How Cold Are Moon Shadows, Why Are Dark Matter Halos Spherical, War For The Moon | Q&A 251

How

cold

are the

moon

's permanently shadowed craters? Why does Dark Matter form a halo and not a flattened disk and how long until there is a war over the

moon

? All this and more on this week's quiz show. It's time for the question to show its questions. answers wherever you are on my channel, if a question pops into your brain, write it in the YouTube comments below. I'll put them together and answer them here, okay, let's get into the questions. Place them 1810, how

cold

is it? entering the

shadows

on the moon on the sun side is it as cold as at night?

Side of the Moon the Moon is a very strange environment, it is actually much more hostile in terms of temperature than even Mars and when we think about how Mars temperatures drop to -100 degrees Celsius and rise to 100 or 20° at the equator , which is nothing compared to the Moon, so if you are on the day side of the Moon, temperatures can reach up to 121° C. If you are simply sitting on the surface of the Moon and the Sun is above, you can get to 121 and then as soon as your point on the Moon goes into Shadow the temperature will drop and get to about -133 C. so do the math, you have 121 during the day to - 133 that's like no, that's 250° CS changes from day to night and it happens very quickly there is no atmosphere on the moon so by the time the sun sets things start to cool down below you will have some leftover radiation coming from the regolith around you , but pretty quickly you'll get to that incredibly cold temperature, but it's not as cold as on the surface of the Moon, the coldest.

The place is in these eternally shadowed craters on the moon. Now you asked how cold it is in the

shadows

of the moon and that's that number minus 133, but there are these places at the South Pole and a little bit at the North Pole. where the Sun never enters these shadows and therefore the temperatures become dramatically colder; In fact, the coldest temperature ever measured on the surface of the Moon was -246 Celsius, making it much colder than even night on the Moon and this is one of the main reasons why it is believed that there are these eternally shadowed craters on the Moon that contain large reserves of water ice is that in 246 the ice is rock solid, there is no radiation hitting it to evaporate it and, in theory, if you can get into those regions, then you can board it and this is the big reason why all these spaceships die as soon as you get to Moon Knight, so you have to have a spaceship that can handle operating in above 100°C and then by the time you you go into the shade, the temperature drops to -100° C or more and we know that very, very cold temperatures are very bad for batteries.

If you have a laptop battery, you have an electric battery. riding a bike in a car, they are very concerned about what temperature the dough is going to go in, so if your really fancy batteries are in incredibly cold temperatures for 2 weeks then they don't have much of a chance of being able to come back, but then You're probably wondering what happens to the permanently illuminated parts of the Moon, and in fact, there's probably no place on the Moon that's always in eternal sunlight. There is this idea of ​​the peaks of eternal sunlight and that there are these mountains that are the opposite of those craters and the problem is that the craters can be very deep, so you can have these places where the sunlight never enters, but the peaks don't go as high and they're not reliably in full sunlight, probably the best place on the moon is Shackleton Crater, which is one of these craters that's right on the south pole of the Moon and there are places around it. of Shackleton Crater that are almost in eternal sunlight for about 40 hours, it can be

dark

in those craters, it all depends on where the Moon is in its orbital inclination compared to the Sun, etc., but there is simply no place on the Moon where you can be in eternal sunlight, so it's a difficult environment and you can see why all of them.

Many of these spacecraft are having such a difficult time, not only landing on the Moon, but also surviving. during a single lunar night, which makes the fact that the thin Lander returned so incredible that it was able to handle that temperature variation. Good job to everyone at Jacko. I'm sure you noticed the name of the Star Trek planet that appeared over my shoulder in that first question and you're wondering what it's for. This is a way to vote to tell us what you think was the best question of the week. And last week everyone voted for Jesus, however, if satellites are the first products used to build the space economy, what is the next product?

It was a great question and I'm glad everyone enjoyed the answer, so I'm going to answer a lot of them. of questions in this episode, a different Star Trek planet name will appear over my shoulder, wait until the end of the episode and then just put the name of that Star Trek planet in the comments below, we will also have references in the notes of the program you can see what all the names are, don't forget to vote jmz 604 if the regular

matter

in our galaxy flattened into a rough disk, why did the

dark

matter

remain as a rough sphere, this is how astronomers think while the Milky Way galaxy , for example, is on this flattened disk in the same way that a solar system is on a flattened disk.

