Bigger JWST for Starship, Day on A Gas Planet, Real Science Gatekeepers | Q&A 256

What is the pressure on Europe's oceans? How is the length of a day measured on a gas giant and what would a total solar eclipse look like from the Moon? 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, if a question pops into your brain, write it down. I'll put them together and answer them here. Okay, let's get into the questions. Kenneth, does anyone know how ocean pressure works on Europa? It is compared to the pressure in the ocean on Earth, so it is believed that Europa, one of Jupiter's moons, has this thick layer of ice and underneath there is an ocean of liquid water and we don't know how thick the layer is. of ice and we don't know it. how big the ocean of water is, so I'll give you some numbers, but they're probably wrong and we'll have to wait a couple of missions to get to Europa and give us an answer, so we're waiting for the Europa Clipper that launches this year and we are waiting for the European space agency's Juice mission which has already been launched and both will arrive in Europe in the early 2030s and then try to measure the depth. of the ice try to calculate Europa's gravity field to find out where that layer is between the ice and the water and then the solid core, so keep that as a warning: future Fraser will be able to give you these numbers.

Today's Fraser can't but let's say the ice sheet is about 20 km thick and as you know that's a lower end, it could be a lot thicker than that so if you're in the ocean off Europa right on that level between the ice sheet and the In the water sheet you have 20 kilometers of water ice pushing you down, so you think well, that just means it's like it's under 20 kilometers of water, but the gravity on Europa is 17th of the gravity we experience on Earth. then you have to do some calculations, so if you do those calculations you would get 26 megapascals of force pushing you down from the ice above your head and that is equivalent to being underwater on Earth at about 2.7 km, assuming that the ice is 20 km thick, which is probably not the case, so it's the equivalent of you being about 2.7 km deep, which is a lot, but it's feasible that we could do it now that the liquid ocean is thought to be actual on Europa is about 100 to 200 kilometers deep, so again, gravity 17, so you're looking at about 130 to 260 megapascals and that's equivalent to being 13 to 20 6 kilometers deep under the ocean in Earth, which is impossible because our oceans don't go that deep, and so when you think about some kind of robotic explorer that's going to need to explore the oceans on Europa right from the start, it's going to need to be able to handle the equivalent of being 2.7 km under the ocean on Earth. but at its maximum level, if you're going to try to go down to the ocean floor and examine black smokers, you're going to have to be much stronger than anything that is routinely deployed here on Earth, so it's a challenge to even pull it off.

This type of technology is an even

bigger

challenge for Europe to survive, but it's not a thousand times the amount on Earth, it's doable, it's just difficult. I don't know if you noticed, but there was a target from Star Trek Planet that appeared above me. let's lean on that first question and this is a way for you to vote to tell us what you thought was the best question of the week and last week we had a tie between four candidates so that no one could

real

ly decide what they thought was the best question. Congratulations to Dreamcast KN for doing three cosmic dog collisions and Nomad 77 CA, so thank you to everyone who voted now, the way you vote is we'll put in a different Star Trek

planet

name every time it comes into another question. and then you can write in the comments below which one you like best and then I'll put them together and hopefully we'll have a winner next week, but who knows, well, and we'll put them up too. in the show notes and we'll put them in the chapter markers so you can see what all the

planet

names are.

Don't forget to vote for Randall Hensler, shouldn't they build a new iteration of the James Web Telescope that can fit on Spacex's new super heavy rocket, so when James Web launched, it launched inside an Aron 5 rocket and this It has a sort of standard fairing about 5m wide, so the whole telescope was designed to fold up. down and it fits inside that 5 meter fairing and then when it reached orbit it deployed. The primary mirror measures 6.5M, so it's larger than the size of the Aron 5 rocket's fairing, but actually the most important thing is the tennis court-sized sunshade it uses to keep cool from the sunlight. coming, so Starship has a fairing size of 9M wide, i.e. almost twice as wide as the Aron 5 and much longer, so the question is: what size telescope could fit inside of the basic Starship now?

There are two approaches to going this route: one is to not be fancy, just use that 9M size to just fit a large telescope, a simple telescope into the fairing of the 9M when you look at a lot of the telescopes out there. Things like the Hubble Space Telescope Things like Spitzer or Hersel They look like tubes, right? They are just a tube with the primary mirror and the secondary mirror and they fit inside the spacecraft that was designed to launch them. Hubble came from the space shuttle, while Hersel and Spitzer. it fits inside the fairing of a rocket and then you know you could make a 9M telescope you could make an 8M telescope.

