Regarding Jupiter, if a Jupiter’s mass of oxygen could be evenly distributed throughout the existing gases already present in its atmosphere, and was subsequently ignited, how long would it take to exhaust the entire mass, would there be any “ashes” remaining, presumably water, and if so, how many teaspoons?
20:51 If I remember correctly, the sun is basically bobbing up and down while revolving around the galaxy in the “suburbs” near the outer edge of the galactic plane. There’s a gas cloud of some sort that the sun travels through periodically while it’s bobbing up and down. A few scientists have suggested that many of Earth’s extinction events have coincided with the sun’s interaction with this cloud and it could potentially be related. On another note, if someone offered me a trip to space, I’d take it so fast! If I had the money to pay for a trip on one of those space tourism flights from Blue Origin, Virgin Galactic, or other companies, I’d do it tomorrow! I too am interested in the high altitude balloon rides to the boundary of outer space in a nice, comfortable, and relaxed capsule attached to the balloon…that’s right up my alley!
It's all a matter of reference frames. From the reference frame of an object in free fall, it experiences in fact zero gravity. That was Einstein's whole deal: there is no instrument you can invent that can differentiate between acceleration and gravity. They are indeed physically the exact same thing. Likewise, existing in an empty universe or falling freely under the influence of all the gravitational pulls of everything we have in our universe is the exact same thing. If you're in a box that you can't look out of, you will never be able to tell the difference.
Hoth! Highest mountain in Ecuador is Chimborazo ele. 20,702 Because of the equatorial bulge, this peak is the farthest point from the center of the Earth. Bring your oxygen tanks! Mars question: wouldn't the bottom of Valles Marineris, some 10km deep, where temperature should be warmer and the atmosphere denser be a more likely place to look for Martian life?
19:35 - That reminds me of when I was a kid, my dad explained what life was like before television. Now our generation gets to explain to the next one, what life was like before the internet.
@@arkvsi8142 - and be visited by FBI? no thanks, and the design was flawed anyhow so it is a waste of money to build it, NASA abandoned it I think, if I remember correctly
@@arkvsi8142 - no, you couldn't, I think they noticed it was difficult to load rockets from the ship to the rig due to waves on the ocean, that's why the rig had to sail back to long beach each time, I suggested to use a dry dock instead, that could sink down when the ship comes with new rockets, rise up, unload rockets, sink down, let the ship leave, alternatively stay half submerged to stabilise the structure, but it was never built
@@doncarlodivargas5497 Oh, I Analyzed it and makes sense, basically a ship elevator/lifter that fits the rocket and lowers it after. Kinda worth building, but a shame it was discarded...If nasa was the one in charge.. I guess they preferred to send that money to Boeing
31:58 As someone that has been an amateur astronomer since the 1980's I've only seen one "UFO" and coincidentally it was last summer. I witnessed what appeared to be a satellite traveling in a circumpolar orbit. I then noticed it stop for a few seconds. It then started to make sharp turns as it moved across the sky for about 30 minutes. After this it zipped over the Western Horizon at incredible speed before disappearing. My wife and kids also watched this with me so I know i wasn't hallucinating. Never seen anything quite like it.
I have seen the same thing while watching a meteor shower at night,the craft made ninety degree turns at super high speeds we all watched this and couldn't believe what we saw.
I always laughed at UFO believers...then last year I see a light standing still due South brighter than Venus...then ZIPPED to the West. It started bright greenish white , upon arriving west, it was a dim ruby red...and blinking ! Zipped east to west for 10 minutes then vanished. It also increased and shrunk in diameter at random...Drone ? But Hobby Airport was directly below it...isnt that illegal...to operate a drone there?
I'm excited to just see images from places like, Alan Shephards photos from the early 1960s to the Voyager ships many ships have taken photos of OUR l Lttle Blue Marble. So so many photos.
You mentioned you would have less weight from the center of the earth out the father you go. But the center of the earth you would be weightless. I’m not sure how far from the center you start experiencing weight but I would assume as you move up from the center you have mass above you and mass below you countering each other. So it would be different than standing on an astroid of the diameter and composition of your depth. I think I’m looking at this correctly but not positive.
GRILL 332 you are correct. At the center of the earth its mass is uniformly distributed all around you so you experience weightlessness. moving away from the center creates a non uniform distribution of mass so you begin to experience some gravity until your reach the surface at which point all the mass all beneath you and you experience one G.
Yes, what he said was right but with the assumption you are on the surface, in that situation it makes sense to say the gravity gets weaker the further you are from the center of mass. You could not just say it gets weaker the further you are from the surface as that would imply its always the same on the surface even though the surface itself can vary in it's distance from the center of mass which we know does effect the strength of gravity you experience
Hey fraser here's my question: Billions of years from now when the sun is beginning to run out of hydrogen and starts to fuse helium and enter its red giant stage. Could we ( as a more advanced civilisation then we are now ) find a way to crash the gas giants into the sun to replenish the sun's supply of hydrogen and maybe give our sun another billion years of stability? Thanks!
can we somehow use earths magnetic feilds for rockets , and the earths gravity is not evenly distributed on its surface so what would be the best possible launch site
Fraser - You showed Virgin Galactic when you were describing Virgin Orbit - Virgin Orbit uses a 747 “Cosmic Girl”, while Virgin Galactic flies a specially designed aircraft “White Night 2” out of New Mexico (Not the UK)!
Fraser Cain: Would it be possible to use the temperature and pressure differentials in the Venus atmosphere to generate power? I am thinking of an analog to geothermal power where you send a dirigible with log hoses that would dangle down into the hotter and denser atmosphere close to the surface. Add a couple of oneway valves and a sterling engine on one end, and you should be set. Is this defeated by material science concerns or weight limitations? Would we need to wait for graphene to make this viable, or are there other problems that I am not considering?
This idea is against the thermodynamics laws, so you want to pump hot dens gasses up in the upper atmosphere and benefit from heat and temperature difference to produce energy( I suppose that is your ideea), when the gasses climb inside some pipe (or hose if you want) in the upper atmosphere their pressure decrease, and when a gass experience a drop in pressure becomes cooler, other way around is true too, if you want to pump cold rarefied gasses from upper atmosphere down when the gasses descent increase in pressure make them hotter and when reach ground temperature and pressure differential would be almost zero. Or so small that energy gain will be smaller than energy used to pump that gas.
I began my amateur astronomy in Adelaide Australia which has a population of a million and a bit, so when I visited Fraser Island off the coast of Queensland I was quite disoriented by the vast number of stars and the Milky Way dominated.
