learning how it is out there until we do go for the star shot and have a dozen trusty clunker scouts holding the door
The plutonium decays at the speed it does, and it doesn't matter how much energy you use. But there are other isotopes you could use that decay at a slower rate, and could provide heat for centuries.
Honestly, if you're wanting to have long-duration Kuiper probes then huge solar reflectors are probably going to make more sense than RTGs. Sure, go ahead with micropower if you want, but the main restriction on lifespan is that RTG, so use RTG tech (because it'll last longer than solar cells) with solar reflectors instead of nuclear decay.
Don't interstellar asteroids present a potentially more dangerous threat to Earth because we would have a shorter warning time to prepare for impact? Wouldn't that be reason enough to have scattered satelites throughout the solar system with at least a secondary duty watching for interstellar objects?
Because of the inverse square law, sending information with radio or any other electromagnetic comms aint going to happen unless you have an absolutely massive energy source on the craft
Those probes also could be used to build a gravitational lensing telescope, as they pass at 500 AU distance. Whatever the swarm is pointing to, this is the time to point their telescopes back (as long as they are built to stand or blot out sun's glare).
Just as you utilise the vibration and colliding with other ones and Taloric current circles within circles that draws into the process of creating gravitational vacuums that flow into the process of creating light will emerge from the starting point this is similar to balance of capacity to holding the resonating moment of the silence
What happens if one of those probes flying at 0.2c speed would accidentally hit the planet? Would an Earth like atmosphere block it without causing damage on the surface?
What about sending a "string" of minicrafts where the first ones carry the instruments whereas the following ones use their "grams" worth for better antennas?? Isn't that a viable plan?
What about something like in star trek, relay stations, commuications relays, have a few probes stop along the way and create a wifi type thing along the way, boucing a signal back to earth. Would that work in any way?
Hey Frazer, I wasn't aware that the "power system" required for sending info from Proxima to earth had been solved. Is this the case? I've been in touch with a number of individuals working on the power system from time to time, and was told the problem hasn't as of yet has not been solved. Plz reply or send link. Thank you, Kevin Hambsch
The Sun is Hydrogen and Helium which is ALREADY excited, Hydrogen produces Lasers in Infrared so I have always wondered why we can't simply align mirrors through the suns Corona or whatever such to lase the media in-between. There has to be a place, even if not using the already excited solar gases in which two aligned mirrors can be arranged such that the hydrogen helium medium lases allowing us to produce a Laser on a scale absolutely unimaginable. I have heard of Stellasers before but they all seem to be nothing but focused mirrors and not actual lasers using the solar winds as the lasing medium. I think ima run some numbers and see if that concentration can be made to lase. The excited lifetime should be rather large given the low density and Helium to aid similar to a Helium Neon laser
I've been trying to get an answer to this question. Its briefly mentioned by Eubanks in this very interview ( 41:24 ) but just kinda of gets glossed over. Ive even had a hostile reply or two where I've asked about this.
@@Axeface thank you so much for following up! I never thought you'd actually reply. I follow your news stories weekly and when I can, the interviews. I would like to support you, but grad school (need I say more). One day maybe I'll be able to become a patron... I have many other questions
Could you elaborate to the reality of those numbers? Would that much power be easily absorbed by the atmosphere (lets assume an atmo fairly similar to earth for this) or would it make contact with the surface? @@RobertSputnikWranglerVtoroi
I thought I had replied to this earlier. About your response, could you explain what those numbers mean in real terms? For example (lets assume a, earth like atmosphere) would it burn up in atmo or could it reach the surface? @@RobertSputnikWranglerVtoroi
What would the laser pushing the probes along do to the Proxima-Alpha Centuari system - not all the laser light is going to just hit the swarm. How bright a flash would be to them? And would we see the illuminated swarm in the night sky as it retreated? Maybe redshifted…
Instead of using Earth based lasers in flat sails, could you use on board lasers on curved sails,? Parabolic perhaps? The downside to that would be the weight of the laser. Would you need a bigger sail or would you gain that back from the laser beam spread (or is this distance too small for a significant beam spread), no absorption from interstellar dust, or 100% dedicated beam vs. the beam switching between different sails?
Getting back to the slowing down problem, with an onboard laser you just point the laser in the other direction. With the laser on earth or nearby orbit, though, there's no laser there to slow you down... Except for the star you're heading to. Would there be enough light and enough time to slow a storm element down enough to get into some orbit around the star? Could some of the leading probes somehow concentrate the targeted star's light onto some of the trailing probes to an amount that could slow them down. Another thing to remember is that slowing down adds time to the mission. By whatever method used, how much time would slowing down to stay add to the project?