I think inside Starship and that would be the most powerful telescope humanity has ever launched. It would be amazing and it would be about the size of the smallest possible iteration of the Louar telescope, you know, the plan is to make the Habitable World Observatory telescope be 6.5 MERS, like the James Web Space Telescope. I wouldn't be surprised if SpaceX pulls it off, Starship does. If it works even disposable, then it's worth designing a telescope that's like the Hubble Space Telescope, but

bigger

and fits inside a 9M fairing, just straight up, don't get fancy, just a tube within a tube and you place it in space now.

We have an 8m telescope like Hubble, when Hubble is 2.6M, it is now 8m, it will probably have twice the capacity of James Web, but it will also be very specific, it will be able to emit ultraviolet, infrared and visible, it will have a coronagraph. It'll let you see potentially Earth-sized worlds orbiting Sun-like stars, but what if you got fancy? What if you wanted to go the route of James's network and wanted to build a folding telescope that you could then attach to the leg of a rocket? Starship and then launch it right, then it could be a lot bigger, like you could probably get a telescope that's definitely over 10M, maybe 20M wide, maybe you could be even bigger if you fold it right, but I don't .

I think that's probably going to be the route because, just like building the James network was a huge challenge to get all the parts working properly, reducing the weight of each component of the telescope, the budget went up and up and up to 10 billion dollars, much more than anyone plans to make and I don't think people want to make that mistake again, they don't want to deliver a telescope that will be over budget and late, they want to build a telescope and they want to deliver it on budget and on time , so I wouldn't be surprised if the Next Generation Large Space Telescope is more like Hubble, more like Nancy Grace Roman, it's a tube within a tube, but the idea that I

real

ly like is or orbit construction, so Instead of just launching one launch that has the entire telescope in it, what if you launched one component at a time like we did with the International Space Station?

You launch the main bus, it has robotic arms, then you launch the primary mirror and it assembles the primary mirror with its robotic arms. You know the telescope builds itself or you have astronauts flying to it, so there are a lot of options. Something like Starship gives you a relatively low cost to launch a large quantity. of mass with a large fairing and if it works, which we still don't know if it will work at this point, it will be a GameChanger, but even the worst possible iteration where you have to destroy both Starship and super heavy with each launch.

That gives an amazing capacity to the new Trenton 3779 telescopes. How do they measure the length of the day or the speed of rotation on gaseous planets? They do not have a solid surface. Yes, you're absolutely right and this is a bit of a soft question because when you look at planets like say Jupiter, the speed at which the planet appears to be spinning at its equator is different from the speed at which it appears to be spinning at its poles. in several minutes, so you have to ask yourself what part of Jupiter you're talking about because you get these differential wind speeds that occur on the planet and therefore parts of the planet spin faster than others, so that's one way to ask the question and if you want to say, how long does it take for the Great Red Spot to disappear? around the planet is about 9 hours and 50 minutes and you could have that as a way to measure the rotation speed but that's just part of it, think about the core, maybe there is a more solid core inside Jupiter, how long does it take that and how much?

Know? Because you can't see the surface features like you can on Mars or Mercury and the way they do that is by measuring the magnetic field that comes out of the jump, it's incredibly strong, very obvious, and these types of magnetic fields exist. field features that rotate with the planet, so they look at Jupiter's magnetic field and measure for that magnetic field feature to return to the same location and that gives them a number again of about 9 hours and 50 minutes, but Saturn is more complicated. one and, in fact, has defied any attempt to measure its rotational speed until just a couple of years ago.

If you asked a planetary scientist five years ago what the rotation speed of Saturn was, they would say I don't know what it is. Like about 10 hours and 30 minutes, but we don't know for sure, so you go through the same process like you can't tell it from the speeds of the clouds because the clouds move at different speeds that you can't really tell apart. the magnetic field because it doesn't have this really powerful and precise magnetic field in the same way that Jupiter does, so any attempt to measure rotation speed based on the magnetic field just didn't work and it's only in recent years that scientists have They discovered a really clever trick: they didn't look at the planet itself, but they looked at the Rings and there were these waves, these gravitational waves that are caused in the Rings, they are like standing waves and they were able to find those waves. on Cassini data and they were able to map how long it takes those standing waves to go around the planet and they found that it takes 10 hours, 33 minutes and 38 seconds, so it wasn't until 2019 that we finally knew what the length of the day is on Saturn , so you can take that idea and take it to any other planet where you're looking for features in the atmosphere that rotate, you're looking for the magnetic field, and then you're looking for potential rings, other things. like this to try to give you an idea of ​​how fast the planet rotates.