Brazil has a naval base within a few miles of the Equator Brazil has been shopping as a prospective space port. Don’t be surprised if someone like SpaceX leases it…
An interesting side effect of the "zero gravity" discussion is the realization that riding the Vomit Comet really is close enough to what being in orbit would be like, since both achieve free fall
2:15 Just say: To destroy CO2 you will need 6.7x more energy than to destroy H2O, but Venus is in the Sun's range to destroy water! DONE, and Remember: On Venus surface, you have supercritical CO2 😉
Surely there is *some* oxygen in Jupiter's atmosphere, right? Maybe the whole planet doesn't ignite, but can there be Jovian wildfires? Is there a place in Jupiter's atmosphere equivalent to california?
I thought I saw a report that Cassini (Or was it Hubble?) saw very occasional huge flashes in the Jovian atmosphere of about 1300C. It is interesting to think what would happen if Jupiter turned into a small star (Even a brown Dwarf) - I would suspect on some nights, depending on Jupiter's position in the sky, that there would be no night.
There's something like 1200 times more hydrogen atoms than oxygen in the atmosphere, and most of that oxygen is bound in water vapour since the oxygen atoms have already reacted with the hydrogen. There would be free oxygen atoms in the upper atmosphere but they are very reactive and dissociate and re-associate from hydrogen in water vapour due to electrical storms. You won't see fires but there are plasmas and auroras where oxygen is involved as well as other chemical reactions.
Hey Fraser, My question is about hot jupiters and selection bias from telescopes like TESS and KEPLER. When the protoplanetary disks form around new stars, the stellar wind tends to push a greater percent of lighter elements (H & He) further out (Perhaps there is also an aspect of centrifugal differentiation?). This forms the gas giants (in a very neat band- smaller inner rocky, gas giants, ice giants). This seems like it would happen in every system, which means that most gas giants should form further from their star? Would this not be the case if you had a metallic element-poor system? Or perhaps red dwarfs have weaker solar wind? Obviously, large, quickly orbiting planets (especially with relatively low mass stars) are going to be the easiest to detect. There still seems to be a lot though! Would the main cause of hot jupiters be from gravitational perturbations/interactions in the forming solar system, changing their orbits after formation? Or would there be a case for them naturally forming at such a close distance under certain circumstances? Sorry for the long question! Thanks!!
Watching the Terminator judgement day depiction of ICBM nuclear missile attack, wouldn’t every missile re enter The atmosphere from west of their target and course adjust due to earths rotation?
I've always wondered why don't scientist just take a microscope on a Mars Rover and look for life that way. It's seems like we could just look for microbes - even dead ones directly.
Kamino. Fraser, what do think of the idea of looking at the stars the way the Incas did? They looked at the nebulae, rather than the stars themselves. They inverted the idea of stargazing and sought out dark areas with identifiable shapes. Would this solve the issue of all of the stars looking too bright and making it hard to identify constellations when in space?
Could we refuel a spacecraft by low-orbeting jupiter? Either with a oxidizer-type engine or a ion-type engine? The ionization energy is very high for Helium though (about 70x higher than Xenon), and the density is much lower than other preferred gasses (1/33 of Xenon) so I guess it wouldn't be great... Like 2310x worse than Xenon?
Crait - I've wondered the same thing, and your explanation was fantastic. With an eye on building bases on the Moon, and also needing to clean up the orbit around the earth, Would it be possible with something like Starship to, at some point in the near-ish future, develop a "capture" system to retrieve some of the satellites / large debris in orbit around earth that were not designed with a system to de-orbit properly, and deliver them to the moon for recycling / repurposing?
It's zero g, not zero gravity. Yes, g comes from gravity, but g is a the force from gravity. In space you have no force, but still plenty of curved sapce
Using warp bubble theory, would it be easier to warp in the direction that your spaceship was already moving? Or would it not matter which way you wanted to warp?
How do you define "the direction that your spaceship was already moving"? That is arbitrary in outer space. If one guy is moving "north" at ten miles an hour and another is doing so at twenty miles an hour then the first guy is moving "south" at ten miles an hour. Which frame of reference is the correct one.
I've said it befor and I'll say it again... Absolutely love your content Fraser! BEST space channel on RUclips! I consider myself fairly adept, but you explain things perfectly for anyone to understand.
Please check out physics girl. She's got a great channel and currently going through a medical emergency and could use extra views and support Fraser, Scott Manley & Anton Petrov are a few of my favourite science educators 😁 daily watch for me because of such mind blowing content
@@THIS---GUY I watch all of them too! I just really like Fraser's content. Scott gets pretty deep into launches which i like but not always my thing. Anton discusses more physics anomalies, which i also like, but can be a little too much for "relaxing" I also watch physics girl, launchpad astronomy, astrium, what about it.... pretty much all of them Fraser is just this Awesome middle groud where its fun topics and gets deep with them, but not too deep and with good variety
@Aetoski you're right about everything. Fraser answers so many questions, too. He's so interactive with community, it's easy to take it for granted . Astrum, Sea, history of earth/universe are awesome for relaxed learning. I agree about Manley. I've recently been deep diving into him and Everyday Astronaut but overlook how specific they are. Thanks for sharing!
@@THIS---GUY Sabine Hossenfelder is probably my second favorite overall right now. Goes a little more in depth, but also a great explainer with good variety, including chemistry topics. Also shes kind of hilarious
Space elevators get way too much respect. The counterweight would have to be 22,218 miles above the earth. (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_elevator) Some versions of space elevators envision a cable 62,000 miles long. The shorter version would take over 9 days at 100 mph to go from Earth's surface to the space station. So you would have a Pullman rail car with sleeping berths, a dining car and locomotive (this is the steampunk version of a space elevator) chugging along a nanofiber ribbon for more than a week to get to the space station. In SciFi the space station would be a couple hundred miles above the Earth, but apparently, that doesn't work. Phooey.
I’ve always!, aways wondered why these gas giants don’t set on fire!!!! And what would happen if one did! 😫 Talk about cook off 🥵 Great Chanel, really helps me chill out after a day of thinking!. Your a big brain 👍
Hello Fraser, I don't understand the measurement used for the so called "Hubble tension". Does it mean that the universe is expanding at said velocity at the borders of our universe? Or is it expanding at said velocity within that megaparsec at the end of the universe? Or are those velocities for localized parts of the observable universe? I am really confused. Or I'm simply unable to grasp the math and distances described for these questions. Help! And thanks. I watch as many of your videos as I can.