The very first observatory on the moon was on Apollo 16 with the FAR UV telescope tripod mounted, f/1.0, 75 mm electronographic Schmidt camera weighing 22 kg. It had a 20° field of view in the imaging mode, and 0.5x20° field in the spectrographic mode.[1] Spectroscopic data were provided from 300 to 1350 Ångström, with 30 Å resolution, and images were provided in two passbands ranges, 1050-1260 Å and 1200-1550 Å.[2
This is an amazing interview! I absolutely loved it, and a question came to mind. Why aren't we focusing on using the Moon as our holistic focus/training ground with robotics, rovers, probes, communications, logistics and sustainment, engineering and infrastructure, security, mining, science, etc? The cost of learning lessons is high, but we're close enough to quickly observe, orient, decide, and act where we can make changes/adjust, respond, employ/codify lessons, build/produce whatever is needed, and incorporate them into operations in relatively quick order. Then use that template for points between the Moon and Mars, and then Mars, and so on. Also, are we going about this the right way? We absolutely have friction/distrust with China and Russia (for example) and have built partnerships with trust and interoperability with others, but invariably, we're all going in the same direction. We all have various experiences and expertise (depth/breadth) and can maximize our resources if we're going about this together rather than individually or in small groups. Thank you again for this awesome interview, and am rewatching it as I know it will take a couple of views to fully grasp and understand it.
I am but a lowly mechanical engineer however I like to think that I have a pretty good grasp on a lot of these concepts revolving around interplanetary and interstellar travel. And what I hear from people irl and on the internet are things like a lot of people think Dr Alcibierre invented a warp drive and we just need to build it. When I burst that idea bubble they inevitably argue and we end up with me telling them that we humans in the current year cannot fly direct to any body in the solar system outside of the moon, all of our spacecraft rely on gravitational assists and the fuel they have is reserved for small maneuvers with Cassini being the closest thing to sci fi with its having to fire its engine to slow down and enter Saturn's orbit. And we have no infrastructure in space, the ISS is a research platform not a gas station, we haven't refueled any of our craft, on paper we can do it but on paper landing on the moon should be something we had down pat but how many unmanned craft have either missed the moon or crashed into it vs landing on it since apollo? There's a ton of tech on the drawing board and in development that will allow us to explore or exploit the solar system but at the moment we're still stuck in low earth orbit as far as manned spacecraft go. Chemical rockets are great for getting up and out of the gravity well but for humans to go anywhere past the moon nuclear propulsion is really the only viable option and we know how to build fission rockets aka nuclear thermal propulsion, hell a nuclear fusion system where you expose water to the super hot fusion plasma converting that water to plasma is probably buildable with current tech ie an inertial confinement reactor. But none of this stuff outside of nuclear thermal(fission) exists so people need to reel in their expectations and understand just how primitive our spacecraft are
Entanglement doesn't appear to be useful for faster than light communication, though I think it can be used in quantum cryptography. As far as I know, the only faster than light communication method in the quantum world would use quantum tunneling - which is entirely impractical over interstellar distances for all kinds of reasons, and not that much faster than light. I don't think this is a solvable problem in the near term. It's probably better to think of ways to avoid the need for communication. I'd be thinking of projects that rely on autonomous vehicles mainly.
No we can't, according to the current knowledge. The universal speed limit (at the speed of light) is all about the speed of information travelling through space. This IS the whole point. If you could somehow break that limit, then our whole understanding of physics falls apart. The term "instantaneous" itself refers to photons travelling in perfect vacuum. The time is already instantaneous for photons, there's only space. Events can't happen faster than instantaneously. To me, this sucks canal water, but that's what theoretical physicists understand to be true. If even theoretically this is not possible then we would need to discover magic to do anything with that.
Anyone who replies here suggesting there is any chance at all to communicate at faster than the speed of light in vacuum, better described as the speed of causality, by quantum entanglement or quantum tunneling, or ANY other means is being WAY unrealistic. Nothing can communicate faster than the speed of causality or you could tell someone what happens in the future. There's one way to communicate at any speed theoretically and undeniably but it's very disappointing. It would be one-way communication and you'd have to travel with the message at relativistic speeds (which we have no assurance will ever be practical) and measure the speed of the communication in your own reference frame, i.e. not useful.
A visa? It just depends on your country and what kind of visa. Travel? Work, education? Each one has its own requirements. www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/services/visit-canada.html
The best thing is to have a degree in a field that helps your immigration, and to speak english and french as fluently as possible. This document explains it. So if you can meet these criteria, it's easy to get a visa to work here and then eventually get your citizenship: www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/services/immigrate-canada/express-entry/eligibility/federal-skilled-workers.html
I keep running into having to explain that Dr. Alcubiere didn't propose or design a warp engine or ship and that he came up with the math / equations to describe a means by which light speed could be gotten around. And then the bubbles really burst when I tell them that in the most optimistic scenarios something like a ship using a warped bubble of space time would require the mass-energy equivalent of something the size of jupiter. But it kills me that people think we're building the tech to explore our entire solar system and other star systems when our best currently operational craft are still chemical rockets. Space x building rockets that can be re-used and actually land themselves are great but even their best is still a chemically powered rocket. And then there are the people making fun of the moon probes from Russia and India that crashed instead of landing, and they have no idea how difficult it is to land something on any celestial body even the moon. Space exploration hasnt even learned to crawl as it pertains to manned craft. Going to mars is nothing but a stunt just like apollo. If the astronauts survive im sure theyll do valuable science but itll be a one and done. We need to build infrastructure out there, like refueling stations, automated emrgency aid stations between earth, the moon and mars. We haven't even tried any of the shelter ideas on the moon and knowing how you're going to live on mars before you get there might be a good idea. We have no standardized anything for working and living up there, almost everything nasa sends up is custom one off hardware. So yeah we need to do a lot of work before doing anything past the earth moon system for crewed exploration.