The other thing you can do is make all the planets flattened, for example Jupiter and Saturn spin so fast that they are flattened blobs. they're a little bit wider at their equators than they are, the distance across the equator is greater than the distance from pole to pole, but this is just spinning, so you don't really get an answer for how long it's happened, you know, it's just a question of how. For a long time, this is a spinning spheroid, but you can have interactions with other planets and things like that, so the spheroid also gets a little bit of torque and suddenly now it's more like a soccer ball that's spinning and you can have an idea, but it's been really complicated to do, that's not very precise.

This method of looking at Saturn's rings was the most accurate way to give them the answer they were looking for. Alex just Alex, what would a total solar eclipse look like from the Moon? How long? would last the entirety. I'm glad you asked now. I just saw the total solar eclipse from Dallas for the first time, as I tried to see it in 2017, but there were clouds so I didn't get a chance to see the full eclipse, but this time 2024 in Dallas with perfectly clear skies. I saw it. I saw the large prominence of the crown at the bottom right.

It was incredible, it was perfect. Sorry, what was I talking about again. Oh, right, your question. So, from our perspective on Earth. we see the sun and then we see the moon taking out this piece of the sun, but from space what you see is the shadow of the moon falling on the earth and moving across the planet and fortunately there were a lot of spaceships that were observing this. event, then there were the astronauts aboard the International Space Station flying orbitingaround the Earth and they orbited over the area of ​​the eclipse and in fact you can see there is a video where they can be seen talking about the eclipse while they fly over one. of the Go satellites, these are weather satellites, the lights I could see the full clip and you see the shadow, this time lapse image of the Shadow comes in from the bottom corner up across the Earth, it moved across North America and came out the top. from Canada and then go back into space, but your question was what would it look like from the Moon and would it look pretty much the same as that Go image, but we actually got some images of the solar eclipse from the Moon.

Now there is no spacecraft on the surface of the Moon that could have taken a photo, but NASA's Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter was in orbit around the Moon. I'm sure they had planned this very carefully. They were able to look back, look at the Earth, and take a photograph of the Shadow of the eclipse moving across the Earth. So how long would totality last? Throughout the entire path of the Eclipse, you would see the Fall of the Shadow. and then move across the planet and then come back out of the top, the total duration of the eclipse depends on where the shadow falls on the planet and how much planet it has to cross, but it's hours in which it's going to happen.

It takes hours as it moves from one end of planet Earth through the planet and then out the other end. Sashel Naran, do you have any suggestions for a backyard telescope hobbyist? He has asked a question that really starts a rabbit hole. I mean, how? Do you want to dive down the rabbit hole of being a garden telescope hobbyist? You can buy a very inexpensive telescope for a couple hundred dollars or you can spend tens of thousands of dollars more to build the perfect backyard telescope, so I'm not going to go there. to go into all the options, but I can give the quick answer that is best for most people and that is to buy a Dobsonian.

Most people who want to get a telescope and be able to see the night sky tend to do so. live in cities and are really excited to be able to see the planets you want to see the rings of Saturn you want to see the moons of Jupiter you want to see the Great Red Spot you want to see the polar caps on Mars you want to be able to see the incredible craters on the surface of the Moon , you want to get a solar filter and be able to see the sunspots and the bumps on the sun and you can do all that with a Dobsonian telescope and that's not a specific provider that's one type of telescope, they're very simple to use, they're built very simple way, but they are very powerful and really offer you the best value you can buy as an 8 inch Dobsonian for under $500. which sounds like a lot of money, but an 8 inch telescope is a lot of telescope, you can see the moons of Saturn, the moons of Uranus, you can see really precise objects in space with an 8 inch telescope and yet very simple To use, you see one thing in the sky, you simply point your telescope, look through the viewfinder and then look at that object, you can set it up quickly, invite your friends to watch the telescope show.

