In your discussion of the Artemis program, you refer to it as a "joint project between NASA and the European Space Agency". Please note that the Canadian Space Agency and the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency are both very active participants and contributors to this program. Canada's main contribution is the design and construction of the "Canadarm 3" robotic manipulator. A Canadian astronaut will be part of the first Artemis crew to land on the Moon. It seems to me that these contributions deserve at least a passing mention in your coverage..

@DrBecky

Жыл бұрын

My apologies!

@dhwang101

Жыл бұрын

It's curious that NASA can find way to work with Russia but not with China

@geesehoward700

Жыл бұрын

whos making the window screen wipers?

@DNTMEE

Жыл бұрын

Canada has an actual, honest to goodness space program with launch vehicles and everything? Or is a government supported Canadian firm simply the contractor building the arm?

@unconcernedbeast9190

Жыл бұрын

8:55 i hate that they picked a colored person and a woman to let them land on the moon . obama was random they did not say let pick a black guy and make him the new the president .he did it himself it was beautiful the colored person and women did not deserve their place i hate this world . that like saying let put the first black guy on everest so they carried him there

Another fantastic episode Dr Becky! As a former astrophysicist I’m in awe of your communication of complex concepts. Have you ever thought about doing a book on how to do science communication well? Love this channel and your super massive podcast

@tracyavent-costanza346

Жыл бұрын

how can someone be a FORMER astrophysicist. once you have invested that much time and gold toward learning something, NOBODY can take it away from you.

@deepakmahtani2667

Жыл бұрын

@@tracyavent-costanza346 that’s a very good question, I left academia unfortunately after my PhD

@tracyavent-costanza346

Жыл бұрын

@@deepakmahtani2667 WRT "... I left academia unfortunately after my PhD.." good choice on when to leave. I hope you found a decent job on the "outside". In college they called that the "real world" and once in it, I seemed to detect that it really was not all that different. Except I got paid.

Artemis (and to a large degree Apollo) were more engineering efforts than scientific ones. There is a huge amount to be gained from the discoveries and inventions required by these efforts. They expand human knowledge and capability just as scientific discover does.

@rickrocks007

Жыл бұрын

But it's such a boondoggle. It never should have been continued when Obama said kill it. They authorized using private space companies and should have killed the massive humongous multi-corporate, multi-country, program which after so many years of delay, still won't be the best rocket built in the USA by the year 2024.

@sjaakderksen531

Жыл бұрын

The gain in engineering knowledge during Apollo which made amongst others JWST possible and indirectly advances in science possible. In that respect I agree it's possibly not Artemis which brings the same amount of engineering advances but more likely private space companies. Imagine what kind of space telescopes could be launched with starship? Likewise they pose a risk: take for instance Starlink obstructing the view from Earth.

@rorykeegan1895

Жыл бұрын

Artemis is an engineering bad joke. Its a Frankenstein rocket and completely bonkers. Its cost a fortune to save money!

@StephensEFRC

Жыл бұрын

Tosh

@tracyavent-costanza346

Жыл бұрын

agreed. in "engineering" often a FAILURE teaches you more than a "success" does. And let's face it, the US space program has had there share. the MOTIVE might have been "science" (at least in part) but the METHOD was engineering.

Scientists: "Our research results won't make sense without context!" Media: "Scientists say, their research make no sense!"

@tracyavent-costanza346

Жыл бұрын

lack of context never seemed to bother research mathematicians.

@ticktockbam

Жыл бұрын

@@tracyavent-costanza346 Mmmh, I wonder why that would be? It's not like they'd need any context in pure mathematics.

@tracyavent-costanza346

Жыл бұрын

@@ticktockbam WRT "... It's not like they'd need any context in pure mathematics..." precisely my point.

Having once seen the night sky from remote places in NZ and Canada, it's tragic that I have to search for the milky way. 😒

@maksphoto78

Жыл бұрын

I feel you bro! I grew up in an Estonian town where street lights were rare, and you could see this hazy band of light all across the sky.

@JohnRodriguesPhotographer

Жыл бұрын

Light pollution sucks. Necessary because of criminals

@limiv5272

Жыл бұрын

@@JohnRodriguesPhotographer How about just seeing where you're going when it's dark outside and cars not crashing into each other? Even without criminals those lights would be necessary

@JohnRodriguesPhotographer

Жыл бұрын

@@limiv5272 I use something we like to call headlights

@limiv5272

Жыл бұрын

@@JohnRodriguesPhotographer They're not enough, that's why intersections have to be well lit, at least in my country.

I will never forget HOW I learned about Betelgeuse dimming. I was setting up my telescope in the backyard getting ready to do some observing, and I looked at Orion and something felt WRONG. Took me a minute to figure out what was triggering that feeling, but I'll never forget that "uncanny valley" sensation from looking at the sky. It was like Lovecraftian cosmic horror stuff. Jumped online to make sure my eyes weren't playing tricks on me.

Dr Becky's delivery is joyous, just hearing her deliver these videos makes the day all the better 😀

Let me get this straight: you're a full-time astrophysicist, you write, produce, and edit your podcasts, you wrote a new book, AND you narrated that book. WHEN DO YOU SLEEP? I'm really not complaining - I'm in awe. And envious. Mostly in awe. And VERY appreciative of the awesome output.

@timl.b.2095

Жыл бұрын

Exactly my feeling. Not to mention she's an *award-winning* astrophysicist. (See her Wikipedia page.)

