May Video Poll
regarding an artemis video:
there are so many content people who are super into space and I am happy to sit back and not be mediocre in a place where they shine. I will find something I am interested if this wins but I am just not super into space and there are so so so so many people who are SUPER into space that would make a better video I am sure if that's what you want.
Comments (22)
aren't you some kind of astrophysicist ? haha it's funny hearing you're not a space person. sorry if that sounds mean. let's do a book club on inventing temperature! (just kidding about this)
FWIW, yes & no. Bc there's something to get, here. Telescopes, unmanned probes & such fill our pockets with knowledge & at oodles more bang for the buck than manned missions, I think that's DrC's take. As for the Astro angle, I used to physics club (handful of late-life students) where one of our later invitees was an astrophysics PhD (like DrC). Knew a lot of physics & astro, great & practical stuff. Was an amateur astronomer (telescope) type, went on trips to witness eclipses. I love the sky, but such dedication is way beyond me. Anyway, now high up in the Skeptical Inquirer organization. All that astro stuff is long ago & rusty, for, um, them. Point being, folks take their useful baggage along, turn it into new pursuits. DrC's papers tend to dial in on galaxy barring. That specialization is heavy on hydrodynamics. Tie-in there to interesting topics around the Virial theorem, interesting to me, that is. But that's a skill that she's now applying to, like, weather models, I guess. Which is, you know, more useful to the world than just knowledge for its own sake. Including in that basket, 1st-hand exploration. There's a lot in physics, & ya gotta master a lot of it to get that piece o' paper. But recently DrC mused counterfactually if she might've been better suited to experiment rather than theory. One has one life. There's a certain necessity for fine granularity. Focus, curiosity, &c. It's good to gather the specifics of what a person is into. And not settle for sweeping generalizations of a person into an astro bucket that automatically makes it natural that they'd be a "space person." You know, just spitballing here.
Let me know if this isn't the place, but I'd like to offer a suggestion for another topic sometime in the future, please: An AC intro/primer on deSitter space and how it affects our attempts to understand/address quantum questions? I may not be able to grasp it, but it seems like it kinda undoes a lot of what's been written about quantum theory, no?
It’s the math framework that might change, not the quantum world underneath it.
I changed my vote a few times because these all sound fascinating. Dunno if you keep a stash of topic ideas but I would love to hear about any of these!
I'd never even heard of "Genesis Mission" until your poll. The wikipedia description sounds both terrifying and right up your alley (complimentary).
Years ago a tornado passed directly over my house without touching down. Naturally, I ran outside and tried to see into it. We all have events like the 2011 Tuscaloosa–Birmingham tornado in our future. Might be useful to meditate on that prospect.
First of all: You couldn't be mediocre if you tried! Second of all: In my opinion, You should talk about Artemis II, because EVERYBODY should be talking about Artemis II. We should be glued to our TV screens instead of being distracted by some algorithmic attention trading economy on YouTube. All the BS that drains our time and sanity will still be there in a week but Artemis II will have concluded. Don't let YouTube force you into a niche. Just give us your thoughts and perspective. My favorite reaction to Artemis II so far, for example, comes from a gaming streamer (https://youtu.be/9Vtt9fFkwqQ). You talked about women in space before (twice that I remember) and it has been super insightful and I am convinced that whatever you have to say about Artemis II will be interesting and important as well.
I'm voting for #5 for 2 reasons. 1) Understanding hydrostatics is a prereq to hydrodynamics. IOW, #2 is hard. We need #5 because it gives us a vantage point. For the same reason, we need a grounding in thermo before we tackle non-eq thermo. Noting that in gravity, there's no such a thing as equilibrium. 2) #3 is just a gateway drug to #1. While the "hot topics" are #1, 3 & 4, they're essentially tokens of anti-science. Their relevance is depressing. And obvious. Covering them is unlikely to lead to solutions. Only #2 & 5 are pro-science. IMO.
All options, including any Angela's Choice, are interesting to me, but my 10-year-old self has to pick the Star Trek option.
Re: Artemis, this will be a minority opinion, but I'm not so thrilled with it. For one thing, we have problems like climate change that are much more immediate and we are under funding climate science and alternative energy. We were under funding it before Trump but since Trump it's almost comical, like he's paying a company $1B to not build a new wind farm that would generate clean energy. The other thing about Artemis is that in terms of science you get much more Research Return on Investment when you spend money on unmanned research, rather than manned research. Putting humans into space is exponentially more expensive because you need to keep them alive and bring them back. When I see people waving flags at these missions, I see people cheering on corporate welfare. That's what manned flight is all about, the aerospace companies promote it precisely because it is over an order of magnitude more expensive.
The first one confused me because "Genesis Mission" to me is the flying saucer that crashed in the desert after collecting solar wind samples. I had to look up the one that's going to kill nuclear physics. I work in space but don't go for things just because "Space!!!" I'd rather have Angela's Choice and hear about something you want to do a video on that I might not otherwise hear about.
To me "Genesis Mission" was the probe that's detonated in the Mutara Nebula at the end of Star Trek II.
Feels like nebulas should be a Nebula exclusive. In any case, 10 year old me would've voted for tornados so that is my pick for this time.
Perhaps you've already done this and I have missed it, but I would love your take on the Mercury 13 program and the women who criminally got denied their shot
It’s in the LEGO video if I remember correctly.
Still eagerly waiting for glorious Maxwell, my PhD has taken an unexpected E&M direction so would love the lore
The only thing I want to say about Artemis is this: everyone pointing out that they are now the humans who have been the furthest from the planet simply because their route took them a bit further away - not because they reached anywhere new - reminds me of this video: https://youtu.be/7NmjYKJ_TVI?si=ol4dCwAQfkENySez
I'm not really into space either. I used to be; Apollo, Voyager, the Shuttle, Hubble, even JWST, that stuff had me at the edge of my seat. And I still think it's good to spend tax money on keeping it going. But it doesn't make my heart beat faster the way it used to when I was younger. The other topics are great! I picked tornadoes, but coffee and a problem is always nice, and I know you'll have something to say on the other two as well. :-)
Are you doing the book club on the Left Hand of Darkness?
Destruction of nuclear physics makes me think about the death of the death of the Integral Fast Reactor project; not sure if that's up your alley but I'd love to hear more about it!
I would love to hear more about your PHD work…