Seeing Saturn's rings for the first time is very satisfying and the good thing about a Dobsonian is that they also work very well in dark skies, so if you live in a city with light pollution you won't be able to see any more dimly. nebulae and galaxies and things like that, but you can take that telescope, go somewhere that doesn't have a lot of light pollution and suddenly you can see all kinds of other objects, you can see comets, so that's my number one recommendation for like most of people, if you just want to get a telescope, get a dobsonian now, if that $500 for a dobsonian is too expensive for you and it is for a lot of people, then you can build these things yourself, you can go on saying Alibaba or In others places like wholesalers, you can buy the mirrors, which are just the main primary mirror, you can buy the secondary mirror, you can buy some other mounts and parts and you can put together a telescope like that if you're handy for less. of $100 so you know if you have the money, buy a dobsonian, if you don't have the money, build a dobsonian and that's like for 95%, if you don't have a telescope the answer is, buy a dubs sonian, yeah you have a telescope and then you want to get into other things, like taking pictures of the sky with a telescope, you know, if you want to get into astrophotography then that's a completely different topic, there are a lot more branching options that I can talk about if yes. people want to hear about it, I know you want to hear about it, okay let's get into it, so let's say you want to take the next step and you want to take some real photographs of the night sky, there are two main paths.

Going the route that is relatively inexpensive is to buy a tracking mount for a camera, so if you already have a digital camera then it's really about the tripod, you can buy these tracking mounts, they are relatively inexpensive, they only cost a couple of hundreds of dollars if you set up your camera. above, you already have a nice fancy DSLR camera, it probably has different types of lenses, wide area lenses, narrow lenses and you can use it to take pictures of the night sky and it's amazing what you can do with that for a couple. hundred the other route and this is the one I don't recommend unless you are absolutely sure and committed, it will cost you thousands and thousands of dollars if you build a telescope rig so you will need a really good mount. a really good telescope, a camera system tracking software and a bunch of other things that will cost you thousands of dollars and there is a third option that has come out in the last few years that I like for some people and these are these telescopes intelligent automated robotics out there. the stelina, there's the EV scope, uh, there's the midget, there are a ton of these now and they take a lot of the complexity out of this process.

It's like it has a built-in telescope. It has the software to run it. It has the mount. all built into the camera system and all you have to do is take these things, put them down, they find out where they are on the ground, take a couple of pictures of the night sky, find out what their orientation is and then you can choose objects that you want to see from an app on your phone and then it will look for those objects and start taking pictures of them and you'll actually take pictures of galaxies or nebulae or things like that, and some of them have light pollution filters, so you can take pictures when you're in the middle of a city, they're amazing and you know they always say the best camera to use is the one you have on you and often we generally take pictures with our phones and the great thing about these robotic telescopes, these automated telescopes, is that are very easy to use, they work very reliably, you are going to use them.

The downside is that the images aren't as good as what you could get if you built a telescope with all the separate parts and set it up because there's a lot more customization and these things are expensive, I mean on the lower end I think you can get them for about $1,000, but for the much better ones they cost about $4,000 and So you have to have a lot of money if you want to be able to buy one of those things, but they are very easy to use, they take good pictures and you will use them a lot, so I hope The last advice is everyone's.

You're going to be yelling at me, so yes, if you want to find out if observational astronomy or amateur astronomy is something for you, the best place to start is with a pair of binoculars. Astronomical binoculars cost around $100 and already look for ones like Celestron makes a great pair, the Sky Master Series, you can take them and they are a completely different and wonderful experience, you can see the planets that you can barely make out, say, the rings of Saturn or the moons of Jupiter, with these binoculars. see comets fainter deep sky objects, you can see the Moon looks amazing and you can take them on trips with you, so there are plenty of options starting with binoculars and going all the way up to the Dobsonian.

Decide if you want to take photos. Decide if you want to use the DSLR. route with a follow-on mount or automated telescope or you want to build a more complicated rig, but it's that complicated rig that gets you into the 10,000 20,000 $100,000 range. Hope that helps, good luck if you want to support the work we do at Universe today. By joining our Patreon club, your support allows us to have minimal ads and no sponsorship messages. Sponsors do not receive ads on Universe.com for life. If you want additional parts of the livestream that aren't in this edited version, you can sign up for a special.