Yes i have a question, it boggled my brain. . . I couldn't find any answer. . Lets see if you can help me. . . . . One day i noticed, I couldn't feel any air blowing from my ceiling fan, though the fan was spinning at full speed, everywhere was the same suggestion, blades must be bent, must be dirty blades, blades might be reversed bla bla bla . I can assure, that is not the case. I was very curious, and also intrigued, my curtains were moving, i turned the fan off and on. It was moving air finely, but for 2/3 hardly 5 minutes. Then the same. I turned down the regulator, nothing changed. But when i turn on the fan from level 3 or less, fan was working fine. And whenever i turn it up above 3 . . Same problem started, i was checking with a lighter (sway of the flame). I was confused how is it possible that blades are moving at full speed, but it cannot displace any air. . . Anyway, my electrician changed a white cylindrical part and then it was fine, it might be the condenser but i am not sure, i asked him, he blabbered something, i knew he didn't know or understand anything that might help me get an answer.so, didn't bother him, but it had bothered me ever since, internet has also failed me this time. .. can you help . .???
Jupiter Jupiter Jupiter... When a star fuses and makes Iron, the star dies. Anything heavier than Iron are probably from a supernova or a quasar! something super powerful and massive. So even if Jupiter had ever wanted to start fusion, it most likely has a rocky, Iron core, so it couldn't Even our sun would die if it made Iron. But we will probably see our star die when it makes carbon. Its just too small. Here is a question I have though, Our sun is a yellow dwarf, It will swell into a reg giant and then get blown off and become a brown dwarf. So did the sun start as a super massive star and explode to make the atmosphere and the collect most of the Hydrogen to start fusion again in our sun?
QUESTION: If the sun has been in a constant state of fusion for multiple billions of years, how does it have enough fuel to remain in constant fusion? Where is it pulling in hydrogen from? By now, one would think it would have expended all original hydrogen?
At 1:46 Why does Venus have such a dense atmosphere, and the Earth, a more massive planet, has a much thinner atmosphere? Is CO2 that much heavier than O2 or N2? Well, 1 and a half times, but is that enough? Seems the Earth should be able to have an atmosphere as dense as Venus's, especially as we have a magnetosphere.
Why is The Moon an Alien Spaceship? How is it controlled? Where did the Aliens come from? However, I won't ask why they came. That much I already know...
Two really good book series are "Red Mars" and "Rendezvous With Rama." Both series written in the 90s and before but have a lot of insight to the technologies needed for terraforming and deep space travel. The Rama series definitely came to mind when Omuamua came through our solar system
Revelation Space was exceptional, as are most of his other books. Adrian Tchaikovsky is another great author worth reading…but you’ll no doubt end up in another series! Although the standalone book Elder Race was brilliant!
Why not use the centrifugal launcher to load up balls packed with things to make space gear IN space? Assuming it works every time it'd have to be cheaper than accelerating all that weight and burning a ton of rocket fuel.
At constant 1g acceleration you would theoretically reach near the speed of light in about 1 year... So, we cannot use constant acceleration as a replacement for gravity to travel the galaxy even if we could find enough golf balls to throw backwards. So we aren't really going to need to solve the time dilation problem for a very long time.
If the sun gravity can be used for lensing and therefore bd used as a telescope, could Jupiter have sufficient mass to produce the same effect only on a lesser scale? If this were possible, would the "stand off distance for the viewing point be much closer than the 1K, AU required for the viewing point of the sun? Similarly is it more feasible to utilise the alpha centauri system stars for the same purpose or would the viewing points be further from the earth than that of our sun?
I've seen plenty that I couldn't identify. Especially when it came to a wedge of dots that outlined a shape that blacked out the sky within it as it flew overhead. Too large for any planes.
I think the “problem” with near light speed travel is that the knowledge a civilization might hope to gain from any mission that employs it becomes inaccessible to that civilization, making any near light speed missions of any real duration pointless in terms of discovery to the civilization that the mission leaves behind. I’ve often wondered if this is perhaps a potential solution to the Fermi paradox. Apart from the possible goal of seeding new civilizations through the galaxy, there just is little to no incentive for a civilization to engage in missions of any real duration that travel at near light speeds since the civilization that is left behind will never benefit from the results of the mission in any timeframe that would make a difference to that civilization.
Could you send a spacecraft on a trajectory where it could observe multiple targets through the solar gravitational lense? Sort of like how New horizons was able to flyby bonus targets after the primary mission was over?
so, how fast would the end of the space elevator tether counter-weight be going as it spins about the earth? GSO is 36,000 km, so twice that times 2 times pi would be the distance it goes in a day (C=2*pi*r). That's 452,389,342 meters/day, or about 5, 235 m/s, or 0.0017% the speed of light.
Seems like a failed star for one reason or another I'd probably give just about anything to understand the internal mechanics of gas giants especially Neptune and Uranus :(
Orbital velocity is at least 17,000mph. At the latitude of KSC the rotation diff to equatorial speed is only 89mph. A difference which is insignificant at that scale.
I don't have a favorite, but; - Launchng from near the Equator: The Wikipedia page on the spaceport in French Guiana (5 degrees north) states that a Soyuz which would launch a payload of 1.7 T from Baiknur (46 N) would increase its payload to 2.8 T. Not insignificant! But they don't sem to get in a lot of launches. Wonder how they could keep up with the pace of just SpaceX. Lots of logistics to launching there, I'd guess. - Gravitational lens observatory; an online calculator reveals that an object at 1000 AU from Sol would orbit in 31,620 years and so would move its observation area by one degree in 81 years. I wonder what distance it would be focussed at. And whether using different objects for gravitational lenses is a better idea, given the decades it would take to build any such observatory and further decades to launch it to 1000 AU. Wouldn't it be better to put one into orbit at the Earth-Sun L2 poiint and use various "nearby" massive black holes as lenses?
zero-g is synonymous with weightlessness, i.e. a fighter pilot pulling out of a dive experiences 5-gs (5 times the weight exerted by Earth's gravity). Zero-g is NOT synonymous with "zero gravity".
Nice sunny day on the Vancouver island forests. Very likely the first sign of life on earth detected in the optical by an alien civilisation during day time would be the huge forest land cover.
At 99% of c -- the speed of light -- the time dilation (i.e. the Lorentz factor) is 7. One day on your spaceship is 7 days on Earth. However, one way the Universe stops you from reaching c is by converting the energy you expend trying to accelerate your ship into mass. So at 99% of c your spaceship and everything in it is *7* times as massive (i.e. it would weigh 7 times as much as it did on Earth.)
