Interstellar Propulsion, Uranus-Type Exoplanets, AGI Solving Space Mysteries | Q&A 255

What will happen to the planets when the Sun expands? Why is Venus' atmosphere so thick and everything produces Hawking radiation? All this and more on this week's quiz show. Welcome to the question, show your questions, my answers as always wherever you are on my channel. The question pops into your brain, just write it down and I'll put them together and answer them here. Okay, let's get into the questions. Metens some turkish 2552 How do we know that the orbits of the planets in the Solar System will remain the same? The same thing happens when the Sun expands, so we know that the Sun is a main sequence star and is about halfway through its lifespan and within several billion years the Sun will run out of usable hydrogen in its core. and then it will try to switch to another

type

of fuel like helium and when this happens it actually heats up the core of the sun and causes its outer layers to expand outwards and then they will shed a lot of material which will cool down again and then it will cool down.

It will expand again, it will cool again and it will lose more and more mass each time and eventually the sun, once it has gone through this whole sequence, will run out of usable fuel in the core, it will just be the leftover core of the Sun. and that will end up being about 46% of the Sun's mass now, during that process, as the sun expands into a red giant, it will enclose the orbits of the inner planets, it will definitely enclose Mercury and Venus, and there are some There is a species of arguments back and forth about whether it's really going to consume the Earth or not, and the reason this question exists is because we don't know how much mass the Sun is going to lose and the orbits of the planets depend on it. the mass of the Sun, if the Sun loses mass, then the planets will actually change where they orbit, they will move, I guess they will get closer together as the Sun is losing mass, so that expansion of the Sun will swallow it up. potentially the Earth, so we know that the orbits of the planets won't stay the same, they will change as the sun changes in mass, but another interesting thing is that the sun is actually losing mass all the time, it's losing about 6 million tons per second and that is due to fusion in the core as well as the solar wind coming from the Sun, but in fact that amount is quite insignificant compared to the mass loss compared to when the Sun enters that red giant phase, so what feels like stability today is actually only once in the main sequence phase of the Sun and then everything will change as the sun enters that red giant phase.

I'm sure you noticed the name of the Star Trek planet that appeared over my shoulder in the first question. Of course you did, you're very observant, that's a way of voting for you to tell us what you think was the best question of the episode, so we'll have a different Star Trek planet name over my shoulder for each one. question throughout the entire episode and then we'll put links to all of them as part of the show notes and we'll have what you know on the timeline so you can see what all the names of the planets are and then at the end.

After you finish watching the entire episode, go ahead and ask that question, so I forgot to say it. The winner of last week's episode was Katuri. Would it be possible to use the moon's enormous temperature difference as an energy source? And we talked a little. a little bit about the use of solar energy stored in the regolith, similar to some of the sand shakes that are proposed here on Earth, okay, so don't forget to vote jav slar, how interesting is the information on the size of the dust particles and velocity distribution throughout the solar system. My intuition is that this information is absolutely precious, but it seems like it's not that interesting.

There are no plans to make probes that could record it, nor even the concept of probes to perform that task. Why not? What makes you think this hasn't been implemented? In one probe, NASA's New Horizon

space

craft, which took close-up images of Pluto and Sharon, then spotted the hyperbuilt object Aroth, was equipped with a dust-measuring device and, as it passed through the solar system, was By measuring how much dust it has, it's essentially able to measure the impacts of dust on the

space

craft as it goes through space and one of the really interesting scientific measurements that came out a couple of months ago was that New Horizons is still seeing a lot.

More dust, although largely across what should be most of the Kyper Belt, still see many particles farther and farther from the Sun, meaning perhaps the Kyper Belt in reality extends much further than astronomers had originally thought or perhaps. it leads to a second kypro Bel which is even further away so it is incredibly important to measure dust in the solar system, there are spacecraft that can do it and there are more plans so there is a whole new mission in the works called an

interstellar

probe . and the plan for this is that it will fly further than the distance that New Horizons, the pioneer travelers, and will actually reach

interstellar

space beyond the heliosphere of the Sun and into the interstellar sphere of Helium, that of all the other stars of the Way Milky and get a real idea of ​​how much solar wind the sun produces by creating this heliosphere, how much this protects us from the particles that come from the rest of the stars in the galaxy, now one of the other things that New Horizons did, which is Something related to dust is that we know that there is this dust that is embedded in the solar system.