The halo of dark matter surrounding the Milky Way looks more like a sphere, and you might wonder if the same forces apply. Now, we have this galaxy that is spinning and all the gas, dust and all the stars end up in this flattened disk, why doesn't Dark Matter do the same? And part of the problem is that whatever dark matter is, I mean, we still don't know what dark matter is, so when you say why dark matter behaves this way or that way, you don't know what. es, but one of the characteristics that dark matter probably has is that it doesn't interact not only with regular matter, but it probably doesn't interact with itself except with gravity, so particle physicists give it a term for this, they call it cross section of the particle and when you think about just regular atoms Clouds of hydrogen gas that as this cloud spins around all these hydrogen particles are in this giant cloud and they collide with each other and as they collide with each other they start to lose some of this impulse that carries them. and everything can start to flatten out.

Another example is like when you have a black hole. You have a black hole. The material is trying to fall into the black hole. Maybe it's too much material for the black hole to feed on. and then this Cloud begins to form around the black hole, but then these particles collide with each other and flatten out in this disk. Dark Matter probably behaves in a very different way because it doesn't have a cross section that can be taken as a cloud of dark matter, you could spin it around and you won't get the same kind of interactions between the particles that cause it to flatten out into this mass. larger cohesive, each individual particle of Dark Matter on its own journey and it will not be interacting and bouncing off other particles and you know a lot of people ask this question like: will dark matter go into black holes?

If it's a particle, it's going to go to the black hole for sure, but it's not going to form this accretion disk around the black hole. hole in the same way that normal matter does, it will have gravitational interactions with all the particles that are around the black hole and the black hole itself, etc., but they will not collide with each other and then fall into the black. hole and then it's the same idea that you're not understanding that interaction, that friction between the Dark Matter particles and then you get a more

spherical

Halo shape, although I mean the real shape is still under AR, you know, it's more like a egg, is it the spots and clumps orbiting the galaxy that provide this additional mass to the galaxy?

You know, this is all still part of the work astronomers are doing to figure out exactly what's going on with obi-1 celery dark matter. are we alone in the universe? Fraser gave the perfect political response. I must say I was disappointed. He hoped Fraser would put his love of science before his reputation. What a reputation. I am a journalist. Know? If you like scientists. Journalist. So, uh, me. I don't have a reputation to protect um now I think this question was a couple of weeks ago and someone asked me if we're alone in the universe and the answer was we have no idea and the point was just to give a real quick Snappy.

Respond and then move on. Now those of you who watch the channel know that I have a kind of deeper, more nuanced view of whether or not we are alone in the universe, but I don't think we know. It's a perfectly viable answer. give to a question where there is no scientific consensus on the answer so far what is dark matter we do not know what dark energy is we do not know if there is life in the universe we do not know what happens after we die we do not know where the universe came from we do not know it's okay to say we don't know an answer you're not being a politician you're answering the question as honestly as possible CU as soon as you give an answer, is there life in the universe? oh yes, I think about it very carefully, how do you know what your evidence is?

Well, my evidence is that it seems like there must be that's not evidence, that's an opinion, it's like I like vanilla. ice cream instead of strawberry ice cream what is dark matter? Well, dark matter can't be some kind of particle. Oh, what's your evidence? Well, you know, it just feels wrong, it seems like scientists made this up. The kind answer is like this and I think people feel uncomfortable hearing the answer I don't know now for me when I hear the answer I don't know that is a person who is honest and says that I have not accumulated enough information to form an intelligent position on this matter and so for the For the sake of transparency and honesty, I am just going to admit my ignorance in this situation.

And for me, being a journalist and doing this job for so long, I find that I know less than I thought over time and I understand very well. I'm careful about what things I can and what I think there's a scientific consensus about and what there isn't, so it's strange to me that someone would hear the answer that I don't know and be disappointed. like educating myself on the true answer, providing the evidence and second, there is overwhelming evidence that provides the information that I will gladly change my mind. You know, I think we're alone in the universe, but I have no evidence to say that.