Receive user-exclusive podcasts and get overtime segments as well as other special behind-the-scenes episodes, including our monthly user-only quiz show. Thank you to everyone who has already subscribed and welcome to our newcomers Scott Donnelly Mark Woods Linda Jerka Anne Burnside Le Croft Jeremy Waldrup Michael muh Patrick eeken Charles shopon Michael Meyer and Uchi Naga join the club on patreon.com Universe today papa Biden who are the true guardians of

science

there are no guardians of

science

the scientific community is a vast group of human beings around the world in hundreds of different countries who work for different organizations people who work in universities people who work in governments in agencies research space agencies like NASA I mean they are all different people and then they will do their various research work which is funded in different ways in some cases they are funded by rich sponsors, in some cases they are funded by governments, they are funded by universities, they are funded by corporate interests, so they are funded in many different ways and generally scientists will do their work and publish the results of their work in journals and the journals are owned by different publishing groups so there are no

gatekeepers

individuals to go through all this material and decide this is shown, this is shown, this is not shown, whatever it is, it's just you.

It's kind of like saying who are the

gatekeepers

of I don't know, the economy, as if there are so many players that are moving in this at the same time. I think there are incentives that tend to push scientists in different directions. You know there's this idea from Publishing or Parish that the economy of scientists is doing a lot of science and the way you've shown that you've done a lot of science is by publishing your results in peer-reviewed journals, the most prestigious ones. the journal, the better and by doing that, then you can interact with your colleagues and review each other's work and go from there, and then the scientists are the ones who, I guess, are peer reviewing your work and therefore if you write an article and it is published in a magazine, then you put up a flag and say: I have discovered something.

I have discovered something. I think there is phosphine in the atmosphere of Venus, for example, and that could be an indication that there is life on Venus and then other scientists will take your work and examine it carefully step by step and then think they will try to find any mistakes that you made. task. could have done and then they're going to respond that they're going to write their own article that says it references their work and says here are all the ways that person said this, but I think it's wrong and here are my results, so Now we have two competing scientific theories that are published in articles and then more scientists will try to discover all the fragments and break these theories and what can survive the longest is the one that is widely considered to be the best theory of the time, so , who is the real science?

Keep the Guardians of nature, the laws of the universe are the true Guardians of the gate, all science is trying to do is describe reality and if what it is describing is not correct, it is not doing it accurately. they reflect reality itself, then it's only a matter of time before reality rears its head and shows them the truth and hopefully when people review your work and peer review it, they can get to reality as quickly as possible , but I think anyone who thinks there's such a thing as a way to control reality, I don't understand how that's possible, like I said, reality has a way of revealing itself, uh, and those are the laws, Andrew, what are you going to do differently? to prepare for your next eclipse?

So I mean everyone I talk to. After having seen this eclipse, they say I want to see another one, what will be necessary and unfortunately the next eclipses will not be as easy to see as this one. I mean, this one just went through Mexico, United States. and Canada passed through huge cities, it was on land for most of its journey, so you could choose where you wanted to go depending on how good the weather was for the next eclipse. It is much more complicated to be in Iceland in a small part on the outskirts of Ruic and Iceland or you can be in that small part of Spain and Portugal, so there will bea large concentration of people in those two areas, the one in North Africa, which will be a little complicated because Go to the Mediterranean Ocean and brush the top of Africa a couple of times.

The Australian one looks great and you know you can go anywhere along the eclipse path in Australia, but I guess there are a few places you'll want to go. go or in New Zealand, um, which apparently people tell me is a real place, so this is complicated. I mean, if you're going to try to go see the next eclipse, you're going to go places that everyone else is going to try to go to. go and look and it will be a very different story, there will be a huge concentration of humanity in the few places where you will be able to see the eclipse and it will be a little difficult to get to them, so I don't know if I'm going to try to go see the next eclipses, but you know it's going to be a lot more complicated than just getting on a plane to visit my wife's family and see an eclipse, so yeah, I'm not doing it.

I don't know what the plan is, but I think it's always the same. Whenever you try to see an eclipse, like I said on the last show, you treat it like a heist, you don't treat it like a vacation, you're trying to maximize your chances of seeing it. clips, you have to go to the places where you are likely to have the best weather. You should make sure you have ground transportation on the day of the eclipse so you can get to a place where you can see it, and you should be flexible. all the time, so I would do that.