@@frasercain Fraser, did not intend to come across as snarky. Several of us (aerospace engineers & one astrophysicist who worked on the JWST) meet every Monday to chat about the latest in astronomy, astrophysics, etc. Your excellent works come up every time we meet. So thank you!
Re: going to space. Aww, I'm older, and I want to go space (to see the Milky Way, for instance). I'm hoping Starship works well enough for me to take a 45 minute ride to Australia! I'd pay $10k for that, so 300 passengers could fund a $3M launch.
I've digested that black holes aren't a major part of dark matter, but I'm still baffled that they're properly part of the universe, still. What's YOUR take on it? Is Sagittarius A*, the supermassive black hole at the center of our galaxy, properly part of the Milky Way and Universe?
Holy cow let's do the SGL telescope! There's all kinds of things to look at. Voyager is 14.6 billion miles out and took over 30 years to get that far, so ohh nevermind, need to be 93 billion miles out (6.4X more). We'll need 10x better propulsion to get it to 1000AU (139 light hours away!) in anything resembling a human lifetime. The old 1960's project Orion could easily get it there in a few years, but fear and that test ban treaty closed the sky forever, oh well.
Tattoonie Hey Frasier, Venus is next door and Proxima Centauri is 50,000 years away (I guess). Why do we focus on finding life in places so far away but there is no priority on doing a several century project like terra forming Venus. Humans have done projects on this time scale: Norte Dame, Gaudi’s Cathedral, etc.
Question time Fraser! Okay so I get Time Dilations effects on humans... but how does this work with man made objects? So if I create a rocket that explodes in a mushroom cloud of kittens after exactly 20 years.... And I jump in, fire it up and blast off, and travel very very quickly not at the speed of like, 1 G or 2 G's let's say.. Does the rocket explode in kittens based on the time that I'm there with it:? Does the rocket "Age" along with me and all of it's components?
Sulfuric acid existing in Venusian atmosphere makes no sense to me from the point of elementary chem. S combusts creating SO2. Add H2O and you get H2SO3, and NOT H2SO4. So please explain to me the how sulfuric acid gets made on Venus where oxygen is in shortish supply.
I got a question: Why you been misleading about no add in the middle? If you get paid for adds and don't include the value of your "No adds in the middle adds" when y'all do taxes it means y'all been cheating the tax man. The IRS got Capone when FBI couldn't so I guess my real question is, "Do you feel lucky?..." Y'all better vote this best question. I'd do it for y'all :}
Coruscant - Why would a Solar gravitaional lens missin be limited to one target? Surely the scope would be put into an orbit and be able to target other systesm? I'm guessing there may be only one target of interest even in an orbit?
BESPIN 's question is great. I would ask a follow up question: If we were to send an oxygen tank to Jupiter which would probably implode at a close distance, would this create an explosion of the hydrogen on Jupiter?
I just realized your Patron pitch is an advertisement for your own show and it is in the middle. I don't know what to believe now. First Fauci, and now I've realized F. Cain has been lying to us every single episode since idk when, like season 2 probably.......
Yeah, terms like "Zero Gravity" and "Micro Gravity" are not the best way to describe weightlessness on orbit. One term I like is "0g", spoken like "Zero Gee". With "g" being a unit of acceleration, not a unit of force. "1g" is the amount of acceleration that an object experiences relative to you on Earth, if you let it go where Gravity would take it, and "0g" is the amount of acceleration relative to you for an object you let go while on orbit. If you wanted to avoid people misunderstanding "0g" as "Zero Gravity" then perhaps "Zero Acceleration" could be one way to describe it, but in my mind Weightlessness and "0g" are both just as good and more commonly used anyway.
What about Gravity Equilibrium as a new term. Where you are unable to sense which direction you're being pulled in? It's tricky when you consider motion though. 90% of earths gravity feels like zero because of motion. Do we need a term that includes both gravity and velocity?
Jupiter Catching Fire would require Oxygen you need both fuel and oxidizer for fire the Si Fi movie "The Wandering Earth" makes good use of it in it's plot line.
We should start a petition to SpaceX to get Fraser into space. Even if he doesn't want to 😂
Send andrew tate, leave fraser alone. :)
I don’t think he meant to send Fraser with a one way ticket into space
Tim Dodd on dear moon is almost as good but I would love to see Fraser do a Q&A in zero gravity 😀
Dear Fraser, a question popped into my brain: how are the SpaceX bathroom and SpaceX snacks?
Has my vote
Regarding Jupiter, if a Jupiter’s mass of oxygen could be evenly distributed throughout the existing gases already present in its atmosphere, and was subsequently ignited, how long would it take to exhaust the entire mass, would there be any “ashes” remaining, presumably water, and if so, how many teaspoons?
Fine video..very interesting
20:51 If I remember correctly, the sun is basically bobbing up and down while revolving around the galaxy in the “suburbs” near the outer edge of the galactic plane. There’s a gas cloud of some sort that the sun travels through periodically while it’s bobbing up and down. A few scientists have suggested that many of Earth’s extinction events have coincided with the sun’s interaction with this cloud and it could potentially be related.
On another note, if someone offered me a trip to space, I’d take it so fast! If I had the money to pay for a trip on one of those space tourism flights from Blue Origin, Virgin Galactic, or other companies, I’d do it tomorrow! I too am interested in the high altitude balloon rides to the boundary of outer space in a nice, comfortable, and relaxed capsule attached to the balloon…that’s right up my alley!
Alastair Reynolds is fantastic
(you could be the brother of the 'growing up in scientology' guy)
It's all a matter of reference frames. From the reference frame of an object in free fall, it experiences in fact zero gravity. That was Einstein's whole deal: there is no instrument you can invent that can differentiate between acceleration and gravity. They are indeed physically the exact same thing. Likewise, existing in an empty universe or falling freely under the influence of all the gravitational pulls of everything we have in our universe is the exact same thing. If you're in a box that you can't look out of, you will never be able to tell the difference.
Naboo is my vote for best question, or best answer. Weightlessness feels properly pedantic to me!
Hoth! Highest mountain in Ecuador is Chimborazo ele. 20,702 Because of the equatorial bulge, this peak is the farthest point from the center of the Earth. Bring your oxygen tanks! Mars question: wouldn't the bottom of Valles Marineris, some 10km deep, where temperature should be warmer and the atmosphere denser be a more likely place to look for Martian life?
19:35 - That reminds me of when I was a kid, my dad explained what life was like before television. Now our generation gets to explain to the next one, what life was like before the internet.