Therefore, the answer I have to give is that I don't know and I can't wait to be wrong, so, yes, yes, it is not a political answer, it is an honest answer, which is the opposite of a politician, the politician correct. to give you an answer and they are going to justify you and they are going to give you a lot of magic tricks to distract you and no, we don't know, I don't know. I don't think anyone does, okay A B how far are we from a war for the moon there is no reason to claim the moon and then want to defend the moon there are only disadvantages if you try to claim the moon and say the Moon is ours and in the moment you do that, then you're going to make other nations on earth a little bit grumpy, they may say: wait a minute, didn't you sign?

Don't we all sign? outer space treated and we said no one can own the Moon and now you're saying yes, obviously you know it's just a treaty and barely enforceable but you still know it's kind of idiotic to say you now own it of the moon. so you're going to start with that and then what are you going to get? Now that you've pissed off all your neighbors, you've pissed off everyone on Earth by saying you own the moon, everyone's really mad about it and so what? Do you get for this Moon claim? Nothing, you can barely do it, you don't know anyone.

We saw what happened with multiple spacecraft that were barely able to reach the surface of the Moon upside down and many spacecraft died while trying to do so. This is like step one, landing on the moon, not to mention, uh, collecting resources from the moon, of which there aren't many. I mean, actually, there's almost nothing you can't get on the moon, that you can't, you know, you just get it. on Earth, as people say, you get helium 3, you can get helium 3 on Earth, maybe it's not as concentrated, but you also don't have to go to the Moon to get it, so there's no value in going to the Moon and it's something like this. that there's no value in claiming Antarctica like you're going to get you're going to be the lord of the penguins you're going to be you're going to have a lot of snow and ice that you can make in a refrigerator Obviously, if you could really dig under the snow and ice and start mining in Antarctica, then maybe you could start making some money, but you can do it anywhere else on Earth.

Why try to start with Antarctica? And that's one of the main reasons why it's Antarctica. This is part of the Antarctic treaty because it is a very special place, a very sensitive environment, you cannot make money, sothat people are fine with no one trying to possess it and it's the same with the moon, there's nothing you can get from the moon that you can't just go down here on Earth and there's no reason you've already pissed off all your friends, There's no benefit to going to the moon and now you have to defend it like: what are you going to do?

Are you going to send spaceships full of space marines to the surface of the moon? They're going to break and fall and then the Space Marines are going to fall and then what are they going to do there on the surface of the Moon? They're going to wait for someone to try to take their helium 3. mines away from you, so what? How far are we from the moon? I would say conservatively forever um yeah I'm going to go with forever uh but you know if anything changes I'll let you know but for now I don't think there will ever be a war over the moon Roa What are you obsessed with?

Roa well interpreted. This is, of course, one of the questions that I ask people that I interview and this was pretty new, I guess, in the last six months, about a year. Um and it came about when I realized that when I interview a scientist, they're not thinking about the work they just published in a research journal; in many cases, that's old news to them, they published a six-month preprint. a year ago and then they published it in a magazine and then the magazine accepted it and then it was published and then there's a press release and there's a giant delay from when they thought of the idea to when they talked to me. and they've moved on, but you know, they're essentially describing the research that they just published, they're not going to talk about the next research, the future research, but I can get a sense of what.

Then comes what the future holds for them by asking them what They are obsessed with it and that's why I find it really interesting. It gives me a psychic prediction about what is coming in the future. You know, imagine you could interview. Don't know. Christopher Nolan. and ask him what he's obsessed with and you realize he's giving you the plot of his next movie and that would be cool, so what am I obsessed with? So one of the things we do every month is a special trivia show just for patrons. plugg for the patreon uh patreon.com Universe today um and I spend probably the first half hour talking about what I'm obsessed with and that changes every month like now, at the time we're filming, I watched a couple of these episodes I'm really fascinated with solar energy sales, laser sales, Institute resource utilization, how can we make things in space from things in space?

