[Q&A+] Flat Planet, 3I/ATLAS vs Jupiter, Next Gen Space Stations
Would we even notice if 3I/ATLAS smashed into Jupiter? What are the plans for next gen space stations? Is it okay that most succesful space corporations are run by billionaires? And in Q&A+, what the hell is a Thorne–Żytkow object?
BONUS QUESTION STARTS AT 17:04
Watch the video here (with no ads) or on YouTube: https://youtu.be/ZHdlHSv-OgQ
Here's a link to the full, unedited livestream: https://youtube.com/live/yUqB8vkD4cE
Comments (11)
I totally understand all the names you threw out there for technology and I’m with you, but do you think that as Canadians we could work harder on pushing our space agency. I mean the Canarm come on now it was awesome. Don’t get me wrong, but I don’t feel like as Canadians we could & should more. I think that maybe we should bring more education and the joy of discover into the junior high’s and high schools and get them telescopes and allow them to add your videos in their curriculum just putting that out there
Isaac Arthur topics today
Great video! :) Really enjoyed this one. :)
Question: It also freaks me out a bit that the ecliptic plane of the solar system is nearly perpendicular to the ecliptic plane of the Milky Way. Are there gravitational forces slightly pressuring the solar system to conform so it will eventually align? Or is the solar system basically totally stable in its current state?
The lifetime of stars is estimated in a similar way to how a car's range is estimated. We know the fuel mass, specifically the hydrogen mass. We can determine the consumption rate, which is the star's luminosity times the energy production factor, i.e., the amount of energy released when 4 hydrogen atoms combine to form one helium atom. With the knowledge of the hydrogen atom's mass, we can determine the rate at which hydrogen is consumed to produce the observed luminosity. The lifetime is then calculated by dividing the total hydrogen mass by the consumption rate. To be precise, the lifetime is slightly longer, about 1%, due to later Helium and metal burning.
Hi, if your simile is correct, then the actual lifetime of a star will be c.75% of the calculated value.
speaking of flat things, we often see relativity space distortion represented like an indentation in a rubber sheet. how can we visualise this in three dimensions ?
could we see times on the site in UTC please ?
In the Thorne–Żytkow object section, you started saying it was a neutron star inside a red dwarf, then switched to inside a red giant. The latter being correct
Before I watch , I estimate that it could exist a flat surface object that should go round a flat star on a flat universe and ours is flat So , maybe , as our planet is made from a dust cloud that forms a Flat Disk first before it turns into A 3D semi sphere Maybe another one remains a flat disc and solidifies As Flat object But , it should still have some Depth So Not totally 2 D Black Holes are Flat So , a black hole could make The Flat Star I need here So , maybe we could find A “ Rogue” flat planet moving around Nothing An invisible B H taking energy from the fracturing world around them in the Hole while staying in The Golden Zone of the region Maybe Now I’ll watch B all Great !!!
You should probably do things the other way round. Watch and listen first. There are generations upon generations of hard-earned understanding behind what you are being shown. Your "estimate" doesn't have any value until it completely accounts for why the alternative is wrong despite experimental observation. And even before that, for anyone to notice, you have to at least be respectful enough of the effort that came before you to organize your thoughts in a way that demonstrates you know better than what vocabulary words to put into a blender.