9:20 Interesting idea but isn't it a bit too "creationist" style of thinking? I mean it's not impossble and it's fun to think about (definitely good idea for sci-fi movie) but aren't there much simpler natural explanations? We should always use Occam's razor in these cases.
We will need a proof of concept for breakthrough starshot anyway, but, as he calls it, 'one eye' is the best poc I can imagine. We will develop this technology to actively survey the outer solar system, and eventually send survey swarms farther and farther
Top tier interview right here. Marshall Eubanks is one of the best guest scientists I've seen on one of these shows. I won't lie, a lot of these scientists aren't great speakers and I zone out pretty quickly trying to listen to them. This guy is great. I could listen to him go on about space for hours. And this was such a fascinating subject! I learned a ton from this video. Lots of things I'd never considered about the Breakthrough Starshot project and its implications.
Oh fantastic, glad you enjoyed it.
@@frasercain were glad your glad we enjoyed it 😊
This is one of the most fascinating interviews ever. Brilliant
Fraser, that was for many reasons, my favorite interview of yours I've seen. That's really saying something. It showed your talent as an interviewer and your knowledge of the field along with highlighting how interesting and incredibly smart your guest is. These guys putting craft into space are humanities greatest assets. Thanks for all the entertainment and education you send my way. Much appreciated.
Thank You 2:40 General Relativity, Respect. ..but ...😅❤
Ok, this Talk Helps me understand Traveling Speed, & Time differences for each other... 6:10 the NEED for SPEED😅
God is an Alien❤😅
13:00😅😅😅Focus😅😅❤
Ohh darn! We could've latched on to Oumuamua
😮😢 FREE RIDE
Even just knowing the dimensions, albedo, rotation, and accurate orbit - and having a thumbnail - of every known object in the Solar System would be revolutionary for our understanding. You don't need megapixel images or interstellar distances for this to be revolutionary.
? red ppĺĺ
When imagining future human achievements. The idea that no matter how far we reach. there will always be an unattainable horizon, is somehow comforting. The universe is on a scale none of us can ever truly comprehend. 💚♾️
What if we create subspace warp travel?
This is one of your most intriguing guests. Thank you for not talking over him too much Fraser, I know it's tempting because the subject matter is so fascinating.
I love this interview! So fun and engaging listening to this guest. Even if there was no specific subject, it'd be great just hearing you two talk about ideas and possibilities like in the first 13 mins 😅 Regular installments with Mr. Eubanks please!
I was more mind blown in 10 minutes than in the whole past 2 years.
Wow! 😮 Interstellar medium swarm drag steering control? Fraser oh boy you know some incredible people ✨. Yeah, these interviews are brilliant! Please keep them coming. You could see easily how much you enjoy this great man’s mind just like your audience 😂. Cheers! ✨🦋
Glad you enjoyed it!
How did I miss this?
Interview of the Year!
2:40 re:space is big - on the beach at Melbourne there is a scale model of the solar system- the sun is a beachball. the earth is a few cm in size 150m away. Pluto is a bit over 3km away. Next to the sun is Proxima Centauri - it is within 10% of the correct location, if you go all the away around the circumference of earth. ...
I’m watching the Marshal Eubanks interview for the 5th time and I’m both totally entertained and learning new stuff every time I watch it. The idea of swarms of light powered swarms to SCOUT OUT exploration paths is brilliant - both intellectually and FISICALLY. That kind of pragmatism has LEGS because it politically warm and fuzzy.
I love when he is trampling on the hopes and dreams of all the lightspeed enthusiasts😁
..just become a Photon...done.
1:00:30 explore our oceans❤
1:04:00 InterStellar Fashion❤😂🎉 👔 😊
1:06:20 THANK YOU PATREON!!
THE UNIVERSE ❤S YOU!!
@@ApteraEV2024 Interstellar fashion is at 1:03:00 roundabout😉
The interstellar bolo tie is at 1:03:30
Haha, finally another person but me in team Venus! :) Great interview. It's amazing how our perspective changes when we deal with interstellar probes. It's just amazing we can tackle this and send a missions that will take 40 years to travel. I wish we all lived much longer, so that we can witness such missions.
Team Venus here
Kerbal Space Program is there for the rest of us...
Team Venus here, too. But first the Moon
Great interview/discussion Fraser! Hope you do more like this.
Fascinating interview, I am always totally amazed with some of the concepts that scientists are working on. Hope to hear many more interviews like this.
This is the best interview I’ve watched so far on your channel. Congratulations to both! 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
Realy enjoyable and interesting chat. Thanks for putting it up.
Great interview. I had heard about project Starshot Breakthrough before, but Marchall's insight on it was really eyeopening.
My favorite interview to date. Amazing.
Loved it. Those were some of the questions I've been wondering about, some of them for years and years.
Such a great interview, Mr. Eubanks held my attention non-stop. Thank you, Fraser, once again.