@likegoodvino

Жыл бұрын

I was thinking the exact same thing @Michael! She is a totally inspiring human being!

I just wanna say that I hope you’ll continue this channeI. I know you’re busy with work and just life in general. You’re enthusiasm for the Cosmos is just contagious though. I have nobody in my life who even remotely cares to hear me talk about anything space-related. Even when I’m familiar with a topic you’re covering, you always make it exciting and I learn something new each time. -just a big fan :)

I think the discussion about Artemis funding is a bit of a false dichotomy. The money was made available to fund Aretemis because it is a big prestige project and kept jobs going in key states/congressional districts. If there was no Artemis project, the money wouldn't have been budgeted.

@sundhaug92

Жыл бұрын

Yeah. Utah, Texas, Florida, California,... it's a massive jobs-program

@finkergamer8557

Жыл бұрын

Maybe I'm still asleep, but yeah - if there is no project, there is no project.

@xEvilRaptorx

Жыл бұрын

@@finkergamer8557 ...then there is no funding*

@aspuzling

Жыл бұрын

I don't see how it's a false dichotomy. If Congress had not funded Artemis, they would have had more tax money available to fund other science or non-science programmes.

@HappyMathDad

Жыл бұрын

​@@aspuzling I don't see how the elemental curiosity of humans has to be restricted to basic science. Many people want to see humans in space. And it would be a huge achievement just as basic science. Both are valid from a human perspective. It seem narrow-minded to say only basic science deserves funding.

There's a PR and visibility benefit to sending people back to the moon which will I suspect will inspire future generations to get involved far more than perhaps a bunch of smaller, much less visible missions. There's nothing more inspirational than humans overcoming huge technical hurdles to achieve something spectacular. I would say the more people are inspired by events like this, the better that for is space science in the long run.

@garethbattersby

Жыл бұрын

I would more focus on a mixed nation team than skin colour and genitalia. Especially with everything going on now. If we had a team of American, European and Asian astronauts that would be more symbolic I feel. When we last went it was one nation, now we return as a global team.

@stevenwilson5556

Жыл бұрын

@@garethbattersby I agree. The identity politics isn't inspiring, but multiple nations being involved absolutely is.

@anoyingnomad

Жыл бұрын

JWST is also one of those achievements!

@LouDeeCruz

Жыл бұрын

Yes and JWST has given us amazing data showing how the latest Big Bang theory predictions have failed again! Last time the BBT failed was when distant supernovae lightcurves failed to show time dilation . And the theorists had to make up imaginary acceleration to prevent the BBT from being thrown onto the scrap heap of science history along with flat earth theory.

I feel us finally going back to the moon opens so many new doors for us into space travel and observing our universe more. Imagine building a 50m telescope on the moon!

In the long term, what we learn from going to the moon and establishing a permanent base there were inform our efforts to eventually go to Mars. If you read NASA's justifications for lunar missions that's one of the main selling points.

@lubricustheslippery5028

Жыл бұрын

We could go to Mars that is possible. Figuring out something worth wile doing on Mars and getting back is the problem. We already have Rovers taking samples on Mars. Sending bigger robotic drilling riggs and getting samples back to earth could be done cheaper without sending any squishy bags mostly made of water (Humans) to the barren and hostile planet.

@rezadaneshi

Жыл бұрын

Those are all baby steps Chris. World has never seen a leap like JWST because it will solve a huge number of our cold file questions. Humanity is at its pinnacle desperately needing technology that need understandings, that only JWST type of machine can deliver. There will never be a time machine like the ones in the movies. Well, that will destroy physics. But JWST is that kind of miracle that actually follows all of the lows of physics as we know them while evolving it. It’s only been a little over a month Chris. Wow

@ghoti221

Жыл бұрын

@@lubricustheslippery5028 The real question we’re trying to answer is whether humanity is stuck on Earth forever. Sending probes is all well and good, and the SLS has been a massive financial boondoggle IMHO, but at some point we have to learn to crawl out of our cradle, or humanity dies here. The pale blue dot wasn’t just a warning to take care of the only home we have, but a reminder that we need to leave home, or something is eventually going to get us.

@sisilotau2185

Жыл бұрын

What we need to actually do is send the willing to either the moon or Mars or both with the materials needed to at least attempt to set up a base or settlement of some kind. We are suffering from cold feet and the fear of disaster. And if we hope to colonize anything outside the earth that needs to end. It's a must we must do everything possible to avoid deaths or life long injury in the possible, but we need to actually take the risk numerous times before we can ever hope to get a footing outside Earth. We only need to look at history of how setting up colonies on earth took place to figure out that it is very dangerous even on our own planet, but enough attempts with those who are willing will eventually prove fruitful. But just thinking and planning and sending robots will never actually make it happen. Humans need to be sent to actually make progress and it won't always be pretty, but if we send the willing, they will eventually figure it out, and they'd do it quicker and better than if we just keep theorizing

@witchdoctor6502

Жыл бұрын

Exactly! This is just a baby step for humanity to colonize the sol system. Scientifically we can do better with that kind of money, but this is to inspire and show everyone what we can do right now and for us to imagine what we can do in upcoming decades if we (really) want to.

In my view, Artemis is like marketing. It costs a big clump of money, but one of the dividends is increased public interest in space - and hence, increased funding. People tend to engage more with other people on the ground than they do robots, even if the robots can get the actual job done just as well or better. That's one massive marketing budget, though.