And I'm also very interested in direct observation of exoplanets that go beyond the transit method, the radio velocity method to actually be able to directly image the planets. I'm really fascinated by what we can discover because right now we only see about 1% of the exoplanets that are out there when they pass directly in front of their star, but that's not the vast majority. Of the planets, most of them will be in some random configuration compared to the star and also the planets that are likely to be the most interesting, the Earth-like planets orbiting Sun-like stars, take, say, more than 300 days to enter orbit. around the star, so not only do you have to get to this moment where the star and the planet line up perfectly, but you also have to wait a year to see that second Transit and you have to wait another year to get a confirmation, but if there is some kind of direct imaging system where you could just take a picture of the star system, remove the sun, remove the star and then see all the planets orbiting that star.

That would be incredible and that's what the Habitable World Observatory is going to do. theory of what the extremely large telescope is going to do and we're entering this new era of direct imaging of exoplanets and I'm all for it so that's what I'm obsessed with right now, but I guarantee you that when you see this it shows what I'm obsessed with will have changed if you want to support the work we do at Universe today consider joining our patreon club your support allows us to have minimal ads and no sponsorship messages sponsors do not receive ads on universetoday dcom for Life want For the additional parts of the live stream that are not in this edited version, you can sign up for a special podcast test stream just for users and get the overtime segments, as well as other special behind-the-scenes episodes, including our monthly questions exclusively for users. like 3 hours long thanks to everyone who has already subscribed and welcome to the new arrivals Randall llant Chris Ryan kameir Christa Maria fut Chris Stockbridge Jessica Marshall kri s Brian and Laurel samansky Jeremy Holland pow pick and Spencer join the club on patreon .com Universe Today Ianai, what do you think is happening with dark matter?

Any trends you've noticed? We're in a really interesting time right now for the search for dark matter because this is one of the biggest mysteries in astronomy. Today, astronomers would really love to know what causes dark matter, what is this invisible mass that is pulling in all these galaxies, that is causing these strange rotation curves, that is changing the structure of the galaxy? cosic microid background radiation that is causing galaxy accretion, that is causing gravitational lensing, as if all this exists? There is evidence that this dark matter exists, but no one knows what the actual particle is, what the mechanism is, so there are two main fronts where astronomers and physicists are really trying to get to the bottom of this: can we do better observations to specify? the characteristics of dark matter on the largest scales try to confirm some theories try to refute other theories they get to a point where you think Everything that's left has to be the answer and then on the particle side people is building increasingly interesting particles. particle experiments with accelerators where they try to capture Dark Matter particles directly and be able to see their interactions, even if it is incredibly rare, like how nutrals work and where we are today is that many of the big astronomical projects are this about to start, so one of the ones we have been reporting on is the uclid mission.

This is this mission that is doing an all-sky survey of the entire universe over the course of 6 years and will image the entire sky in visible light. and infrared and try to map the distortions of gravity throughout the Sky because of all the mass that is crushing it and because when you have, say, a Galaxy and then you have a mass of dark matter in front of it, the mass of Dark Matter It acts as a natural lens that changes and distorts the shape of the Galaxy, so astronomers will be able to see and map all of these distortions across the sky and that will come from the UK mission.

Very similar work is going to be done with the Roman Grace telescope in New York, which will be launched very soon, and then there is another mission that NASA's Sparx cult is launching, which will be something similar to the uclid mission and then you have the ground work from the See the Ruined Observatory and when you add all this up you will get a lot of separate instruments that will work together to really try to limit dark matter and that will eliminate a lot of ideas and then on Earth you will have a lot of really interesting experiments which are designed to test a possible specific aspect of a dark matter particle to detect whether it moves, whether the Dark Matter could be axons or whether the Dark Matter could be some other type of non-interacting particle and then you know is doing some really interesting work with the Gaia Observatory.

Wow, I just got a TW because I just mentioned Rubin and Gaia in the same question. Everyone got their bingo right there, but the Mission guy has been making these observations. of wide binary stars, so people think this might be evidence for mon, although other people say this is definitely not evidence for M, so you can see even hardcore Dark Matter skeptics like Saine Hosenfeld are beginning to realize what happened. idea of ​​dark matter particles, so the trend is that astronomy and particle physics have taken on the complexity of the challenge and brought serious instruments to address this problem, so now we have to wait for realizations these experiments and my The hope is that we get a much better explanation on the other side of this, we may not get the answer, but that's okay, this is a mystery, it's developing, enjoy the ride.