Thank you Marshall - No one has said this before and I’ve always thought ‘we see what they want us to see’. I have always thought that what we might NOT be seeing THE universe but one that is currently being presented to us. As our space telescopes get better we might one day figure out we’re being fooled, or better said we are like the baby in a crib with those toys hovering above them that she reaches out to play with. For her, that is the universe. Yet there is a full room beyond her crib that she will have to learn to walk to see.
Fascinating issues discussed here. Much enjoyed the dialogue.
@44:40 this seems like something that AI could do....be completely autonomous, figure out wat needs to be done within mission parameters, and send/receive data without worrying about time lag from controllers here on earth.
That sounds like HAL.
LOOOL the galaxy is an art project. loved it!
Yes. The "Fish don't know they are wet" theory. It's all around and we can't tell. I like it! Can we build a ML algo that can detect alien spacecraft if we don't have any alien spacecraft to show it? I'm not sure, because I'm a dummy, if we can train ML without samples... can we? We can train it to detect cancer, because we have samples.
Amazing interview, i actually learned alot from your conversations here. Thank you so much for not editing this down to conform to RUclips's matrix and actually leaving in the meat and potatos of the conversation. I always learn something new and exciting when i watch your channel , thank you!!
Nice human pace, I like listen to your videos.
Love this channel so much keep up the great work FC FROM a fan from the UK
The hugh pitched tone at 18:40 made me think an alarm was going off.
I love this, more of this Fraser please! I must watch this again.
Fascinating interview. Excellent discussion with Eubanks. Even if the probes fail so much side data can be extracted from it's journey thru space.
This may be the best thing I’ve ever seen on RUclips! 🙌🏻
"collision induced molecular spectroscopy" might just be my new best phrase for describing an experiment - smack it real hard on the way past and see what glows and flys off ...
Thanks Fraser, I enjoyed that talk.
Right now we are barely able to explore the Moon… for Alpha Century we will probably need another 500 years or even more
Yep, we just need to make sure we make it to the next century while exploring space however we can. That includes observing and preventing the biggest asteroid collisions.
We went from the Wright Brothers to the space shuttle in 80 years, and we did that with only brain power, no AI (not even CAD/CAM).
It won’t be quick, but it won’t take 500 years.
Travelling at over 600 million mph is probably unobtainable and in a debris filled space,incredibly dangerous.
I flip flop on my opinion of that. 100 years is a long time. We went from no airplanes to landing on the moon in 70 years. Who knows what breakthroughs await us in the next 100.
@@blakeb9964we are still using chemical launched rockets to get into space that were first developed in the 1200’s. It’s going to take a lot more than 100 years to come up with something that far surpasses what we have now.
if the air -> interstellar medium analogy kind of works... Is there a "photonic" boom, when you exceed the capability of the spacetime medium? :) And if there could be one - could we extrapolate it's signature based on the air analogy? Btw. what happens when you exceed the limits of water? some kind of a bubble of superheated/phase transitioned water forms around the object, I presume?
Oh, that's a really interesting question. I honestly have no idea, I wonder if it's just too tenuous to be an issue.
@@frasercain ;) yea, most probably - even had to poke and prod my paid friend - chatgpt until he spat Cherenkov radiation as one more phenomena, when the capacity of a medium is exceeded. Anyway, I'm still fascinated about the eerily effectiveness of water->electromagnetic phenomena analogies. Although I think I'm pushing it too far here ;)
Very interesting guest. Should get him on the show again
Obviously talk to it through modulation in the power beam and receive by some sort of display on the sails so we can read it.
On the subject of signal relays, the complaint of "single point of failure" is only true for a limited set of conditions. In particular, while the bandwidth will necessarily be undermined due to minute misalignments, the concept of a "distributed amplifier" could just as well be applied to multiple objects pointing in the same direction as to a single object. Set aside perhaps three frequencies, one for the initial (fairly high power) "local" signal, one for a lower power "full chain" signal (derived from the local signal, used to provide the data signal to every member of the chain by every _earlier_ member of the chain), and medium-power one for a "to Earth" signal (derived from the full-chain signal), and if the probes all along the chain actually _can_ contribute, then you can get enough signal strength that there isn't a single point of failure anywhere except the immediate area of the signal's origin.
I begin to wonder whether the cause of the Fermi Paradox is that settling other stars flies in the face of economics and politics. Interstellar trade is unfeasible as there's nothing out there we can't get locally; and even if successful settlers that far away would soon mutate into aliens, socio-economic at first, genetic eventually. They might even decide that the distant home-world is responsible for their sorrows and declare war, open or covert. That's for the nearest star-system. Even more so for the others. Add to this the high likelihood that anyone wishing to settle so far away is likely to be weird and therefore dangerous beyond our sight, you can see why no species would want to risk all this for so little reward.
I also think that the answer to Fermi's question "Where's everyone" is "On their own planets."
Why trying to settle on a faraway world? What's the gain? Unless you have FTL or discover some unobtanium wich you absolutely need to mine whatever the cost, the cost/risk/gain equation is so ridiculously unbalanced that space travel is just not something a pragmatic civilization pursues... And I've yet to see a technological non-pragmatic civilization.