I think this time, when I see another one, I will probably try to take pictures as if after having seen it with my eyes, it is worth trying to capture the moment because every eclipse is different. I was listening to an interview with Fred Espenak, known as Mr Eclipse, he works for NASA and we rely on his data to know when eclipses happen, what parts will be visible in their entirety, he runs all these great simulations and says you can just look at an image of an eclipse and you know which one it was because the shape of the corona, the location of the prominences in the eclipse are different and therefore each one is unique.

Now I want to watch them all again anyway. Don't know. It's complicated. Thoughts on Sky Overlay Phone Apps. I've tried a few of these phone apps and I'm not a big fan and maybe it's because I know too much and I've learned my constellations so I can go out under dark skies. I can look up and I can calculate my bearings. I know if it's in summer. I'm looking at certain constellations. If it's winter, there are different constellations and those phone overlays work, but. I don't really feel like people learn anything from them. Don't know. It's like you take the phone and you hold it up and it shows you what the object is in the sky or what the star is or what the constellation is.

It is, but it doesn't stick in your brain the same way and there are a group of people who are watching this right now who learned your constellations the hard way, which is to say you went out with a small telescope or binoculars night after night. and I learned which star was what and how to find Hercules and how to find the Big Dipper and how to go from one star to another and you were able to find Andromeda, which was really complicated and little by little the sky changes boys, there are so many. stars for oh, there's Gemini, oh, there's Leo, right, and that process is really valuable and if you're going to use that phone app to show you that constellation, you're going to drill it into your brain and you're going to come out and you're going to confirm, oh what is that, it's Leo again, it looks like an upside down question mark, uh, with a triangle behind it, so if you use that, then it's cool, it tells you what it is and then you memorize it. go out and you memorize it again great and eventually you don't need the phone app and I think that's the goal: you don't want to have the phone app, you want to be able to go outside and look up at the sky. and feel at home, feel that this is a map of the universe that you recognize that you are comfortable with, that it is very familiar to you and that it is the place you want to get to, so whatever method you use to get there is fantastic, use a phone. a book, um, but it gets there because it's worth it Christopher Jacobson, how will Japan prevent astronauts from bringing dust to their pressurized thief Artemis?

It seems dangerous to be working and sleeping with all that dust in the habitat, so this question is a continuation of the news we announced in the space bites this week where the Japanese space agency is going to build a pressurized rover for an upcoming Artemis mission, probably Artemis 7 and this is designed to keep astronauts safe and secure in a pressurized environment on the moon, it's like a wheeled spacecraft that circles the moon for 30 days, so it's going to have to have atmosphere for 30 days to be able to keeping the astronauts alive, but in shirt sleeves and not having to wear a space suit like they did with the lunar rover.

They went with the Apollo mission, but you are absolutely right that the lunar regolith is a gigantic problem and it is a problem only for the Rover on the surface of the Moon, since the Rover will be driving around this small crystal. like if regali gets into all the mechanical parts and causes wear and tear on the Rover, what is the solution? Go slow, try to minimize the amount of this regolith that gets up and gets so much into the mechanics of this seal. as little as possible so that there are very few places where these things can enter, but the question you ask yourself is what happens to the Astron if the Astron leaves the Rover and wanders around the surface of the Moon. and then they go back to the Rover, they're going to track this regolith inside the Rover and then potentially they're going to breathe it in, it causes lung irritation, maybe something more dangerous in the future, we definitely want to avoid that, so there's a couple of ideas for that is that NASA was testing this idea with a previous iteration of the Rover that would have the suits that the Lunar Excursion suits would be on the outside of the Rover and they would sort of be bolted to the outside of the Rover. and then the astronauts would put on the suits from inside the Rover and then they would separate and then they would walk on the surface of the Moon and then it would be time to get back to the Rover, they would push their backs against the open side of the Rover.

They open a portal and then return to the rotor, so at no time do the suits go from outside the Rover to inside the Rover, they always remain outside. I think that's probably the solution they're going to find. You have to go and then you can imagine that as the Rover crawls on the surface of the Moon, it will have these multiple space suits like they are stuck on the back of the Rover, so this problem is partially solved. solved, but there are also a lot of other technologies that NASA and other agencies are working on right now to try to solve this problem and it will probably be some type of electrostatic field, so at NASA they are trying with one of the next intuitive Releases of machines, they are testing a material designed to repel lunar dust with electromagnetism, so we know that this dust is charged like static electricity, so if you run a current along a surface where this material could fall, you should be able to repel it and it's going to fall apart, so I think you're going to have evasion where you're just trying to minimize the amount of these reguli that get into the Rover, you're going to have mitigation where you're going to try to minimize the amount that can actually stick to any surface. and then you will clean the place where they will be with sponges cleaning this regul to try to get rid of it so that it does not cause a danger inside the spacecraft, it is a big problem, although probably one of the biggest unsolved problems in space exploration in the Moon right now, you know, what did that Gamay explosion do to the Earth?