@SpaceCadet4Jesus

Жыл бұрын

...and a few deaths along the way.

I guess the important science related to Artemis is really things like testing improved space suits and the other periphery equipment required for humans to visit other planets. The fact that humans havnt landed on another body in space in 50 years means that there may be a huge backlog of equipment related to those kinds of missions that hasnt really been tested. If we ARE to go to Mars, knowing where we stand with that equipment has to be considered the first step. Also... If Betelguise dies in our lifetimes that would be wild... Orion, one of the most important constellations for ancient peoples would be changed forever. Wild.

@tonywilson4713

Жыл бұрын

As an aerospace engineer who graduated in the late 80s, I can say for change you're someone on the right path. There's an extraordinary backlog of stuff that was never fully developed or deployed on any mission. I normally hate these discussion because so many people hear so many things via social media that they never hear what we went through. In 1985 we were expecting to not only build the next space station by the mid 90s but be back on the moon BEFORE or just around the year 2000. Then January 28, 1986 happened Challenger blew up during the launch and reality came down like a hammer. I was actually in Orlando and watched Columbia take of only 16 days earlier. I would have like to be way closer but form 60 miles away it was staggering. Looking back the space shuttle was double edged. On one hand it was a spectacular technical success in that they made a reusable spaceplane actually work and nobody should ever misread that. On the other hand it utterly crippled our progress in manned exploration. It consumed 2 things in particular - money and man hours. That meant many other programs just didn't get funded as well as they needed or not funded at all. But even worse there wasn't the time spent, as in people actually working on things like life support for a moon base or long duration missions. There was a massive delay on new space suit design and there wasn't a heap of other things done. The ISS program is also similar. yes its done some amazing science but it has also consumed massive amounts of money and human time. Its saving grace is the testing and proving of technologies. The lame super slug in this has been SLS, which would take me a long time to explain, but its been a disaster so far. To not end up producing a decent result will be a catastrophe. So you are absolutely right. The main reason we need to go back to the moon is to simply do all those things we didn't do during the 90s or 2000s

@danilooliveira6580

Жыл бұрын

I think its less testing, since you can test it on earth, and more about proving it. the engineering and technological challenge we will have to overcome to do it will teach us a lot about more important missions, that is the difference between practical engineering and theoretical science, the best way to progress is by actually doing things and seeing what you learn from it. its also setting the path for future missions. proving everyone, specially the people handling the money, that we can have a reliable foothold on the moon will make it a lot easier to convince them to fund the next missions. having a long term base on the moon will not just be of extreme scientific significance (imagine all kinds of science we could do on the moon, imagine building a HUGE space observatory on the moon that we can only hope to do with the help of human hands), specially if we plan to go to mars, but can also have practical significance in the future, since the moon is the best place to get He-3 that we may need for some types of nuclear fusion since D/He-3 is not just one of the best reactions but T is on short supply.

@Kelnx

Жыл бұрын

This is absolutely the reason why we have to go to the Moon. If we're serious about eventually going to Mars, we can't just test proposed systems meant to keep astronauts alive on a base or colony on Earth and hope they work well in such a harsh environment. The Moon is right there, and if we can make things work there, we can make them work on Mars. I know some scientists argue that we shouldn't even bother sending humans anywhere for exploration, but they're only thinking about gathering science, not future of our species. There is a hard time limit for how long Earth can be habitable. We need to work towards the eventuality of finding ways to live in inhabitable places, and Mars will be a good first effort. But to get there, we need to test things in our own "backyard", which means the Moon.

@DrBecky

Жыл бұрын

The problem with that is that I don't think it is a good idea for humans to visit other planets. I talked about this the other day on my video about Mars. If you want to know if life existed on Mars, the worst thing you can do is send humans there because you contaminate the surface. Especially if you find life and then want to know if it had a common origin with Earth or not. Anything you find after humans have been will always be cast in doubt

@tonywilson4713

Жыл бұрын

@@Kelnx You're absolutely right on most of this. Despite the delta-v being similar the flight time to Mars just makes it a nightmare technological solution. You have people alive (food, water, oxygen, CO2,.....) for 6 months versus 3 days. In an emergency you could get people back from the moon in 3 days, while 6 months isn't an emergency option. As for the reason there are scientists NOT wanting to do manned missions, that's more complex than the future of our species. The species line is being pushed by people like Elon Musk and I can tell you its garbage. If we are to rely on Mars for survival we are already doomed. Its a longer discussion if you want to have it but Elon is pushing a fantasy. *Either we learn to properly manage this planet or we really are doomed.* The reason why many of those scientists want to use probes and rovers is because they are so cost effective at the moment to learn more about Mars and other planets. Don't forget we have been trapped in Low Earth Orbit for a few decades. If you look at my other comment there just hasn't been the resources to go anywhere. Right now, there's 2 rover missions that are obvious to me but I haven't seen ANYBODY propose. 1) Lunar South Pole to look for and analyse water. We know its there but we don't know what its actually like or how much is really there. So its a combination of survey and analysis. Is it just straight H2O or are there salts and dissolved minerals. We need to know what is actually there and what we can do with it. The monster problem is how do we power a rover inside those craters where there's no sunlight. I think the problem is that every answer so far produces 3 or more problems to solve. 2) Mars North or South Pole. Its pretty much the same for Mars but id' expect its a lot more expensive, because its Mars and its seriously cold at those poles and there'd be less light to charge batteries. So its more complex and I suspect like for a lunar south pole every solution produces 3 or more problems

I don’t think you’re wrong to voice your opinion from your perspective on Artemis. You’re thoughtful and explain your position which is what we should hope our scientists should feel free to do. It’s going forward though so I hope there is an inspirational effect worldwide that makes the investment worth it as you said, Apollo really moved the needle in so many disciplines.