I worked on the sea launch and it was the most fantastic project I have been involved in, very exciting indeed
Send blueprints
@@arkvsi8142 - and be visited by FBI? no thanks, and the design was flawed anyhow so it is a waste of money to build it, NASA abandoned it I think, if I remember correctly
@@doncarlodivargas5497 I see, still I can just improve from it, #SendBlueprintsNotNvdes
@@arkvsi8142 - no, you couldn't, I think they noticed it was difficult to load rockets from the ship to the rig due to waves on the ocean, that's why the rig had to sail back to long beach each time, I suggested to use a dry dock instead, that could sink down when the ship comes with new rockets, rise up, unload rockets, sink down, let the ship leave, alternatively stay half submerged to stabilise the structure, but it was never built
@@doncarlodivargas5497 Oh, I Analyzed it and makes sense, basically a ship elevator/lifter that fits the rocket and lowers it after. Kinda worth building, but a shame it was discarded...If nasa was the one in charge.. I guess they preferred to send that money to Boeing
31:58 As someone that has been an amateur astronomer since the 1980's I've only seen one "UFO" and coincidentally it was last summer. I witnessed what appeared to be a satellite traveling in a circumpolar orbit. I then noticed it stop for a few seconds. It then started to make sharp turns as it moved across the sky for about 30 minutes. After this it zipped over the Western Horizon at incredible speed before disappearing. My wife and kids also watched this with me so I know i wasn't hallucinating. Never seen anything quite like it.
I have seen the same thing while watching a meteor shower at night,the craft made ninety degree turns at super high speeds we all watched this and couldn't believe what we saw.
Say what 🙁
You sort of got credentials!, after so long being into it!.
What are they 😒
@@talkingmudcrab718 drone?
I always laughed at UFO believers...then last year I see a light standing still due South brighter than Venus...then ZIPPED to the West. It started bright greenish white , upon arriving west, it was a dim ruby red...and blinking ! Zipped east to west for 10 minutes then vanished. It also increased and shrunk in diameter at random...Drone ? But Hobby Airport was directly below it...isnt that illegal...to operate a drone there?
I'm excited to just see images from places like, Alan Shephards photos from the early 1960s to the Voyager ships many ships have taken photos of OUR l
Lttle Blue Marble. So so many photos.
You mentioned you would have less weight from the center of the earth out the father you go. But the center of the earth you would be weightless. I’m not sure how far from the center you start experiencing weight but I would assume as you move up from the center you have mass above you and mass below you countering each other. So it would be different than standing on an astroid of the diameter and composition of your depth. I think I’m looking at this correctly but not positive.
GRILL 332 you are correct. At the center of the earth its mass is uniformly distributed all around you so you experience weightlessness. moving away from the center creates a non uniform distribution of mass so you begin to experience some gravity until your reach the surface at which point all the mass all beneath you and you experience one G.
Yes, what he said was right but with the assumption you are on the surface, in that situation it makes sense to say the gravity gets weaker the further you are from the center of mass. You could not just say it gets weaker the further you are from the surface as that would imply its always the same on the surface even though the surface itself can vary in it's distance from the center of mass which we know does effect the strength of gravity you experience
If Elon's Starship actually becomes rapidly reusable, then maybe in 20 years it may cost ONLY $100,000 for a flight to LEO.😜
Hey fraser here's my question:
Billions of years from now when the sun is beginning to run out of hydrogen and starts to fuse helium and enter its red giant stage. Could we ( as a more advanced civilisation then we are now ) find a way to crash the gas giants into the sun to replenish the sun's supply of hydrogen and maybe give our sun another billion years of stability? Thanks!
Did you get a new camera? The video is looking great today
Can we go back to the blurry one now?
can we somehow use earths magnetic feilds for rockets , and the earths gravity is not evenly distributed on its surface so what would be the best possible launch site
How do astronauts deal with being horny in space?
Do they have a secret stealth jerk or do they go cold turkey?
Fraser - You showed Virgin Galactic when you were describing Virgin Orbit - Virgin Orbit uses a 747 “Cosmic Girl”, while Virgin Galactic flies a specially designed aircraft “White Night 2” out of New Mexico (Not the UK)!
Thank the gods we know this now. 😂
@@whyukraine - I expected better from Fraser - He’s usually a lot more careful.
Yeah, I noticed that mistake, but didn't figure it was critical enough to redo the whole video.
Fraser Cain: Would it be possible to use the temperature and pressure differentials in the Venus atmosphere to generate power? I am thinking of an analog to geothermal power where you send a dirigible with log hoses that would dangle down into the hotter and denser atmosphere close to the surface. Add a couple of oneway valves and a sterling engine on one end, and you should be set. Is this defeated by material science concerns or weight limitations? Would we need to wait for graphene to make this viable, or are there other problems that I am not considering?
This idea is against the thermodynamics laws, so you want to pump hot dens gasses up in the upper atmosphere and benefit from heat and temperature difference to produce energy( I suppose that is your ideea), when the gasses climb inside some pipe (or hose if you want) in the upper atmosphere their pressure decrease, and when a gass experience a drop in pressure becomes cooler, other way around is true too, if you want to pump cold rarefied gasses from upper atmosphere down when the gasses descent increase in pressure make them hotter and when reach ground temperature and pressure differential would be almost zero. Or so small that energy gain will be smaller than energy used to pump that gas.
Marvelous questions. Thank you Fraser and all the curious minded.
"I like Earth" - best comment 2023. Earth is more beautiful than anything we have discovered in the Universe so far.
I began my amateur astronomy in Adelaide Australia which has a population of a million and a bit, so when I visited Fraser Island off the coast of Queensland I was quite disoriented by the vast number of stars and the Milky Way dominated.
Really , Kenya and Ecuador should be the world's primary center for space launches. Right on the Equator AND high elevation.
Nairobi and Quito should be the space capitals of the world.
Yeah, that's what I think too. Ecuador or somewhere in Africa, right on the equator.
What happened to your fake backdrop it used to be so pretty
Colombia and Brazil are gonna love Ecuador dropping spent rockets all over their countryside
Brazil has a naval base within a few miles of the Equator Brazil has been shopping as a prospective space port. Don’t be surprised if someone like SpaceX leases it…
…Not if the rockets return to launch site or go to a remote landing site like SpaceX.
@@TraditionalAnglican if you can do that, you don't care about a 1% boost from an equatorial launch
Hi Fraser. How do you tell time in space? What about the moon or mars? Would they get their own time zones like earth once inhabited?