You can take pictures of it when you are on the surface of the Earth. It's called zodiacal dust and it is this dust that is in the sky along the plane of the ecliptic, so where all the planets are in the sky there is also this trail of dust that is in the middle. It is easiest to see shortly after sunset. Just before dawn, you can see this zodiacal dust, and in fact, astronomers have recently discovered that this dust is probably related to Mars. This dust probably comes from Mars and has spread out in a kind of ecliptic plane and it is this dust that obscures part of our vision and one of the questions that astronomers recently wanted to know.

How much does this dust obscure our view of the cosmos? I mean, it's kind of the equivalent of having light pollution or atmospheric dust here on Earth if you're at the bottom of the atmosphere with a telescope and you're looking through space. You're looking through the atmosphere, we know it's much better to be in space with a space telescope, but the question is: is it better to be close to the solar system or is it better to be far away in the solar system and so one of the One thing that New Horizons did was simply measure the darkness of space itself and was able to determine that, in fact, there is a lot of dust that is causing a slight hindrance to the astronomical images taken by the telescopes that are in the inner solar system, so we have all these giant space telescopes around the Earth, the L2 range point and that's just because it's convenient, but the best place to put a space telescope would actually be well beyond the orbit of Pluto.

Beyond most of the dust you get. the clearest and darkest view of the cosmos, but it would be a real hassle to send a telescope there, so you keep them relatively close. How come Venus's atmosphere wasn't stripped by the sun in the same way it was? About Mercury and why Venus' atmosphere remained so thick. This is actually a completely ongoing mystery that astronomers aren't entirely sure about, so let's talk about a bunch of factors that have been considered in the past. The first thing is, obviously, Earth and Venus. They are much more massive than Mars, so one of the ideas is that because Mars has much less gravity, it has been losing much more atmosphere compared to the other larger planets and that is partly true, but it doesn't explain in a way a lot, so a big defense that people think is that Earth has a global magnetosphere that protects us from the impact of the solar wind, while Mars and Venus do not have global magnetospheres and therefore have no protection, but in fact The amount of atmospheric loss from the lack of a magnetosphere is not that great, so a paper was published a couple of years ago in which they calculated how much water would have been expelled from Venus over the course of 3.9 billion. years as if it had had water for that entire duration and, according to the researcher, it has between 02 and 6 M of water depth on the entire planet, so when you think about the depth of the Earth's oceans kilometers deep and If you simply averaged all the Earth's oceans around the entire planet they would still be kilometers deep, and yet if we lost just one meter in space over the course of almost four billion years that's nothing, so, what?

Why doesn't Venus have water? And this is like a big mystery and one of the main reasons why NASA is sending a mission back to Venus, they actually have two missions that they are sending: the Veritas Mission, which will help map the surface of Venus, and then there is Da Vinci plus which will help measure the atmosphere of Venus and NASA did a fairly recent spacecraft called Maven on Mars and one of maven's jobs was to measure water loss, the atmospheric loss that occurs due to the solar wind on Mars and they came up with pretty much the same thing, which is that yes, there is water, atmosphere is being lost on Mars, but it's not as much as you would expect and it doesn't explain the complete and total lack of water, so now there is alternative explanations that maybe the water on Mars maybe the water on Venus entered the planet and absorbed that water and unlike Earth, Venus and Mars don't seem to have plate tectonics, there is no global plate tectonics that seems recycle the surface and keep the water on the surface, so maybe at some point. water leaked onto the planet and is now out of connection with the atmosphere itself, but maybe all of that water is still there or most of that water is still there.