As an engineer I’m excited by the willingness to push the limits of human exploration, just pushing in small steps doesn’t always break us through, we need the occasional punch.

@tyrantworm7392

Жыл бұрын

Couldn't agree more John. We've probably all worked on projects that have been piecemeal funded, and appreciate how hard it is to make substantial steps forwards in this environment. It's unusual for politicians to be willing to plan/spend beyond the current term, but is needed to progress this sort of ambition. Perhaps Becky will see the virtue in 30 years when we have an ELT on the moon.

@ronaldderooij1774

Жыл бұрын

We need your engineering punch in energy storage, decarbonising the atmosphere, water management, food production, reforestation techniques, ecofuels, etc. We don't need an engineering punch in space. The satellites we have work quite well.

@ShaneSemler

Жыл бұрын

It's not a zero-sum game.

@Chris-iv3bc

Жыл бұрын

Hell yeah brother! Einstein was a moron! Go back to classical physics. Why do we know everything? When we know nothing? Why? Go tell them to make people think. Bing bang is just made up story. Please... i'm an educated intellectual.... This Dr. Becky tells me no electricity in space?

@solsystem1342

Жыл бұрын

@@ronaldderooij1774 you say that like we can't do both? I'd love to see as much money put towards renewables as space travel but, we don't have to remove one to have the other. It's not like space travel takes up a significant fraction of any nation's budget.

It's so great to have Dr Becky to tell us about space news in that refreshing, comprehensive and accurate way.

@tracyavent-costanza346

Жыл бұрын

yeah, I made comments but really they are DETAILS and I think she's great. Even with the British-isms which yank English would probably be advised to borrow more from. Ye tosser, ye.

Chapter 4: Why black holes are "black." Chapter 7: Why black holes are not 'black." That sounds like a riveting plot twist.

I really like the way you project your presentation based on what you're conveying. You absolutely keep it real. And you don't silence at a time when something really should be noted as we've been trained to silence. You are absolutely amazing Dr. Becky, from pac-west WA.!!

I always thought that having a permanent presence on the moon would be a gateway to further exploration of the solar system, no? Would the Artemis missions not be the first step in creating that base? Would the complexity of creating a base on the moon not create many jobs for STEM personnel?

@Dragrath1

Жыл бұрын

Well there are a number of issues for example the Moon does have a lumpy gravitational field which tends to destabilize many orbits so as Artemis is built around that in the Lunar gateway it might limit the missions longevity. The point of this is a lot of the Artemis decisions don't exactly resemble the best long term solution but rather a lot Now as for jobs this here comes to the dirty truth about US industry and jobs is its largely guess work in the US the use of contractors and subcontracting to the point where there is a whole method to winning contracts via unrealistic proposals and then asking for more funds to make up the difference arguably via exploiting the Sunken cost fallacy. In this sense more money doesn't always mean more jobs because a lot of that goes to the same companies like Boeing or Northrop Grumman. Of course this is oversimplified but it was meant to show that there are lots of complexities and its less than an ideal system if job creation was the goal.

@MrHAPPYHAWAIIAN

Жыл бұрын

The moon would become a weapons system, designed for nuclear or high powered laser. Everything is militarized.

@lubricustheslippery5028

Жыл бұрын

Creating jobs by doing things in an inefficient and stupid way is always bad. The moon have lower gravity than earth and it's therefore easier to launch stuff from the moon than the earth. The problem is that we barely can do anything on the Moon so everything have to first be transported from earth to the moon and that is just worse than sending it directly to space. Maybe something like big telescopes on the Moon could be interesting?

@KJ-yk4nq

Жыл бұрын

Agree, if we survive long enough there's an inevitability to us becoming multiplanetary, the moon has got to be part of the picture in our earliest steps

@lubricustheslippery5028

Жыл бұрын

@@KJ-yk4nq That is in a very long term. To get there we should not send astronauts to space now. We should do real science and take care of the planet we can live on now so we have a better chance to get there.

So I'm not the only one frustrated by the naming of the Apollo program! As for the allocation... I think we need the Artemis missions. People have been legitimately losing interest in space, with the shuttle program shutting down, the ISS being slowly aged out, and a bunch of other decisions, the public face of space exploration has just bell constantly losing ground. There's a lot of important science going on, I'm fully aware of that, but a lot of that is extremely esoteric the the average person, or to the children learning about them from the news or in school. For a lot of us, even space nerds like me, most of what comes out boils down to a bunch of pretty pictures that look nice, but very little humanity to them. We don't just want to see stars, we want to see ourselves among them. I remember watching this big retrospective on the Apollo program, and they were easily focusing in on the question of whether or not it was worth it, and they came to the conclusion that there were so many things that we learned from the program, the successes and the failures, the intentional and the mistake, that would have been impossible to learn without actually doing them and sending people up there. Maybe there's less out there that absolutely requires a person to learn more than there wax then, but I still think that as valuable as observation and analysis are to science, there are still things we need to interact with, get our hands on, and things that we need to do, and be seen doing to keep our eyes on the sky.