Time is relative also irrelevant
I got to say this has been one of my favorite space news outlets but the q&a is by far my favorite thank you so much
An interesting side effect of the "zero gravity" discussion is the realization that riding the Vomit Comet really is close enough to what being in orbit would be like, since both achieve free fall
Jumping off a diving board also makes you free fall and weightless
2:15 Just say: To destroy CO2 you will need 6.7x more energy than to destroy H2O, but Venus is in the Sun's range to destroy water! DONE, and Remember: On Venus surface, you have supercritical CO2 😉
Surely there is *some* oxygen in Jupiter's atmosphere, right? Maybe the whole planet doesn't ignite, but can there be Jovian wildfires? Is there a place in Jupiter's atmosphere equivalent to california?
I thought I saw a report that Cassini (Or was it Hubble?) saw very occasional huge flashes in the Jovian atmosphere of about 1300C. It is interesting to think what would happen if Jupiter turned into a small star (Even a brown Dwarf) - I would suspect on some nights, depending on Jupiter's position in the sky, that there would be no night.
There's something like 1200 times more hydrogen atoms than oxygen in the atmosphere, and most of that oxygen is bound in water vapour since the oxygen atoms have already reacted with the hydrogen. There would be free oxygen atoms in the upper atmosphere but they are very reactive and dissociate and re-associate from hydrogen in water vapour due to electrical storms. You won't see fires but there are plasmas and auroras where oxygen is involved as well as other chemical reactions.
Hey Fraser,
My question is about hot jupiters and selection bias from telescopes like TESS and KEPLER. When the protoplanetary disks form around new stars, the stellar wind tends to push a greater percent of lighter elements (H & He) further out (Perhaps there is also an aspect of centrifugal differentiation?). This forms the gas giants (in a very neat band- smaller inner rocky, gas giants, ice giants). This seems like it would happen in every system, which means that most gas giants should form further from their star? Would this not be the case if you had a metallic element-poor system? Or perhaps red dwarfs have weaker solar wind?
Obviously, large, quickly orbiting planets (especially with relatively low mass stars) are going to be the easiest to detect. There still seems to be a lot though! Would the main cause of hot jupiters be from gravitational perturbations/interactions in the forming solar system, changing their orbits after formation? Or would there be a case for them naturally forming at such a close distance under certain circumstances?
Sorry for the long question! Thanks!!
The term should be Zero "G's." As in, if you measure the G forces, you measure zero G. Applies in all relevant scenarios.
Love the show!
Watching the Terminator judgement day depiction of ICBM nuclear missile attack, wouldn’t every missile re enter The atmosphere from west of their target and course adjust due to earths rotation?
I've always wondered why don't scientist just take a microscope on a Mars Rover and look for life that way. It's seems like we could just look for microbes - even dead ones directly.
Kamino. Fraser, what do think of the idea of looking at the stars the way the Incas did? They looked at the nebulae, rather than the stars themselves. They inverted the idea of stargazing and sought out dark areas with identifiable shapes. Would this solve the issue of all of the stars looking too bright and making it hard to identify constellations when in space?
So... venus still gas an atmosphere because it is CO2, and H2SO4...
Okiedokie...
Could we refuel a spacecraft by low-orbeting jupiter?
Either with a oxidizer-type engine or a ion-type engine?
The ionization energy is very high for Helium though (about 70x higher than Xenon), and the density is much lower than other preferred gasses (1/33 of Xenon) so I guess it wouldn't be great... Like 2310x worse than Xenon?
Crait - I've wondered the same thing, and your explanation was fantastic.
With an eye on building bases on the Moon, and also needing to clean up the orbit around the earth, Would it be possible with something like Starship to, at some point in the near-ish future, develop a "capture" system to retrieve some of the satellites / large debris in orbit around earth that were not designed with a system to de-orbit properly, and deliver them to the moon for recycling / repurposing?
Considering gravity, couldn't the same be said about the, North/South Pole's
How viable would an active support space elevator be?
It's zero g, not zero gravity.
Yes, g comes from gravity, but g is a the force from gravity.
In space you have no force, but still plenty of curved sapce
Using warp bubble theory, would it be easier to warp in the direction that your spaceship was already moving? Or would it not matter which way you wanted to warp?
How do you define "the direction that your spaceship was already moving"?
That is arbitrary in outer space.
If one guy is moving "north" at ten miles an hour and another is doing so at twenty miles an hour then the first guy is moving "south" at ten miles an hour.
Which frame of reference is the correct one.
I've said it befor and I'll say it again... Absolutely love your content Fraser! BEST space channel on RUclips!
I consider myself fairly adept, but you explain things perfectly for anyone to understand.
I'd also suggest Anton Petrov for more science content, too.
Please check out physics girl. She's got a great channel and currently going through a medical emergency and could use extra views and support
Fraser, Scott Manley & Anton Petrov are a few of my favourite science educators 😁 daily watch for me because of such mind blowing content
@@THIS---GUY I watch all of them too! I just really like Fraser's content.
Scott gets pretty deep into launches which i like but not always my thing.
Anton discusses more physics anomalies, which i also like, but can be a little too much for "relaxing"
I also watch physics girl, launchpad astronomy, astrium, what about it.... pretty much all of them
Fraser is just this Awesome middle groud where its fun topics and gets deep with them, but not too deep and with good variety
@Aetoski you're right about everything. Fraser answers so many questions, too. He's so interactive with community, it's easy to take it for granted .
Astrum, Sea, history of earth/universe are awesome for relaxed learning.
I agree about Manley. I've recently been deep diving into him and Everyday Astronaut but overlook how specific they are.
Thanks for sharing!
@@THIS---GUY Sabine Hossenfelder is probably my second favorite overall right now. Goes a little more in depth, but also a great explainer with good variety, including chemistry topics. Also shes kind of hilarious
Space elevators get way too much respect. The counterweight would have to be 22,218 miles above the earth. (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_elevator) Some versions of space elevators envision a cable 62,000 miles long. The shorter version would take over 9 days at 100 mph to go from Earth's surface to the space station. So you would have a Pullman rail car with sleeping berths, a dining car and locomotive (this is the steampunk version of a space elevator) chugging along a nanofiber ribbon for more than a week to get to the space station. In SciFi the space station would be a couple hundred miles above the Earth, but apparently, that doesn't work. Phooey.
@Fraser You said "MASS EFFECT" My ears turn to isolate the transmission
I’ve always!, aways wondered why these gas giants don’t set on fire!!!! And what would happen if one did! 😫
Talk about cook off 🥵
Great Chanel, really helps me chill out after a day of thinking!.