I think a couple of years ago I would have given you a very frivolous answer like Venus doesn't have a magnetosphere and that's why it couldn't prevent hydrogen from being expelled from the Sun and oxygen is 16 times heavier than hydrogen and that's why it kept its oxygen. that bonded to carbon and lost it. it's hydrogen but of course hydrogen is part of the solar wind, in fact there's fresh hydrogen hitting Venus all the time so I would have given you that amazing answer anyway and then Mars, you know, lacks a global magnetosphere, is much less massive.

It easily loses its body of water, but now it really seems that the story is going to be much more complicated and that is why more research is needed. It is an active mystery. Stepan Anderson 7519 It's very interesting to hear you explain the unreal effect, would that mean that everything that has mass creates unreal radiation around it, an immortal being would eventually evaporate like a black hole, so two weeks ago, last week, I said a fairly detailed explanation of Hawking radiation and the important part here is that it is not these virtual particles that appear correctly.

In addition to the event horizon of a black hole, there is actually a different, more complicated explanation, one that Hawking fully knew and should have given, but he felt people weren't smart enough to handle it and that's how we have these particles. virtual ones showing up, they've caused all sorts of miscommunications and misunderstandings for decades and you talk to particle physicists and they wince, so hopefully I'm trying to set the record straight on Hawking radiation and get back to that. In another episode, if you want to hear the explanation, but the question you are asking is one that has arisen, then if it is not an Event Horizon of black holes that is causing this radiation, but in fact the gradient of the difference of mass like If you go down the gravity well, that implies that all the mass evaporates and the answer is probably yes, so there was a paper that came out a couple of years ago where researchers asked this exact question and said, Well, does the whole mass emits Hawking radiation which with a black hole, you have the highest gravity and especially the highest gradient where you have that event horizon, so you will get the most Hawking radiation from the lowest black hole mass, you will have the least Hawking radiation from a super massive black hole, but they actually calculate that there would be some level of Hawking reissue coming from any mass, but that amount would be completely negligible, so I guess an immortal being would eventually evaporate like a black hole. for an infinite amount of time that, if there was nothing else, eventually even that immortal being would evaporate into Caton, why is Neptune used to name categories of

exoplanets

, but not Uranus?

Oh, that's a brutal question for people who follow a lot. people in the news about

exoplanets

in space know that there is aclassification of planets called sub Neptune or mini Neptune and there is the desert of Neptune, why don't we know about many Exon Neptune? And yes, there is this classification of planets like, obviously, the size of the ice giant size of Neptune and Uranus, which is about 50,000 kilometers in diameter, and then there are these smaller ones, like this midpoint between a super-Earth that is much bigger than Earth but then smaller than a Neptune and a sub-Neptune, but why?

Neptune, why is it not Uranus? So I think there are two parts to this: Neptune is a little bit smaller than Uranus by a couple thousand kilometers, so if you're going to have smaller than Uranus, you could also say Neptune and so on, but if you're going to say Neptune now , you can actually talk about things being smaller, but the other part is that it's the word Uranus, right? Uranus just causes laughter in whoever says the word, whoever hears the word, your anus sees that you laughed, so I guess I guess the exoplanetary community just wanted to avoid all the laughter and went with the sub Neptunes, but someone in that community You will have to clarify this.

For me, season 85, what kind of

propulsion

do you think could be used in the first Mann Interstellar Mission or is it something we haven't conceived of yet much before we get into this? I must at least assume that we are going to follow the laws of physics as we understand it, in other words, is it possible for someone to come up with a new

type

of physics? a warp drive a wormhole any of those things yes, of course, the laws of physics as we understand them are not the laws of physics as they really are, so at some point someone will come up with something better and then everything I'm about to say doesn't make sense, but from what we currently understand, there really is only one viable

propulsion

system that would allow us to go from star to star and that is antimatter and antimatter isn't even really a propulsion system, it's just a method of storing energy, so we know that if you have an antimatter particle and a matter particle and they combine, you're going to get a release of energy essentially it's a release of energy in pure form equal to mc^ s, so any Another propulsion system is fractionally as efficient as antimatter and the problem is that those other propulsion systems, whether a fusion thruster or a fission thruster, even having a laser for sale to accelerate union speeds, have a lot of disadvantages.