Why should a politician wish to invest an incredible quantity of time and resources to send around a swarm of probes that will take centuries, millennia to give useful feedback? Who's to benefit from that? Would have Emperor Otto or Pope Urban opened their coffers to send probes in deep space to allow _us_ to get the first news of a maybe inhabitable planet and the decision about what to do with said info?
So yes, enhancing our knowledge about exoplanets and neighbouring stars is cool and useful and I'm all for it, but thinking to colonize outside of our planet is just a fantasy and we shouldn't be too surprised that no alien civ did it, either.
Well said.@@federicogiana
We absolutely have no idea what is there in vastness of space and what we might need in future, so gaining knowledge is resource in itself. Saying that there is nothing there that we can get locally is logical fallacy. We simply don’t know.
@@Cardan011 We know what's out there via light spectra and there's nothing we don't have already. No point at all.in spending tens of billions of dollars and hundreds of years in a tin-can.
@@tonytaskforce3465 so according to you we 100% know what’s out there in 100% of universe? Sorry but that absolutely makes zero sense, we might know 0.000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001% even that is super optimistic. We are literally in infancy of space exploration.
At the 8:30 mark my man takes a drink of some kind of “apple juice” colored drink, and that’s what it probably takes to be on this level
Great questions, thank you!
That was a great interview, and topic. Enjoyed it!
39:40 I doubt that would be a huge problem. Getting to those extreme speeds seems far more difficult. Protecting the spacecraft from all the hazards of going a big fraction of light speed for several years would be far more difficult too. New Horizons probe autonomously aimed cameras for the Pluto flyby and 2014 MU69 flyby in a tiny fraction of the time it took light to communicate with Earth. New Horizons was given software updates down to the last few days before reaching them but that's more likely because they could rather than that they really needed to do that. As a software developer, I don't see a big problem programming that type of software to turn camera data into into directions to the planets, moons, or other areas of interest. A pretty crude way would be take images in random directions and then just throw out the blackest of them.
What a fun interview, thanks 😊
@10:44 "buckle up.." lol .... i got my 5 point harness on for this show ...😂
Edit: Wow! Using ol' Sailing techniques, 'tacking into the wind' for interstellar travel.....yeah totally Bonkies !!!
I really like the way Eubanks explains things that even I thought I had a reasonably firm grip on already. He was able to make a lot of this information even more understandable. Good stuff. Example: human's really don't (or at least this human) understand the scales space works at, 60k kilometers/s still has travel times of up to a year for stuff in our solar system..just .. wow.
I am just in the beginning, and I love this conversation!
Loved it!
Now we can't stop the probes in and reasonable matter but is there any hope of slingshotting it somehow to cause it to move laterally relative to its normal trajectory such that the relative distance between us and the probe slows giving us more time to transmit the data? Surely 100km is more than close enough to swing it around the star at least a tiny bit or smack into its atmosphere really slowing it down assuming we had like 1 in idk, 100 or so capable of withstanding the temperatures to act as a Relay .
Work out a slight shot with a white dwarf. Maybe. neutron star, definitely.
I love the thought of using this system to explore planet 9 and the rest of the kuiper belt.
I always thought a staggered swarm might work best. So they'd basically be able to relay back the information. Send a small swarm out initially, and then another swarm every 12 months or something, with the last swarm being sent after the first swarm gets there and completes its mission. The other swarms can also take data and send it back but we would get the data much later
Nice to be hearing about this now. I have been wondering about it.
Glad you enjoyed it
Even if you did push limits of speed while exploring local system planets etc. Would the local stellar medium be too dense to fly through? And would walked from local probes cause noise for telescope observations?
Lovely interview!! A few question that I might have missed but didnt hear the answer to:
What happens to these jelly pancakes when they are blasted with 100gw laser cannons? Wouldnt they just burn up? Love the idea but definitely need to see some tests !
Also since the laser is a point and not a field, wouldnt it be hard to push the pancakes in a particular direction?
Do you have to continually blast them for 20yrs? Or is this an initial burst of energy and then they coast?
It's a short burst, so maybe minutes? But yeah, you have to make sure you don't melt it.
Lasers cannot make perfect point beams. A couple of decades ago I read something about how much a laser spread from Earth to the moon, and I think it was in the miles. A quick search shows that a cheap laser pointer has a beam a meter wide at a kilometer distance. Even a perfectly constructed laser runs into Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. You cannot know the direction of every photon precisely.
I think there's a chance that the distances are shorter than we think.
Most relativistic arguments assume the dielectric permittivity and permeability of empty space are constant. It does so because the postulate of special relativity is that the two-way speed of light is constant for all observers, not the one-way speed of light, which may be different in different directions, for example to and from a star.
It would be interesting to see how that subtle but important reasoning plays out in distance measurements.
What about Robert L Forward's Rocheworld described light sail deceleration idea? The 'ship' is in 2 parts. 1 part bounces light back to the payload to decel it, while going past the target itself.