Your a big brain 👍
Hello Fraser, I don't understand the measurement used for the so called "Hubble tension". Does it mean that the universe is expanding at said velocity at the borders of our universe? Or is it expanding at said velocity within that megaparsec at the end of the universe? Or are those velocities for localized parts of the observable universe? I am really confused. Or I'm simply unable to grasp the math and distances described for these questions. Help! And thanks. I watch as many of your videos as I can.
As of Aug. 21, 2024, Voyager 1 was 164.7 AU from Earth, long way to go yet
Yes i have a question, it boggled my brain. . . I couldn't find any answer. . Lets see if you can help me. . . . .
One day i noticed, I couldn't feel any air blowing from my ceiling fan, though the fan was spinning at full speed, everywhere was the same suggestion, blades must be bent, must be dirty blades, blades might be reversed bla bla bla . I can assure, that is not the case. I was very curious, and also intrigued, my curtains were moving, i turned the fan off and on. It was moving air finely, but for 2/3 hardly 5 minutes. Then the same. I turned down the regulator, nothing changed. But when i turn on the fan from level 3 or less, fan was working fine. And whenever i turn it up above 3 . . Same problem started, i was checking with a lighter (sway of the flame). I was confused how is it possible that blades are moving at full speed, but it cannot displace any air. . . Anyway, my electrician changed a white cylindrical part and then it was fine, it might be the condenser but i am not sure, i asked him, he blabbered something, i knew he didn't know or understand anything that might help me get an answer.so, didn't bother him, but it had bothered me ever since, internet has also failed me this time. .. can you help . .???
Jupiter Jupiter Jupiter... When a star fuses and makes Iron, the star dies. Anything heavier than Iron are probably from a supernova or a quasar! something super powerful and massive. So even if Jupiter had ever wanted to start fusion, it most likely has a rocky, Iron core, so it couldn't Even our sun would die if it made Iron. But we will probably see our star die when it makes carbon. Its just too small.
Here is a question I have though, Our sun is a yellow dwarf, It will swell into a reg giant and then get blown off and become a brown dwarf. So did the sun start as a super massive star and explode to make the atmosphere and the collect most of the Hydrogen to start fusion again in our sun?
QUESTION: If the sun has been in a constant state of fusion for multiple billions of years, how does it have enough fuel to remain in constant fusion? Where is it pulling in hydrogen from? By now, one would think it would have expended all original hydrogen?
🏳️🌈At which galaxy can we aim a rocket with Elon Musk on it? No need to take a return trip into consideration.🏳️🌈
At 1:46 Why does Venus have such a dense atmosphere, and the Earth, a more massive planet, has a much thinner atmosphere? Is CO2 that much heavier than O2 or N2? Well, 1 and a half times, but is that enough? Seems the Earth should be able to have an atmosphere as dense as Venus's, especially as we have a magnetosphere.
Why is The Moon an Alien Spaceship? How is it controlled? Where did the Aliens come from? However, I won't ask why they came. That much I already know...
Two really good book series are "Red Mars" and "Rendezvous With Rama." Both series written in the 90s and before but have a lot of insight to the technologies needed for terraforming and deep space travel. The Rama series definitely came to mind when Omuamua came through our solar system
Regarding "Mustafar", Tim's Dear Moon flight was canceled earlier this year.
Instead of micro-gravity, call it "equilibrium gravity" or "stable gravity."
The question why Jupiter does not catch fire is the best Argument how abysmal the US education system is.
Revelation Space was exceptional, as are most of his other books. Adrian Tchaikovsky is another great author worth reading…but you’ll no doubt end up in another series! Although the standalone book Elder Race was brilliant!
Why not use the centrifugal launcher to load up balls packed with things to make space gear IN space? Assuming it works every time it'd have to be cheaper than accelerating all that weight and burning a ton of rocket fuel.
Well when your thumbnail is Jupiter wrapped in bacon, I don't see why it wouldn't catch fire
At constant 1g acceleration you would theoretically reach near the speed of light in about 1 year... So, we cannot use constant acceleration as a replacement for gravity to travel the galaxy even if we could find enough golf balls to throw backwards.
So we aren't really going to need to solve the time dilation problem for a very long time.
Question: How come they always show milky way spinning clockwise (southpole view) but solar system orbits are shown counterclockwise? - Köffi
If the sun gravity can be used for lensing and therefore bd used as a telescope, could Jupiter have sufficient mass to produce the same effect only on a lesser scale? If this were possible, would the "stand off distance for the viewing point be much closer than the 1K, AU required for the viewing point of the sun?
Similarly is it more feasible to utilise the alpha centauri system stars for the same purpose or would the viewing points be further from the earth than that of our sun?
I've seen plenty that I couldn't identify. Especially when it came to a wedge of dots that outlined a shape that blacked out the sky within it as it flew overhead. Too large for any planes.
I think the “problem” with near light speed travel is that the knowledge a civilization might hope to gain from any mission that employs it becomes inaccessible to that civilization, making any near light speed missions of any real duration pointless in terms of discovery to the civilization that the mission leaves behind. I’ve often wondered if this is perhaps a potential solution to the Fermi paradox. Apart from the possible goal of seeding new civilizations through the galaxy, there just is little to no incentive for a civilization to engage in missions of any real duration that travel at near light speeds since the civilization that is left behind will never benefit from the results of the mission in any timeframe that would make a difference to that civilization.
Could you send a spacecraft on a trajectory where it could observe multiple targets through the solar gravitational lense? Sort of like how New horizons was able to flyby bonus targets after the primary mission was over?
You guys asked the questions that keep me awake at night In the first 10 seconds 😂
so, how fast would the end of the space elevator tether counter-weight be going as it spins about the earth? GSO is 36,000 km, so twice that times 2 times pi would be the distance it goes in a day (C=2*pi*r). That's 452,389,342 meters/day, or about 5, 235 m/s, or 0.0017% the speed of light.
Seems like a failed star for one reason or another I'd probably give just about anything to understand the internal mechanics of gas giants especially Neptune and Uranus :(
Maybe preface the opinion/religious portion of the video before stating facts instead of grouping them together, IE long periods of time not proven.
Orbital velocity is at least 17,000mph.
At the latitude of KSC the rotation diff to equatorial speed is only 89mph. A difference which is insignificant at that scale.
Fuzzy gravity?
Decentric gravity?
Acceleration dominant vs Mass dominant gravity?