@daedaluscenter2825

Жыл бұрын

it was named apollo becusase he was the god of light and education, which the program did

@AUTUMN-DARK

Жыл бұрын

Also the sun hits the moon and reflects back to earth.... The Apollo mission took men to the moon and then the they came back to earth so on many levels it makes sense.

I was born in 1968 and grew up in a world obsessed with the moon landings, it's the core of my inspiration and desire to know more about science, space, astrophysics and many other subjects.

@jahnghalt3864

Жыл бұрын

Born 1958 - Apollo was very much about "beating the Russians". IF they'd proved to be better at rocketry we'd may well have a real space-infrastructure now (see Kubrick's 2001)

Hi dr becky, whats up with the news that the schrodigner galaxy (red shift ~17)? exists around 200Mya which is far too early for galaxy formation? Is this related to the panic at the disco article?

Having a Moon base and then a Mars base will be great for exploring and exploiting the resources in the asteroid belt to make life better for us all.

NASA: We're going back to the moon. Dr. Becky: Is there a black hole on the moon? NASA: No. Dr. Becky: Funding denied! 🤪

Can't wait until Monday. Hope we have a video from you doc

Isn't the main benefit of returning to the Moon being a stepping stone to setting up a permanent base there which could be used as a stop off point for further reaching missions in the future?

@G360LIVE

Жыл бұрын

Yes.

@SpaceCadet4Jesus

Жыл бұрын

I don't think so. One big deterrent to a permanent manned base is the moon is a large electrostatic dirt ball with no water. The dust aggressively clings everywhere as it has been stripped of electrons by unabated radiation by the Sun. Earth dust is one thing, moon dust another. A major hurdle, among a host of others.

@rorykeegan1895

Жыл бұрын

The proposed Moon base is anything but permanent if SLS is involved. It simply makes the entire project financially silly in the extreme. Basically Artemis as proposed is a selfie opportunity for the NASA PR department and that's about it, given the meagre utilisation envisaged. It only begins to work by dumping SLS and Gateway, then utilising other assets such as Starship / Dragon or Starliner combinations to give us 24/7, 365 occupation of the Moonbase. Have a worthwhile goal, simplify the project, lower costs and increase the chances of success.

@tracyavent-costanza346

Жыл бұрын

yep, at this point primarily Mars missions but probably ultimately others to major moons.

For me personally. It's not the scientific objectives that matter in the Artemis mission. What matters is its symbolism. Like how the Apollo missions were a symbol of humanities first steps outside the confines of our planet, Artemis is the symbol of humanities first settlement of space. It is our first firm step into calling outer space our home. It is a small and pathetic step into the mind boggelingly vast and empty sea that is our universe, but is a step nonetheless. For better or for worse, all of humanities colonial expansion into our universe starts with Artemis being its key to unlock it.

@darren8453

Жыл бұрын

Yes and no. You can't really disentangle Apollo from the Cold War, from JFK's need for a distraction tactic at a time of political uncertainty, the collective will to fulfill the mission after his assassination, and the subsequent political hangover where Apollo missions were considered almost boring once the US had beaten the Soviets. Artemis is simply what happens when you don't have that kind of political capital driving something. And it for all its cost, in real terms it has cost something like a tenth of the try-anything, throw-money-at-problems approach of Apollo. But it has so obviously been a dinosaur project held together by pork in Congress for so long now that I can't muster much enthusiasm for it, knowing that it will be eclipsed in relatively short order and for a fraction of the cost by private space companies.

@TotalyKenyan

Жыл бұрын

@@darren8453 the jfk and the cold War happened and gave us the moon landing. Now we are actually try to collonise space. Little steps, it's OK to stop and take a chill pill

@darren8453

Жыл бұрын

@@TotalyKenyan eh? I was trying to say that Apollo has been romanticised as this wonderful humanitarian project, but in reality the reasons for it's inception and continued existence reflect more on our darker urges and self-preservation

@jonathanp89

Жыл бұрын

Artemis will also inspire a new generation.

@Mortico88

Жыл бұрын

I think most Americans, and most people generally, share the opinion that manned space exploration of other worlds should NEVER have been halted. Let's keep it going, this time!

Artemis isn’t all about the science, it has a chance of creating a future industry. What use is science if it doesn’t actually improve our lives. How many trees, desalination plants, and so on could have been planted or built with the funding of the JWST. Sometimes I think many scientist are lost in the numbers.

@daedaluscenter2825

Жыл бұрын

how many things do you use today that came from Apollo how many people are alive today because we went to the moon? you need to do so reading about it before you write something like that

@Curious_Traveler

Жыл бұрын

@@daedaluscenter2825 Wow just wow, you really should read what I actually wrote again. It sucks that we agree, because you are just so... I don't know what the right word would be.

@daedaluscenter2825

Жыл бұрын

@@Curious_Traveler oh sorry yes your right it's not you it was my mistake . I have seen all what Apollo has done for us all have watch every moon landing and know how it changed the world and been waiting for us to go back , the benefits that will come from Artemis will be so great and will help save the planet , once more I am sorry ad thank you for pointing out my mistake

@Curious_Traveler

Жыл бұрын

@@daedaluscenter2825 no worries, I am likewise looking forward to see what we can come up with, when we have new extremely large challenges.