Top 3 on my all time favorites right here. Only found one discrepancy that is we're taught that closer missions and data supercedes going for the biggies. I was surprised his passion was with lunar commerce after he said we need more smaller steps first. So, what I've learned from Frasier over my first year of this new passion of mine is investing in telescopes, getting data from interferometors sp? and chronometers. So valid we need to understand the waters in interstellar mediums. Fast is evidently not the only nor most important part in our equations.
Fraser, when talking about asteroid mining, you seem focused on the cost of launching material to the asteroid. That is mostly a one time fixed cost. The mine would use on site materials to create return pods (including fuel) to return the product. Assuming it can work autonomously, the continuing cost is small. It just needs occasional SMALL resupply flights of consumables that can not be created locally.
Just like a big mine on Earth, it takes several years to pay back the investment. After that it becomes a cash cow.
There are multiple industrial use metals with current or near future supply issues. In some cases it is known sources. In others it is political. Cobalt is an example where both apply.
question at these sworm speeds can u say use a supersmall lazer or device turned in and act like a mini hydronclider enough to make its own partical fuel/energy ? and a question about are we geting reading on micro noise from things out there are we able to add a reverberation of sorts from these as a communications carryer? booster
If you're sending a fleet of spacecraft to another star system, that is a Starfleet. And I can't believe you gave up the opportunity to call it that.
Oh yes looking forward to watching this lets go Fraser you mad lad ⛳
Love this guy,
I look at it like we’re already building from Voyager, rather than running to a dedicated Proxima mission, we can (and are) making a swarm of retired Kuiper craft;
I imagine if we can keep an old school craft like Voyager alive so long we ought to be able to design modern electronics to survive on a micro trickle of decay power for several or many times as long, working their way in a final useful direction learning how it is out there until we do go for the star shot and have a dozen trusty clunker scouts holding the door
The plutonium decays at the speed it does, and it doesn't matter how much energy you use. But there are other isotopes you could use that decay at a slower rate, and could provide heat for centuries.
Honestly, if you're wanting to have long-duration Kuiper probes then huge solar reflectors are probably going to make more sense than RTGs. Sure, go ahead with micropower if you want, but the main restriction on lifespan is that RTG, so use RTG tech (because it'll last longer than solar cells) with solar reflectors instead of nuclear decay.
Fantastic interview.
Glad you enjoyed it!
Do Scientists Really Think...they will Stop learning. Please stop Worrying about money! 🇺🇸 🌎 😅❤
25:10 Goldilock Zone
@@frasercain39:10 we need a Better Lense..❤😅
42:00 Rules of A.I. Navigation
don't hit anything, don't fall off a cliff, stay on the road.
Else Stop.
Don't interstellar asteroids present a potentially more dangerous threat to Earth because we would have a shorter warning time to prepare for impact? Wouldn't that be reason enough to have scattered satelites throughout the solar system with at least a secondary duty watching for interstellar objects?
Because of the inverse square law, sending information with radio or any other electromagnetic comms aint going to happen unless you have an absolutely massive energy source on the craft
Those probes also could be used to build a gravitational lensing telescope, as they pass at 500 AU distance. Whatever the swarm is pointing to, this is the time to point their telescopes back (as long as they are built to stand or blot out sun's glare).
Just as you utilise the vibration and colliding with other ones and Taloric current circles within circles that draws into the process of creating gravitational vacuums that flow into the process of creating light will emerge from the starting point this is similar to balance of capacity to holding the resonating moment of the silence
What happens if one of those probes flying at 0.2c speed would accidentally hit the planet? Would an Earth like atmosphere block it without causing damage on the surface?
Yes, interacting with even rarified air would destroy the probe. 0.0036 kg @ 60M m/s^2 --> ~1.5 kiloton yield.
Very cool interview!!!
Glad you enjoyed it
Fascinating conversation
Glad you enjoyed it
What about allowing a series of the probes to be a relay network? Would that increase the data capacity?
Haha you guys just got to the topic in the interview. Disregard my question
What's the furthest direct line of sight communication we can do in the present day?
Voyager
What about sending a "string" of minicrafts where the first ones carry the instruments whereas the following ones use their "grams" worth for better antennas??
Isn't that a viable plan?
What about something like in star trek, relay stations, commuications relays, have a few probes stop along the way and create a wifi type thing along the way, boucing a signal back to earth. Would that work in any way?
We talk about that. It sets up a single point of failure.
@@frasercainneed to do it as a mesh
Does the quantity, size and speed of things that hit James Webb give us important data about the solar system?
Hey Frazer, I wasn't aware that the "power system" required for sending info from Proxima to earth had been solved. Is this the case? I've been in touch with a number of individuals working on the power system from time to time, and was told the problem hasn't as of yet has not been solved.
Plz reply or send link. Thank you,
Kevin Hambsch
The Sun is Hydrogen and Helium which is ALREADY excited, Hydrogen produces Lasers in Infrared so I have always wondered why we can't simply align mirrors through the suns Corona or whatever such to lase the media in-between. There has to be a place, even if not using the already excited solar gases in which two aligned mirrors can be arranged such that the hydrogen helium medium lases allowing us to produce a Laser on a scale absolutely unimaginable. I have heard of Stellasers before but they all seem to be nothing but focused mirrors and not actual lasers using the solar winds as the lasing medium. I think ima run some numbers and see if that concentration can be made to lase. The excited lifetime should be rather large given the low density and Helium to aid similar to a Helium Neon laser
I'm not aware of the IR laser beams hydrogen makes. I'll have to look into that.