Vador talking about Solar Salts. I wonder if we could catch up. With OMU with a very small payload solar sail probe, solar sales are incredible. I just want to start everything I'm going to say by first saying that Solar Salts are amazing, now the problem with Solar Sales is that they work less and less the further you get from the Sun and if the goal is to reach an interstellar object that is moving away rapidly from the solar system, then you will need a propulsion system that goes very fast and as if it were going in a straight line.

You launch a solar sail from here on Earth, you'll get a little boost leaving Earth orbit, but you won't be fast enough to reach the UAA, you need some other trick, so there are a couple of tricks. One is that you use a laser to point your laser at your solar sail and now it becomes a laser sail and you can accelerate the sail and depending on the mass of your solar seal you can accelerate it fast enough that you can catch it. Come on, assuming you have the right objective. You want to get very close and that is the idea that has been proposed to send a small spacecraft to Proxima Centari at 20% of the speed of lights.

Now you could reach Oma mua. Any spacecraft will probably have problems, maybe it knows its target is going to be wrong, but it sends out a swarm maybe a thousand 1 M wide, so a laser sail powered by solar sales to reach aumu and make one flyover for the other. The option is actually to go weirdly into the interior of the solar system, so if you can get really close to the Sun, you can do a kind of special maneuver where you can get close to the Sun, accelerate your spacecraft, and then shoot out. on the other side of the Sun, then you could try to chase uua, but it will go too fast and probably won't work.

The other idea is sales of magazines and electric Sals, so in addition to the light coming out of the Sun, there is also the constant flow of particles, the solar wind, and you can have a spaceship that has like this giant net a around it and you pass an electric current through that network, you interact with the particles that come from the Sun and that gives you a boost and that has been proposed as a way to go after uo, but you don't really need a solar sale like we have today the technology to chase Oma, if we wanted to spend the money, you take a heavy falcon, you fill it up with fuel, you have a really powerful upper stage and then you have a little spaceship, a Chase spaceship, and then you fire it and it goes Hey, maybe you do one of these orbits around the Sun to speed up the Oberth maneuver and then you can chase it in, oh, I don't know, 50 years, you could catch up with UA and do an omu mua flyby and there have been even more exotic ideas interesting about how you could even do a sample return. omua mission where, for example, you could take an RTG, which is the type of power system that travelers have out of curiosity and perseverance, because it lasts a long time and produces electricity continuously and then you just connect an ion engine with enough propellant and then everything.

It's actually an engine, it has a nuclear battery that provides electricity and that could accelerate and give it enough speed to not only reach a mua mua, maybe send a sample back and then return to Earth with that, so there is a Lots of ideas we could use, but right now the astronomical community is saying that uua is gone, yes if we wanted to spend tens of billions of dollars we could chase uua, but instead let's wait for the next interstellar object pass through the solar system there. There are a couple of ideas in the works that will be an interstellar interceptor, so you have this spacecraft that will hang around, say, Earth's L2 range point, the Sun, like where James Web is, and wait for an object to come in. cells on the correct trajectory pass through the solar system and then turn on their engines and look for an intercept to make a flyby of that object.

Right now we only know of two interstellar objects that have been found so far, but when the Ver Rubin telescope enters in operation you will find dozens to hundreds, maybe even Thousands of these interstellar objects passing through the solar system, so one of them will be on the perfect trajectory with a minimum amount of fuel for a cheap spacecraft. Canmake a flyover. Maybe you can find a way to make a lander. Orbit and learn a lot about an object that came from another star system. I mean, UA is obviously very special, weird, it would be great to specifically know more information about that, but I guess after a while we'll see. enough of these objects pass through the solar system for one to be as good as another RM what particles are theoretically created during the black hole evaporation process electrons quarks full protons neutrons the vast majority of particles that will theoretically evaporate of black holes are just photons, just radiation light at different wavelengths, when the black hole is very large you will see very low energy photons and as the black hole becomes less and less massive the radiation that comes from it it will get hotter. and hotter you will eventually get this final flash of gamma radiation and then the black hole will be gone and I guess there is the potential for other particles too but the vast majority will be photons grigor kayari which caused the Big Bang we have no idea Bryce Rowy , how solar panel satellites transfer energy to Earth, making one of the possible applications. for the future of space exploration is that we can build space power satellites where, like on the surface of the Earth, the solar panels only work during the day, they don't work at night, but if you could put your solar panels in space , then you would do it.