I've been catching up on so many of your videos that when you said your new book was out next week I laughed smugly at all the people in the past that had to wait to buy it and figured out it's not out until tomorrow 😅 Pre-ordered and looking forward to it!

i think artemis is like a stepping stone for going to mars. Its like learning how to do this stuff again (since its quite a while since we did it the last time) to then have learning experience for the mars mission

@DrBecky

Жыл бұрын

The problem with that is that I don't think it is a good idea for humans to visit other planets. I talked about this the other day on my video about Mars. If you want to know if life existed on Mars, the worst thing you can do is send humans there because you contaminate the surface. Especially if you find life and then want to know if it had a common origin with Earth or not. Anything you find after humans have been will always be cast in doubt

The moon missions aren't about the science, they're about generating enthusiasm for space exploration and science. It's a PR exercise. And if it's successful, it will do a lot toward raising the tide that raises all the other science boats, as it were.

@EBDavis111

Жыл бұрын

It didn't work last time, why would it work this time?

@Siansonea

Жыл бұрын

@@EBDavis111 so, people weren't inspired by the moon missions back in the day?

@EBDavis111

Жыл бұрын

@@Siansonea No. The public was famously bored by them. It's why Congress cut the funding in the first place.

@Siansonea

Жыл бұрын

@@EBDavis111 so, all the footage and photos of people glued to the TV sets watching Apollo 11 land on the moon-fake news?

@EBDavis111

Жыл бұрын

@@Siansonea No, that was real. Then the ratings dropping for the next missions was also real. Did you forget about that? Or was that fake news? You ,know, peopel were glued to the TV for the MASH tv series finale. Do you think that corrolated with a public interest in science? Maybe we should reboot that series and end it again.

I think the strongest argument for the moon mission is pure inertia. It's less the mission itself than it is getting a process going of getting to the moon, and out into space generally, and doing things other than unmanned probes.

@alanlawless7750

Жыл бұрын

"Inertia" is your Strong Argument, at 4.1 billion per launch? Hope your not a lawyer, you'll starve.....

@danilooliveira6580

Жыл бұрын

yes, even if we ignore all the engineering and scientific rewards from the mission, things like this spark the interest in space exploration on people and investors. it will be what funds the next scientific missions and heat up the space race.

@DrBecky

Жыл бұрын

The problem with that is that I don't think it is a good idea for humans to visit other planets. I talked about this the other day on my video about Mars. If you want to know if life existed on Mars, the worst thing you can do is send humans there because you contaminate the surface. Especially if you find life and then want to know if it had a common origin with Earth or not. Anything you find after humans have been will always be cast in doubt

@StockportJambo

Жыл бұрын

@@DrBecky Respectfully, I think that's an astrophysicists view rather than an exobiologist's view. If we find microbes on Mars (which humans could do), they will be very obviously different from anything here on Earth to the trained eye... even if they both share a "common origin" like DNA.

@BlackEpyon

Жыл бұрын

@@DrBecky That assumes the goal for a human presence on Mars is science. Apollo was never about the science, but national prestige. In the case of Artemis, I think there's enough public will to justify going again. We've tootled long enough on the ISS, and anybody who's dreamed the dreams of Sci-Fi yearns for the time when Humanity will finally have a permanent presence outside of Earth. That will be a long and hard road, so we best get started.

I love the chapter titles of you book! 😂 Def gonna grab a copy.

Thanks for recommending a book from one of our favorite Numberphiles. I am not well versed on the Holographic Universe and look forward to learning more. Love what you do and looking forward to your book next week. Thanks for doing what you do!

20:14 - Amazing how Webb seems to just effortlessly break records every time we point it at anything. And we could be getting a couple of decades of observations from it!

Is the paperback version of your book in some countries earlier available? Because I received mine a week earlier than expected. I really love the books cover design!

@driverjayne

Жыл бұрын

The audiobook is already out, I listened to it like a week ago

@DrBecky

Жыл бұрын

International trade paperbacks are being sold. Retailers are supposed to wait until release date, but since international retailers get books ahead of time due to shipping they also send them out early. Hope you enjoy!

Dr. Becky, when I was in grade school, this would have been the late 70's, I was obsessed with black holes and did a science fair project all about what was known up to that point. Later I did a year of undergrad astrophysics but found I just didn't have the talent or the math chops and ended up going into the fine arts, but I'm an amateur astrophotographer and love to keep up with what is happening. I really enjoy your videos and have nothing but a deep respect for anyone who can get a Ph.D in astrophysics! I can't wait to catch up on my black hole knowledge with your book...so excited!

My Grandson's name is Orion. When I did the VIP tour at NASA I got to see behind the scenes of them preparing the Orion capsule and I got my Grandson a photo of it along with an Orion mission T-shirt. He's now about to turn 15 and see this mission in his lifetime. Huge. I'm so proud.

Love your work Becky! I do however agree with a lot of comments though (may be bias as I work with rocketry) the money spent on the Artemis program is valid for trying to push physical exploration and space construction beyond what we know. Unfortunately not in our lifetime, but something we could pass on. Imagine, how difficult it was to put JWST into space (due to it's size) and then if we expanded our space building capabilities, the size of a telescope we truly could achieve is (excuse the pun) astronomical!