I think Isaac Arthur had a video mentioning stellaser using the sun as a lasing medium.
I can understand having problems pronouncing Oumuamua. But how do you get one-eye from it?
The scientific name is 1I/Oumuamua (1st interstellar comet)
@@frasercain thanks.
Borisov was 2/I since it was the second interstellar object ever found.
@@frasercain thanks again.
Amazing interview
Question: How much damage would a breakthrough starshot probe do if it impacts a planet? Are we at risk of causing am extinction level event here?
I've been trying to get an answer to this question. Its briefly mentioned by Eubanks in this very interview ( 41:24 ) but just kinda of gets glossed over. Ive even had a hostile reply or two where I've asked about this.
@@Axeface thank you so much for following up! I never thought you'd actually reply. I follow your news stories weekly and when I can, the interviews. I would like to support you, but grad school (need I say more). One day maybe I'll be able to become a patron... I have many other questions
only a couple of kilotons, no big deal. That's 11 orders of magnitude less than the Dino Killer, which was ~100 million megatons.
Could you elaborate to the reality of those numbers? Would that much power be easily absorbed by the atmosphere (lets assume an atmo fairly similar to earth for this) or would it make contact with the surface? @@RobertSputnikWranglerVtoroi
I thought I had replied to this earlier. About your response, could you explain what those numbers mean in real terms? For example (lets assume a, earth like atmosphere) would it burn up in atmo or could it reach the surface? @@RobertSputnikWranglerVtoroi
great interview
sailing through space using concepts learned from sailing the seas. 4 dimensional tacking techniques when the interstellar medium is calm 3rd edition
Can you sling slot it around the planet and the the star and then back
it would go too fast too be pulled in enough by the star. It would shoot past.. You would need a much heavier thing like a black hole maybe
What would the laser pushing the probes along do to the Proxima-Alpha Centuari system - not all the laser light is going to just hit the swarm. How bright a flash would be to them?
And would we see the illuminated swarm in the night sky as it retreated? Maybe redshifted…
Instead of using Earth based lasers in flat sails, could you use on board lasers on curved sails,? Parabolic perhaps?
The downside to that would be the weight of the laser. Would you need a bigger sail or would you gain that back from the laser beam spread (or is this distance too small for a significant beam spread), no absorption from interstellar dust, or 100% dedicated beam vs. the beam switching between different sails?
If you're putting the lasers on the ship, you just point them out the back and make a photonic drive.
@@frasercain true
Getting back to the slowing down problem, with an onboard laser you just point the laser in the other direction.
With the laser on earth or nearby orbit, though, there's no laser there to slow you down...
Except for the star you're heading to. Would there be enough light and enough time to slow a storm element down enough to get into some orbit around the star? Could some of the leading probes somehow concentrate the targeted star's light onto some of the trailing probes to an amount that could slow them down.
Another thing to remember is that slowing down adds time to the mission. By whatever method used, how much time would slowing down to stay add to the project?
The very first observatory on the moon was on Apollo 16 with the FAR UV telescope tripod mounted, f/1.0, 75 mm electronographic Schmidt camera weighing 22 kg. It had a 20° field of view in the imaging mode, and 0.5x20° field in the spectrographic mode.[1] Spectroscopic data were provided from 300 to 1350 Ångström, with 30 Å resolution, and images were provided in two passbands ranges, 1050-1260 Å and 1200-1550 Å.[2
This is an amazing interview! I absolutely loved it, and a question came to mind. Why aren't we focusing on using the Moon as our holistic focus/training ground with robotics, rovers, probes, communications, logistics and sustainment, engineering and infrastructure, security, mining, science, etc? The cost of learning lessons is high, but we're close enough to quickly observe, orient, decide, and act where we can make changes/adjust, respond, employ/codify lessons, build/produce whatever is needed, and incorporate them into operations in relatively quick order. Then use that template for points between the Moon and Mars, and then Mars, and so on.
Also, are we going about this the right way? We absolutely have friction/distrust with China and Russia (for example) and have built partnerships with trust and interoperability with others, but invariably, we're all going in the same direction. We all have various experiences and expertise (depth/breadth) and can maximize our resources if we're going about this together rather than individually or in small groups.
Thank you again for this awesome interview, and am rewatching it as I know it will take a couple of views to fully grasp and understand it.