You wouldn't have to deal with the weather, you wouldn't have to deal with the day-night cycle, you would just have maximum sunlight falling on your panels all the time. The complicated problem is that they are in space, so now you have to get that energy from space to Earth, so the main proposal is that it would be done with microwaves and this has been tested and people have been able to test shipping of microwaves over long distances to transfer energy, it is very inefficient, but it does it. In theory it works, so power generating satellites would fly over the Earth and transmit their energy to the surface of the Earth to some collection station that would take that and then convert it into electricity, but you know, that's in theory.

Every few years we get an announcement from a different organization that is planning to do a paper on the possibilities of a space energy feasibility study and it never goes anywhere and that's simply because solar panels are being installed on Earth right now. Earth although they are not as efficient, they are simply dramatically cheaper than launching into space, so there is simply no need to send things to space. Well, we still have parking lots and buildings that you can put solar panels on in addition to the cost per watt. it just decreases year after year after year, the other slight problem is that when you have a satellite in space you are capturing sunlight that maybe wouldn't have reached the Earth, you know those are the things that will fly above or to the side of the Earth and now you're transmitting that to the Earth, so you're going to increase the heat budget of planet Earth now, I'm not sure that's a gigantic input and when you consider how you could reduce your dependence on other greenhouse gases, then maybe you can make it all work and actually be a more effective use of our energy budget on Earth, but I doubt any of these solar projects will work because it's so expensive to capture solar energy on Earth.

It's so cheap that it never makes any feasible sense, what you do want to do is transmit energy from space to space, so we talked before that there are those permanently shadowed craters on the moon and if you're going to want your Rover to explore the bottom from one of these craters to -250°C, you're going to need a way to provide it with electricity, you're going to need a weight to be able to stay warm in those cold temperatures, then you have a satellite that's orbiting above that's collecting sunlight, then you use microwaves to transmit down and a very concentrated beam towards your Rover and then your Rover has a collector and is able to absorb all that energy and to be able to continue doing its job, so I think we will see applications of the use of space energy in which It will transmit energy from space to space.

Maybe to places like Antarctica or the Arctic Circle, how can people in Antarctica get energy in the In the middle of a long winter in Antarctica, you transmit energy to them from space, so there are some potential applications here on Earth, places where other forms of energy are totally infeasible, but I think for a long time we will see applications of space energy used in space, but this is how Andrew Fish has postulated that dark energy will eventually decline and deplete as if there would be no energy if it has increased over time, can the opposite be true?

I mean, we don't know what dark energy is, but dark energy seems to be just a part of space itself. You know that if you have a cubic meter of space and you remove all the mass, there are no atoms at all, there are no particles whizzing through this cubic meter and you remove all the energy, there are no photons. going through that there is nothing there is still something and that is that there are still background fields that are oscillating in space itself and so the discovery that there is some type of energy that is inherent to space itself just falls out of that naturally and you know what I think it was a big surprise the implications that it had on the Universe, but when you talk to astronomers and particle physicists and you tell them that you know if there is this inherent repulsive force in space itself, they say yes, that's what you would expect, so The more space you have, the more energy you get, but the question is: does the amount of energy inherent in each cubic meter of space increase or decrease over time?

The assumption is that it remains exactly the same as if you have a meter of space, it will last billions of billions of billions of years and will always have the same amount of expansive energy coming out of this cubic meter, but one of the big questions that the Astronomers wanted to know what this is. The amount changes over time and if it increases, for example, that's how you get these strange results like the big tear, and if it decreases, that gives other strange results. I suppose with a you still get an expansion in the universe, but that wouldn't be the case. it's no longer accelerating so now it's too early for us to know and you know, I talked before about all these interesting experiments that are being done to understand the true nature of dark matter and the same thing is happening with dark energy. of interesting experiments being conducted to help astronomers understand the true nature of dark energy.