Great video! I'm just excited for the Artemis mission in general. But also for all the other things going on. Been keeping an eye on JWST and Betelgeuse as well. As much as I **love** the constellation Orion, I think it would be so cool to be alive to see a supernova at that scale. Also, don't like motorbikes?! Sad face! :(

@WarrenParks

Жыл бұрын

I'm guessing it's the noise she doesn't like when trying to record a video.

Dr.Becky you make the info so much more lively your accent you sense of humor and the fact you rather pleasant on the eyes keep up the good work!

John Glenn made a visit to my elementary school in the early 90s, and while I know that space scares the hell out of me, he is also why I watch your channel. Someone has to be brave so that the least of us can be informed.

Has JWST looked as far back into time as it is capable of, or can it see further back than it has so far? If I understand correctly, it has only trained it's instruments in one area for about one day, which I assume means that it is capable of taking a far longer deep field observation, thus looking further back into our universe's history? Are there plans to take much longer deep field observations?

@defaultHandle1110

Жыл бұрын

Yeah and they likely saw something they don’t want to publish.

@smeeself

Жыл бұрын

@@defaultHandle1110 sigh

@MisterItchy

Жыл бұрын

@@defaultHandle1110 I think this may be the first time I've felt compelled to reply with an SMH but this certainly deserves one. SMH,

@HappyMathDad

Жыл бұрын

​@@defaultHandle1110 What, nobody wants to be the next Einstein? Successfully contradicting the status quo. Gets you the novel price.

@gerstmanndavid

Жыл бұрын

Is anyone capable of answering this question?

Hey Dr. Becky! Looking forward to your book. Congratulations again on it’s publication. As for manned space missions, I understand your feelings to a large extent. I really believe the future of human interstellar exploration and unlocking the secrets of the Cosmos will be automated probes, basically like it is now. However, I’m excited about Project Artemis for two reasons. 1) Having a future permanent manned instillation on the moon of, hopefully in the far future, considerable size may help ensure human survival of catastrophic extinction events either natural or man made. 2) The heavy lift capabilities of the rocket technology developed and the understanding of long duration manned flight could allow humanity to reach abundant natural resources in the asteroid belt that could improve life on Earth for all. I do have a question. Could you do a episode on how the galaxies in the universe move as the cosmos expand. Do the spin around expanding like a inflated balloon? Do they spin off in a uniform outwardly direction like a starburst from some centrally located Big Bang location? Do the meander away from each other like dust blowing in the solar winds? Do we even know how they move away from each other beyond the evidence that they are? Keep up the AWESOME, Dr. Becky!!!

@kukulroukul4698

Жыл бұрын

both are ugly and COWARD the book and the author

@vigilantcosmicpenguin8721

Жыл бұрын

I'm excited about Project Artemis for one reason: 1) It's awesome.

@MaryAnnNytowl

Жыл бұрын

Spiff, I agree with you 100% on the Artemis mission, and our need to become a multi-planet species, before one lousy asteroid closes the book on our story far too soon.

Thank you for being honest about your qualms about the Artemis project.

I was trying to pull up the CEERS deep field image releases you showed, but I’m have trouble finding it. Can you help me out?

Weird that you don't understand how many scientific missions/experiments throughout history ended up yielding unexpected results that resulted in tons of practical uses.

I'm absolutely in favour of expanding human missions beyond LEO (the cost is highly questionable though and could have been better along with planning). But not in the way some envision like terraforming other worlds to make it a second permanent home. For one thing, I see the need for manned research outposts on other worlds and in deep space to do science and research just as with the $100 billion ISS. Robots are still very limited compared to human and the ability to make decisions on the fly. Yes we have successfully sent robots to other worlds and have done a lot of science but they are still very slow and limited in reach. And the time delay in communicating with them so far away is an obstacle to real time work . At some point, sending humans would make better sense than peppering the Martian surface with 100s of robots. And maybe human led missions can build some really cool supersized observatories in deep space or on the moon. Secondly, I'm of the view that if we can find alternative sources for our resource needs and industrial work, we should look at moving them off our world to protect earth. You don't have to move mountains to mine a few grams of precious minerals here. And lastly, it serves as an inspiration to the public and should encourage people to take on difficult challenges in science and engineering. JFK said it best: “We choose to go to the Moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win, and the others, too.”

@robsellars9338

Жыл бұрын

I agree with you on all the technical points improving our existing performance in the field of earthly and spatial development BUT come on, the Moon? We could have achieved all the good things you say and done something harder and learner more surely?

I preordered your book. Looks like it comes to the States 1 November. Looking forward to reading it! Thanks for making your channel so informative.

Thanks, Becky. I’m a bit behind in catching up with your updates, sadly (which I always enjoy). Re. the bit about Betelgeuse’s hypothesised SME “dredging up dust”, do you know anything about the process involved and the composition of the dust? A VERY long time ago, I did my PhD on modelling dust formation around cataclysmic variables and recall that dust grains (carbon, at least) don’t stand up well to high temperatures (>2x10^3K) or radiation sputtering. Curious to find out more about how the grains form and where they “live” awaiting being dredged up. And do you know if the dust grain hypothesis was supported by any follow-up IR observations? (I realise that by asking these questions I might be overlooking some links you’ll have helpfully provided somewhere!)

I agree with Becky that the science should be what's important but science costs money and NASA's money comes from politics. Getting more people on the moon is something everyone on the planet will be aware of and get excited about, unfortunately the general public probably wouldn't even notice a dozen smaller but more scientifically significant missions.