I am but a lowly mechanical engineer however I like to think that I have a pretty good grasp on a lot of these concepts revolving around interplanetary and interstellar travel. And what I hear from people irl and on the internet are things like a lot of people think Dr Alcibierre invented a warp drive and we just need to build it. When I burst that idea bubble they inevitably argue and we end up with me telling them that we humans in the current year cannot fly direct to any body in the solar system outside of the moon, all of our spacecraft rely on gravitational assists and the fuel they have is reserved for small maneuvers with Cassini being the closest thing to sci fi with its having to fire its engine to slow down and enter Saturn's orbit. And we have no infrastructure in space, the ISS is a research platform not a gas station, we haven't refueled any of our craft, on paper we can do it but on paper landing on the moon should be something we had down pat but how many unmanned craft have either missed the moon or crashed into it vs landing on it since apollo? There's a ton of tech on the drawing board and in development that will allow us to explore or exploit the solar system but at the moment we're still stuck in low earth orbit as far as manned spacecraft go. Chemical rockets are great for getting up and out of the gravity well but for humans to go anywhere past the moon nuclear propulsion is really the only viable option and we know how to build fission rockets aka nuclear thermal propulsion, hell a nuclear fusion system where you expose water to the super hot fusion plasma converting that water to plasma is probably buildable with current tech ie an inertial confinement reactor. But none of this stuff outside of nuclear thermal(fission) exists so people need to reel in their expectations and understand just how primitive our spacecraft are
Thank you
Very cool interview
What about sending a streem of probes so they can act as relay stations to boost the signal back?
He talked about it on the comment about daisy chains.
About introducing single points of failure that can be circumvented with redundancy
Yeah, we talked about that.
Could we use quantum entanglement for interstellar communication? it would be instantaneous, wouldn’t it?
Entanglement doesn't appear to be useful for faster than light communication, though I think it can be used in quantum cryptography.
As far as I know, the only faster than light communication method in the quantum world would use quantum tunneling - which is entirely impractical over interstellar distances for all kinds of reasons, and not that much faster than light.
I don't think this is a solvable problem in the near term. It's probably better to think of ways to avoid the need for communication. I'd be thinking of projects that rely on autonomous vehicles mainly.
No we can't, according to the current knowledge. The universal speed limit (at the speed of light) is all about the speed of information travelling through space. This IS the whole point. If you could somehow break that limit, then our whole understanding of physics falls apart. The term "instantaneous" itself refers to photons travelling in perfect vacuum. The time is already instantaneous for photons, there's only space. Events can't happen faster than instantaneously.
To me, this sucks canal water, but that's what theoretical physicists understand to be true. If even theoretically this is not possible then we would need to discover magic to do anything with that.
Anyone who replies here suggesting there is any chance at all to communicate at faster than the speed of light in vacuum, better described as the speed of causality, by quantum entanglement or quantum tunneling, or ANY other means is being WAY unrealistic.
Nothing can communicate faster than the speed of causality or you could tell someone what happens in the future.
There's one way to communicate at any speed theoretically and undeniably but it's very disappointing. It would be one-way communication and you'd have to travel with the message at relativistic speeds (which we have no assurance will ever be practical) and measure the speed of the communication in your own reference frame, i.e. not useful.
No
No
y no.
Fraser do you have any tips on how to get Canadian visa
A visa? It just depends on your country and what kind of visa. Travel? Work, education? Each one has its own requirements. www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/services/visit-canada.html
@@frasercain wow very nice of you 🥰nah I mean citizenship. wish I could be canadian like you 😔also I love all the small islands, very cool place 🥰
The best thing is to have a degree in a field that helps your immigration, and to speak english and french as fluently as possible. This document explains it. So if you can meet these criteria, it's easy to get a visa to work here and then eventually get your citizenship: www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/services/immigrate-canada/express-entry/eligibility/federal-skilled-workers.html
@@frasercain wow you're the best Fraser 🥰
I keep running into having to explain that Dr. Alcubiere didn't propose or design a warp engine or ship and that he came up with the math / equations to describe a means by which light speed could be gotten around. And then the bubbles really burst when I tell them that in the most optimistic scenarios something like a ship using a warped bubble of space time would require the mass-energy equivalent of something the size of jupiter. But it kills me that people think we're building the tech to explore our entire solar system and other star systems when our best currently operational craft are still chemical rockets. Space x building rockets that can be re-used and actually land themselves are great but even their best is still a chemically powered rocket. And then there are the people making fun of the moon probes from Russia and India that crashed instead of landing, and they have no idea how difficult it is to land something on any celestial body even the moon. Space exploration hasnt even learned to crawl as it pertains to manned craft. Going to mars is nothing but a stunt just like apollo. If the astronauts survive im sure theyll do valuable science but itll be a one and done. We need to build infrastructure out there, like refueling stations, automated emrgency aid stations between earth, the moon and mars. We haven't even tried any of the shelter ideas on the moon and knowing how you're going to live on mars before you get there might be a good idea. We have no standardized anything for working and living up there, almost everything nasa sends up is custom one off hardware. So yeah we need to do a lot of work before doing anything past the earth moon system for crewed exploration.
Very interesting, thanks 👍
9:20 Interesting idea but isn't it a bit too "creationist" style of thinking? I mean it's not impossble and it's fun to think about (definitely good idea for sci-fi movie) but aren't there much simpler natural explanations? We should always use Occam's razor in these cases.
We will need a proof of concept for breakthrough starshot anyway, but, as he calls it, 'one eye' is the best poc I can imagine.
We will develop this technology to actively survey the outer solar system, and eventually send survey swarms farther and farther