The same spaceship ukp Nancy Grace Roman see Rubin will all do this work to try to help us understand what impact dark energy has been having. in the universe itself and it could very well be that the dark energy per cubic meter of space is increasing or decreasing and both would be really interesting results, would be surprising to discover and would have profound implications for the future of the universe. What is your opinion on large solar flares? The risk is exaggerated or unappreciated. I think I've gone on record several times that solar flares are probably the biggest threat we face since space asteroids.

I mean, they're scary, but the possibility that an asteroid is actually going to crash into Earth and cause large-scale damage that occurs on a timeline of tens of thousands, if not millions of years, and we saw that with Mission Dart We can push an asteroid out of its trajectory and now, suddenly, for the first time. In the history of planet Earth, the planet can defend itself from asteroids. Black holes passing through the solar system have very little chance of a supernova exploding in our vicinity. There aren't any that are within dangerous distance for us, so we don't really have to do it.

Worry about that, but yes, really big solar flares happening while we have this highly interconnected electrical system with satellites in orbit would be a very bad day and we've seen events like the Carrington event that occurred in the 19th century that lit up telegraph poles. on fire. We saw auroras near the equator, it was pretty exciting and yet we didn't have this technologically interconnected society, but we've seen examples that say in Montreal there was a solar flare that destroyed part of the power grid and that wasn't really a bad one and There have been events in the tree records that show solar flares that were dramatically more powerful than the Carrington event, so every few hundred years we will probably have a solar flare hit the Earth with enough power to cause severe disruption. on our planet's power grid or whatever you know, on the side that faces the Sun and then we'll have to do a cleanup worth hundreds of billions, if not trillions of dollars, to replace the faulty components, fix the phone lines that caught fire, so yeah, yeah, I think it's a big problem and scientists have gotten a lot better at predicting when harmful solar flares are coming and being able to help people at least know that we're one away. time for a serious solar flare, but we haven't made any changes to just the raw infrastructure of how society works to be able to prepare for this, so now we understand the magnitude of the problem and now the question is can we mitigate it.

I mean, there's no technological reason why we can't. Do we have the will to do it and can we think of other risks on a planetary level that require, you know, a serious solution to combat the problem? I think we can think of a lot, so we will behave exactly with solar flares. how we have behaved in the face of other potentially threatening problems around the planet. Alright, that's all the questions we got today. Thank you to everyone who posted their questions in the YouTube comments and to everyone who joined me on the live broadcast that we do this program every Monday. at 5:00 pm Pacific Time, right here on the YouTube channel there should be a notification somewhere on the channel where you can see where the next one is, so definitely come if you want to see the show that's twice as long .

About two hours long, we get into a bunch more questions after we finish recording the main show, so if you want an even longer QA experience, join the live show now. I'm going to recommend another little YouTuber, but first I'd like to say thank you. our sponsors thanks to Abe Kingston Andrew M gross Antonio lilara David Gilton and douge Stewart Dustin cable Jeremy murn Jordan young Josh Schultz Mark anest Paul roorbach Steven kraki Steven Fellerer Munley and Vlad Chiplin who support us at the master of the universe level and all our Other sponsors , all your support means the universe to us, so last week I asked you all to give me your recommendations for YouTubers who are doing great work, who are just putting their heart into this, and yet for some reason they just they do not have. a huge following and we're here to fix it, so this week I want to recommend Norah's Guide to the Galaxy.

A lot of people recommended her channel and I hadn't seen it before and she's great. She used to work at NASA. JPL, she has a PhD in astronomy and astrophysics and she's been doing a lot of explaining about binary planets and universal constants and she also does various news segments and you know it's cool to see someone who has this technical knowledge and not just a journalist like I, um, but the one I really liked was he did a recent episode on flat rotation curves. This is one of the big pieces of evidence for the existence of dark matter and when you see how strong the observations are, you can I'm not saying dark matter is nothing, it's something we just don't know what it is, so I thought his explanation was cool so definitely check out Norah's Guide to the Galaxy, she only has 4000 subscribers so see if we can figure it all out.

Well, thank you all for watching this week's episode. Thanks for all the questions. See you next week.