Do you want to spend a thousand years to travel to another star system? Do you want to spend 10,000 years? Do you want to not be able to? to slow down when you get to the other star system, no, so an antimatter rocket, you're essentially combining matter, antimatter, you're getting a release of energy and then you can just use the photons themselves that are being ejected from the antimatter. . use mirrors to focus them to come out of the back of your rocket or you can use the matter and antimatter to heat some kind of hydrogen propellant gas, maybe something you're bringing back from the universe and then accelerating it. the back part thanks to the antimatter and once you get to the antimatter then you have the types of densities that are required to accelerate a spacecraft of the type that would carry passengers on board to speeds that would take them to other star systems during their lifetime.

The problem is that creating antimatter is incredibly expensive, costing around $62 trillion per gram, so the total amount of animat just produced by all of humanity is orders of magnitude less than what it would take to send even the probe smallest possible, like a robotic probe to another star system that we need to increase our antimatter production by many, many, many orders of magnitude, we have to find ways to do it as cheaply as you can imagine in some future where a large percent of the energy comes from the Sun. I don't know, like 1% is only used to create antimatter, then you're starting to get the types of energy use that you know, storage of antimatter in a very small amount, use that in a spaceship is dense enough, gives you enough energy.

The Delta V speed change to be able to transport you to another star system, so until we use antimatter there is nothing that can take humans to other star systems. Now you could use other systems like a laser sail like the one on Breakthrough. A star shot is being planned, so you could send, say, a spacecraft to Alpha Centuri at 10% the speed of light, but it will have to be a spacecraft that big with a kilometer wide solar window and will take it. 40 years to get there that way is not the right amount of time for humans to complete the journey, so really antimatter is the only way to go in the end if you want to support the work we do here at Universe today. by joining our patreon club your support, minimal ads and no sponsorship messages patrons do not receive ads on college.com for life want the additional parts of the live stream that are not in this edited version, you can register alone for a special sponsor stream the podcast and get the overtime segments, those other special behind the scenes episodes including our exclusive monthly quiz show for sponsors, thanks to everyone who has already subscribed and welcome to our newcomers Clinton Knox John de benedet hi twia Scott J Arvid e Pani Sandra everon Jones Ardo lindfelt s Kaba Dylan Thomas murre Scott Wright and Ed Engle join the club on patreon.com The current universe pathogen x what is the meaning of simply looking at ethanol and other complex organic molecules around protostars is your yeast in space?

You're absolutely right that James The web has detected a lot of really complicated organic molecules in the OR regions around protostars, so for a long time it was thought that okay, there would just be the building blocks, you'd have hydrogen, you'd have helium, you could have carbon and then these will come. together in a stellar nebula and then over time planets will form and then on planets you will get more complicated carbon atoms, ethanol, acylin, methane, carbon dioxide and finally you will get even more complex things like amino . acids and then from there you will have those first building blocks of life and then maybe something will happen to create life, but now astronomers are discovering more and more and this has been known for a while that not only are they like these atoms of carbon that form in more complicated Molecules in space, but this seems to have no end, so astronomers have detected not only, as you said, ethanol as alcohol in the cloud of gas and dust leading to the construction of a system stellar, but they have also found acylin. and methane and just hundreds of amino acids, not just the 20 that are needed for life on Earth, but also tons and tons of other amino acids, and what makes it really exciting is that it means that the raw material for life was simply present.

Even before the star system formed, you have all these amino acids, all these sugars and alcohol and all this stuff, it's ready to go and then as the planet forms it starts to rain on the planet and build up. and then you have the conditions under which life can try to form, which makes this question even more puzzling, since you know there didn't seem to be any special circumstances that happened on Earth; There's something really unique and interesting about it. On Earth, we had all these amino acids and more complex molecules on our planet. It turns out that in many, probably all of the protoplanetary systems that we see, all those raw materials are ready to go waiting to join the planet, one of the really An interesting question is how do you get those amino acids and other molecules on the surface of the planet? planet.