So, I mean, we see a lot of Gamay explosions, but I think you're talking about the one that happened in 2022, it was very powerful about two billion light years away and it was so powerful, remember, two billion light years away. , but it was so powerful that it actually caused ripples on Earth. ionosphere that were detectable and then you know that the ionosphere is one of the layers around the Earth and it actually rippled because of this Gamay burst that hit the Earth. This was because it was a very powerful Gamay burst, but these things are a big problem and in fact, astronomers are still not 100% sure what causes them.

We know that one type of Reb gamma burst is caused by the collision of neutron stars, which was the Kinova event we saw just a couple of years ago and which matches some of the observations. From some of these gamma bursts you get these two neutron stars that orbit each other and merge and you get this tremendous release of energy and specifically you get these outgoing jets that go along the poles of the detonation and if one one of those is If it is pointed towards the Earth, then it can hit the planet, but it is another type of explosive explosion and astronomers are still figuring out exactly what its cause is, but it seems quite likely that it is the collapse of the core of a extremely massive star, so think about the types of stars. that are in the large Mulin Cloud, the ones that have dozens, if not more, a hundred times the mass of the sun, when one of them dies, it is a catastrophic event and it could be something a little more complicated, like maybe in has like a binary companion and that helps drive these really powerful Jets and these are the ones that can be billions of light years away and still have a noticeable effect and a gam birth like it's pointed at Earth and it's half a galaxy away . like it's on the other side of the galaxy, it can still cause tremendous damage to planet Earth, it can weaken the ozone layer and having less ozone layer is a big problem for life on Earth, now you're getting a lot more radiation . from space and that is why it is believed that these gamy explosions, if they occurred nearby and hit the Earth, could have been the cause of mass extinctions in the past.

Now the good news is that we don't know of any potential stars that could cause gamma explosions in our vicinity, but they can affect you from such a great distance that they could be in the middle of the galaxy, they could be an Andromeda and still have an effect on the galaxy. Earth, well, that's all the questions we received this week, thanks to everyone who asked questions. in the YouTube comments but also thanks to everyone who joined me for the live show we recorded this live show every Monday at 5:00 p.m. PST right here on the YouTube channel, you should check out the event for the next one and you'll want to like it, click the button that reminds you that it's happening at 5:00 p.m. m.

PST, the show is twice as long as what you're watching here, so I think you're having a great time. Join the chat with the other people watching the show. It's a very good time, all right. I'm coming. Recommend another small YouTube channel but first I would like to thank our father thanks to Abe Kingston Andre gross Dennis alberty dou Stewart Dustin cable Jeremy M Jim Burke Jordan young Josh Schultz Mark Anis Modo Paul robox Steven Kaki stepen fer Munley and Vlad chiplin who support us at the master of the universe level and to all our sponsors, all your support means the universe to us, so thank you to everyone who recommended me little YouTube channels.

This has been great. I found a bunch of new channels I had. I've even seen it before and it's a really tough time to be on YouTube right now to start a channel at the same time you're in the middle of all this AI nonsense and if you don't have a lot of subscribers and you're still giving out good information, how do you Do people know you're legit compared to people who aren't? And the only way we can do this right now, that I can imagine, is word of mouth, which doesn't seem very effective, but we're going to do our part, so this week I want to direct you to a channel called Cosmos Elementary and not I can't believe they only have about 6,000 subscribers at the time I'm recording this.

They've made tons. of really interesting videos, we have stuff about the horizons of the universe, how the galaxy is colonized, myths and misconceptions about the speed of light and like I've never seen this channel before and yet I watch it and they are and they are Son really good ones so check out Cosmos Elementary so keep those channel recommendations coming. People who have less than 10,000 subscribers. We are doing a very accurate job of teaching ourselves about space, astronomy and other sciences too if we run out of it. Those of space and astronomy, very good, see you next week.