I don't have a favorite, but;
- Launchng from near the Equator: The Wikipedia page on the spaceport in French Guiana (5 degrees north) states that a Soyuz which would launch a payload of 1.7 T from Baiknur (46 N) would increase its payload to 2.8 T. Not insignificant! But they don't sem to get in a lot of launches. Wonder how they could keep up with the pace of just SpaceX. Lots of logistics to launching there, I'd guess.
- Gravitational lens observatory; an online calculator reveals that an object at 1000 AU from Sol would orbit in 31,620 years and so would move its observation area by one degree in 81 years. I wonder what distance it would be focussed at. And whether using different objects for gravitational lenses is a better idea, given the decades it would take to build any such observatory and further decades to launch it to 1000 AU. Wouldn't it be better to put one into orbit at the Earth-Sun L2 poiint and use various "nearby" massive black holes as lenses?
Sulfuric acid H2SO4 also has hydrogen... Why hydrogen can form sulfuric acid but not water?
zero-g is synonymous with weightlessness, i.e. a fighter pilot pulling out of a dive experiences 5-gs (5 times the weight exerted by Earth's gravity). Zero-g is NOT synonymous with "zero gravity".
Nice sunny day on the Vancouver island forests. Very likely the first sign of life on earth detected in the optical by an alien civilisation during day time would be the huge forest land cover.
Earth atmosphere is 70+ % nitrogen. How can Venus have 2x as much?
I really hope I see people eon the moon again in a few years time.
At 99% of c -- the speed of light -- the time dilation (i.e. the Lorentz factor) is 7. One day on your spaceship is 7 days on Earth. However, one way the Universe stops you from reaching c is by converting the energy you expend trying to accelerate your ship into mass. So at 99% of c your spaceship and everything in it is *7* times as massive (i.e. it would weigh 7 times as much as it did on Earth.)
Yes, I didn't say it would be feasible. Only that time dilation is cool. 😀
@@frasercain Fraser, did not intend to come across as snarky. Several of us (aerospace engineers & one astrophysicist who worked on the JWST) meet every Monday to chat about the latest in astronomy, astrophysics, etc. Your excellent works come up every time we meet. So thank you!
Whoa, I'm honored. :-)
Re: going to space. Aww, I'm older, and I want to go space (to see the Milky Way, for instance). I'm hoping Starship works well enough for me to take a 45 minute ride to Australia! I'd pay $10k for that, so 300 passengers could fund a $3M launch.
At 11:02 Plenty O'Gravity says: "We have 3 levels of gravity: Wee, Not So Wee, and Friggin' Huge!"
I've digested that black holes aren't a major part of dark matter, but I'm still baffled that they're properly part of the universe, still. What's YOUR take on it? Is Sagittarius A*, the supermassive black hole at the center of our galaxy, properly part of the Milky Way and Universe?
Holy cow let's do the SGL telescope! There's all kinds of things to look at. Voyager is 14.6 billion miles out and took over 30 years to get that far, so ohh nevermind, need to be 93 billion miles out (6.4X more). We'll need 10x better propulsion to get it to 1000AU (139 light hours away!) in anything resembling a human lifetime. The old 1960's project Orion could easily get it there in a few years, but fear and that test ban treaty closed the sky forever, oh well.
Tattoonie
Hey Frasier, Venus is next door and Proxima Centauri is 50,000 years away (I guess). Why do we focus on finding life in places so far away but there is no priority on doing a several century project like terra forming Venus. Humans have done projects on this time scale: Norte Dame, Gaudi’s Cathedral, etc.
Question time Fraser! Okay so I get Time Dilations effects on humans... but how does this work with man made objects? So if I create a rocket that explodes in a mushroom cloud of kittens after exactly 20 years.... And I jump in, fire it up and blast off, and travel very very quickly not at the speed of like, 1 G or 2 G's let's say.. Does the rocket explode in kittens based on the time that I'm there with it:? Does the rocket "Age" along with me and all of it's components?
Sulfuric acid existing in Venusian atmosphere makes no sense to me from the point of elementary chem.
S combusts creating SO2. Add H2O and you get H2SO3, and NOT H2SO4.
So please explain to me the how sulfuric acid gets made on Venus where oxygen is in shortish supply.
I got a question: Why you been misleading about no add in the middle? If you get paid for adds and don't include the value of your "No adds in the middle adds" when y'all do taxes it means y'all been cheating the tax man. The IRS got Capone when FBI couldn't so I guess my real question is, "Do you feel lucky?..."
Y'all better vote this best question. I'd do it for y'all :}
Coruscant - Why would a Solar gravitaional lens missin be limited to one target? Surely the scope would be put into an orbit and be able to target other systesm? I'm guessing there may be only one target of interest even in an orbit?
Why doesn't water burn and or explode, it's hydrogen with an oxidiser o hence h2o. Can someone help.
TL;DR because following OSHA Compliance Guides. Remember kids: Safety is no accident!
Instead of micro gravity, why not something like level gravity or an acronym. Non Prioritized Gravitation (NPG) sounds fancy
BESPIN 's question is great. I would ask a follow up question: If we were to send an oxygen tank to Jupiter which would probably implode at a close distance, would this create an explosion of the hydrogen on Jupiter?
I just realized your Patron pitch is an advertisement for your own show and it is in the middle. I don't know what to believe now. First Fauci, and now I've realized F. Cain has been lying to us every single episode since idk when, like season 2 probably.......
Yeah, terms like "Zero Gravity" and "Micro Gravity" are not the best way to describe weightlessness on orbit. One term I like is "0g", spoken like "Zero Gee". With "g" being a unit of acceleration, not a unit of force. "1g" is the amount of acceleration that an object experiences relative to you on Earth, if you let it go where Gravity would take it, and "0g" is the amount of acceleration relative to you for an object you let go while on orbit. If you wanted to avoid people misunderstanding "0g" as "Zero Gravity" then perhaps "Zero Acceleration" could be one way to describe it, but in my mind Weightlessness and "0g" are both just as good and more commonly used anyway.
What about Gravity Equilibrium as a new term. Where you are unable to sense which direction you're being pulled in?
It's tricky when you consider motion though. 90% of earths gravity feels like zero because of motion. Do we need a term that includes both gravity and velocity?
Jupiter Catching Fire would require Oxygen you need both fuel and oxidizer for fire the Si Fi movie "The Wandering Earth" makes good use of it in it's plot line.
You said "zero G" approximately 6 minutes after you said "weightlessness" should be the term, if you could remember it.