If the planet orbits rapidly through this material, it might actually act. It is difficult for him to see that comets are delivering some of these. complex molecules to the surface of the planet, they are crashing at tens of kilometers per second, so it could be too fast and actually break up and break those larger molecules into smaller ones, but perhaps as the comets get closer a lot and just hand over their tails to planet Earth, maybe that will work or maybe there are other ways that things from space can land more gently on a newly formed planet to get the amino acids that maintain their structure, so again it's another piece of really interesting research and, in fact, I like the work that James Webb is doing, which is mind-blowing because they are able to detect protoplanetary rings where the planets are forming holes in the disks and they are able to measure the amounts of water ice in different parts of these protoplanetary disks to see. how maybe the water is being collected by the planet and then of course the presence of all these organic molecules there makes the question of where all the life is in the universe more complicated because, again, the Earth just It doesn't seem very special, we are totally normal of course, there are a lot of amino acids and other complex molecules that appear on planet Earth at the time they could because they were present in the stellar nebula before we even got here.

You think the chances of receiving an extraterrestrial transmission decrease even further because they will only choose to send signals to exoplanets that they can see using the transit method, so that's an interesting question, so the transit method is where you measure the planets around a star because You see the planets passing directly in front of the star from your perspective, but you don't see many planets that way. In reality, you only understand that less than 1% of the stars in the sky will be oriented that way. that its planets will pass directly in front of it from your perspective and that reduces the number of planets you could potentially see to a fraction.

The planets that we can see through the transit method are not the same as the other way around and other words maybe we can detect them, but they can't necessarily detect us and vice versa, so I think it's a good start as one of the great questions you always have to ask with seti is how is it reduced? The search space is gigantic and there are more than 100 billion stars in the Milky Way. How do you know which ones to look at? When to look at them? What radio wavelengths are you going to try to listen to? so anything you can do to filter that number down to a smaller number is a good idea and one of the interesting ideas is that you can calculate which planets would see us as a transiting exoplanet and that is possible.

You know, these calculations have been done. you can figure out which of the stars might see us as a trans exoplanet and then the next thing you would say is okay, so if that star, if we know that star sees us as a transiting exoplanet, when would they see us transiting? we would know to send a message that when we align with that star we should see a message coming from that star when it happens and this idea has been proposed and has actually been done like the radio astronomers that Ted's researchers have tried to time when it appears to be an exoplanet in transit to some other star, then check that star to see if they send us a message and obviously you know it hasn't worked and there have been a lot of other ideas, like there's a whole field of thought about this guy. from Timing Systems, so another one that I interviewed with a couple of years ago, maybe a year ago, anyway, the idea is that when there is a supernova that explodes, then it is a kind of unique beacon that occurs in the universe. and there will be this cone of light coming out of the supernova where there will be several star systems within that cone of light, they will perceive the supernova and when they see the supernova, then they will be able to know, they can calculate when other stars within that cone of light will also see the Supernova and they can time it to say, "Okay, when that star sees the Supernova, we'll send a message so it's received exactly at the time." At the same time you will see the Supernova and you will also see a signal from us that will tell you that at this exact moment is when you both see the Supernova and you would hope that our star could send you a message.

Come look at our star right now. At the exact moment there is another idea that I really like and that is that there are a bunch of stars that are orbiting around the center of the Milky Way, the super massive black hoal that is at the heart of the Milky Way and one of these stars comes extremely close to the S2 black hole um I think it takes like 16 years to be able to orbit so essentially a clock is being forged that is happening like a second hand that is happening in the center of the Milky Way. and then you might expect other civilizations to notice that the star is moving in this really tight orbit around the Milky Way and then use that as a way to time their transmissions to each other to align with this rotation of this star because it's something that we can all do andyou can dramatically eliminate the places to look at, let's just look at the places where they're mapped, you know, the quadrant of the sky that's being mapped as a star moves around the black hole, so you know. just this idea that you're mentioning, you know, it's like trying to communicate with people who see us in transit trying to communicate with people who know that a supernova occurred trying to communicate with people who are observing the movement of a star the more of these If ideas arise , it's a pretty clever way to try to limit the search for other civilizations.

Do you think the human brain is capable of

solving

the

mysteries

of space or will AI AGI be the one that will help us do it? We're at a really funny point in history, which is that we're here before artificial general intelligence was developed, if there's ever a chance that artificial general intelligence will never be developed, and the current state of large language models and Transformers stagnates and then declines. it comes back and everyone realizes it's a bubble and it never worked and we just go back to the systems we used in the past. I don't think that's likely.

I think there is clearly value to be discovered and with the current state of the big language. models and transformers andArtificial intelligence: we are going to continue to make incremental gains at least as we move forward, we may never develop general artificial intelligence, but even with the current state of AI we are going to gain value, but people are discovering a lot. of really clever ways of using professional AI machine learning algorithms in science and things like being able to model all the chemical interactions that could potentially occur with drugs to find, say, some kind of new antibacterial drug or, uh, people have been able to test different types of materials, they know the chemical limitations of all these different types of materials, they put them into a big language model and then the predicted material capabilities come out for different chemicals that have never been made and there are robots that if they are. combining different materials following these recipes that different large language models developed to find out if these chemicals really match the predictions made by the model and in some cases they are finding absolutely so I think right now this AI when it comes to science, it mostly sucks, it's mostly not useful at all, but there are a lot of really interesting technologies that are just around the corner, like a much higher token limit, so when you think about GPT chat , you can only put in I don't know like 100,000 tokens, which is a lot, but you know, it quickly starts to lose track when you're talking or if you try to send it a PDF to try to read it, but Google says with its version 1.5 of Gemini it has a limit of 1.5 million tokens and it was able to search very well for needles in the haystack, so you could take an entire YouTube video or a document with a million words and put it into the large language model and ask it to find very specific facts and actually brings them to light, so right now the problem is that these things are hallucinating, but Mo maybe in the future they are not going to hallucinate, they are going to do a very good job of being able to give accurate data . facts, then you can imagine this process of helping scientists speed things up, explaining what you're working on and then verifying every scientific paper that's ever been written by someone and then bringing it back. together so you find out if there is any needle in the haac in all of human knowledge that is useful for what you are working on, so I think we don't even need general artificial intelligence to help accelerate our science.

While scientists working with these types of aids are going to produce amazing results, the trick is not to trust them too much, as seen in many funny examples of people getting things like GPT chat to help write their research papers and are being exposed as idiots because they simply aren't ready for that kind of work. So could the human brain solve these

mysteries

over time? Sure we are very slow large language models, but having the help of this technology will speed up our capacity. and will allow things that previously required Brute Force to now be able to find ways to solve these problems and get us closer to the answers than we ever thought before.

It could be that there is a whole area of ​​science that we have already reached our limits in what we can do from our own intuition or experimenting and having something that can explore all possible versions almost instantly will allow us to take a step forward, so I think It's like it's going. To be a combination, very smart people will use the best technology to advance science and that will continue as it always has in the future. Fractured player. What do you think of the city lights that James Web found 7 billion miles away? I follow Jam Jam web news a lot.

I mean, I'm reporting on James' web stories a couple of times a week. You know, we talked about it on Space Bites and of course today we reported on Universe and I haven't heard a single bit of science. newspaper that says James Webb found City Lights 7 billion miles away, uh, and my suspicion is that the video you saw on YouTube that said it was a lie was a scam, that there is an unlimited and unstoppable amount of nonsense gibberish that are being produced and uploaded to YouTube all the time and you know they usually have Neil degrass Tyson crying in their hands, he says we were wrong and he's really sad or he's sorry he lied and stuff, and then it's James Webb who just watched the outside. of the Universe And the scientists were shocked by what they saw, this is all nonsense and none of it is real and if you actually look at the videos, they don't explain it, they don't provide evidence and they don't provide any sources.

They just go around in circles for like 20 minutes and this is one of the biggest threats that YouTube has right now is that it's not just allowing these things to exist even though people are complaining about it, but it's pushing it, is driving it. it's pushing it algorithmically and for example when I go on YouTube to the creators tab and if someone who has a channel understands this, they go to the analytics section and then they click on the research link, then YouTube will give them a list of everyone. of the videos that you think are relevant to you, similar to your audience, whatever it is, and every time I look at that list, it's 100% garbage, every single one of those videos is just garbage, someone is just trying to make money , they're just trying to turn to clickbait AI and they're taking advantage of the system and they're reducing people's ability to understand the real things that are going on with James Webb and I'm not the only person who's noticed of this like Kyle Hill has broken loose just trying to deal with this uh the BBC has done news reports on this and it's a big problem and it's getting worse and I really have two like YouTube isn't willing to deal with this problem Like they don't care, like you know what science is.

It was okay for people to understand the science for a while, but now we're making a lot of money doing this stuff and who cares, we don't care anymore, so YouTube isn't willing or able to. literally unable to catch this crap and find some kind of solution to deal with this and recently YouTube launched a new thing where they require people who make videos to say whether or not their videos are made with artificial intelligence but but they are looking for people that they're trying to spin things, so if I'm going to talk like Joe Biden about black holes and spin that Joe Biden discovered black holes, then I have to identify it, but if it's all just this mass of little video clips and snippets that come from public resources, you have an AI narrator, you have a script written by GPT chat and he just goes around talking about things about space and you package it all together and put a scary clickbait headline in the front that is totally fine 100%, it's not It is necessary to label it, that does not cross any lines and this is the best.

I think it is an existential risk for YouTube and we are seeing this everywhere. from this website and if anyone on YouTube is watching this, I'm sure they watched Kyle Hills' video and I didn't see any results. I didn't see any change and he had a big impact on it and then the BBC reported it. and yet, if I go to my YouTube research channel, every single one of those videos they recommend for engaging content that I should be inspired by is pure AI nonsense, and so what do I think of the CD lights that found James Web?

Seven Sounds 7 Billion Miles Away didn't happen and it is, and the fact that this information is being spread on YouTube is going to cause a complete collapse of people's understanding of what is really happening in the universe, which what these telescopes can really do. YouTube, those are all the questions we had this week. Thank you all for asking questions both in the YouTube comments and to everyone who attended the live show. Just a reminder. We do this show live every Monday at 5:00 p.m. PT, so if you want a much longer show, a lot more questions with me and the audience definitely come and watch the show live.

We'll put a link to the next one now we'll be free next week because I'll be at the eclipse in Texas so I'm hoping I can see an eclipse and not horrible thunderstorms but I guess we'll all find out so I'll see you. In two weeks I'm going to talk about another small channel that you should definitely check out, but first I'd like to thank our sponsors, thanks to Abe Kingston Andrew and Gross Antony Lilara David Gilton and Dougy Stewart Dustin Cable Jeremy M Jim Burke. Jordan, young Josh Schultz, Mark Anis, Paul robok, stepen, Kaki, Steven, fer Munley and Vlad Chiplin, who support us at the master of the universe level and all our other sponsors.

All your support, support, means the universe to us. I have a little different. type of YouTube channel that I'm going to recommend this week and this is a YouTuber named Steph Bowman and Steven Bowman is a geologist and he has a degree in geology and he works as a geologist, so a lot of his videos are about geology. and I really like rocks and I found a lot of your videos really fascinating, but not only do you know how to talk about rocks and in their area, etc., but you also cover some astronomical topics, so here's another recommendation for a YouTube channel . to check it again, if you know a YouTuber who has less than 10,000 subscribers but is doing good work in education in the space Scientific outreach Geology outreach even biology um, let me know in the YouTube comments.

I will continue to meet them. and I will share them with you every week. We want to try to help people with fewer subscribers get more subscribers and this is how we do it. See you next week.