@tracyavent-costanza346

Жыл бұрын

yep, let's face it, the moon missions would not likely have been FUNDED except the rivalry of the cold war.

From what I understood the Artemis mission was the first step in us setting up shop on Mars. While the moon and Mars are different in so many ways, I think it’s the right call to try to prove out various engineering concepts here in our own backyard before applying them at the much further Martian distance. Could we have just gone straight to Mars and skipped the middle step? Probably. But I totally understand why they’ve chosen to take an iterative approach.

@Dragrath1

Жыл бұрын

Yeah but personally the goal of going to Mars is actually my biggest concern since if we visit Mars we may lose the ability to ever know whether Mars evolved alien life independently from Earth.

@txmike1945

Жыл бұрын

@@Dragrath1 But it doesn't matter if we can't. What would we do with that information?

Dr. Becky, I was a boy of 8 years when Neil Armstrong first walked on the moon. I could not get enough of it and am still keen to watch documentaries of those days. There was a political imperative for the US to undertake this effort assuming they wanted to be a ‘world leader’ then countries of that station are expected to ‘lead’ in all areas and do the things that less wealthy countries cannot. Certainly in 1969, many people around the world saw the accomplishment as one for humankind not just an American one. If we move forward to today, as you correctly suggest, the cold war political tension even with our world’s current stressors is no longer there. As such, the justification for this expense needs to come from elsewhere. I think, first, one needs to consider the objectives of such a program. They are in my view: 1. Engineering 2. Science 3. Human 4. Future Technology 5. Financial If the US or any other country is going to be a leader in such technology, then the people able to do this work need to be doing this work. Such work, be it design, or manufacture cannot be conjured up in a jiffy time periods due to some sudden need. The technical demands are far too great. So, in my view the US and the EU for example need to continue projects of sufficient magnitude to maintain their prowess. We have had the shuttle retired for over 10 years. Many technicians and engineers spent much of their careers on this vehicle. Artemis is quite different. I wonder how much intellectual transfer was permitted or possible. I think further that many smaller projects while valuable, do not generate the drive to create new technologies and materials as do these larger ones as often by their nature, they are required to expand the engineering envelope rather than build a new smaller device with a lot of current technology and less innovation. At least mission’s by Artemis will be longer permitting more science and research for a given expenditure of launch vehicle and fuel. I quite agree that the science argument here or even with the ISS is a thin one. If the scientific justification is simply to explore how humans can manage in space it seems self-serving. While the moon is comparatively near sending folks to more remote destinations seems premature to me. If one considers a Mars trip, right now it seems like an endless sandy desert. So, what would be the point? Rather, I would send not just 1, but perhaps 100 opportunity class rovers that have uprated abilities to travel faster and then have scientists from wherever drive these things around all over the planet. When we find a palm tree etc, it is then time to set down a scientific rover such as Perseverance to further investigate and only THEN given the results of same might we consider a human trip. We need to remember that the moon and Mars are horrible places utterly hostile to human life. Furthermore, I cannot see how Orion can travel for months to some place with the crew in microgravity the entire time, they will be completely useless if there is a gravity field of consequence. I would also question the psychological realities of spending months in a small craft like Orion. I hope this has been thought out. It has been said that people are interested in people. As such Artemis is going to garner substantially greater amounts of attention and inspiration for humankind than any uncrewed vehicle regardless of the efficacy of its science accomplishments. This cannot be ignored. This coverage will inspire many children today to undertake scientific type careers as did Apollo years ago. While it may be trite, we never really know how many scientific/engineering discoveries will be made simply due to Artemis’ large public footprint and its influence on career aims of today’s young. In any engineering undertaking no one can really say how this or that technology will be utilized in the future. It is in the doing and creating of such technologies that ideas evolve on how best to use them. For example, in the time of Apollo, the program cost about 40B 1970 USD. A helluva a lot of money. Much of this was development costs such as building KSC and JSC for example. The Apollo 15 mission was costed at about $500 million 1971 USD making it about $2.5B today or slightly less as projected Artemis launches, which are supposed do more. Depending on the source, the technology from Apollo has engendered economic activity of somewhere between 80 and 200 million per year since the 1960’s and is one of the best investments the US taxpayer has ever made (although largely the beneficiaries were the children of said taxpayers … but I digress) Finally, the elephant in the room is the stunning cost of this entire development. Using the Apollo metrestick (I’m Canadian) and realizing that while facilities had to be adapted for Artemis, they did not have to be constructed from nothing in a Florida swamp. If we consider that Apollo cost $40B = 200B today, then what we are seeing in reasonable given what is being asked of the technology. Aside from my comment above about maintaining a country’s technological prowess, I think we need to realize that people squander money all the time for uses far less holy than space exploration. When covid restrictions were imposed here in 2020, the liquor stores had to be kept open because a significant fraction of the country is dependent. 20% of the population still smokes cigarettes. NFL stadiums now cost well over 1 BILLION dollars to watch men play a boy’s game when there are far more wholesome family activities that could had in its place. On same, billions are wagered every weekend, money that is often lost that is needed for the less exciting but more imperative needs of food and shelter. During Apollo, it has been said that the women of America alone spent TWICE as much on cosmetics as it did to build Apollo. The people who get us to the moon are not the brains that will cure other ills of society. If we are free, and free to fail as well as succeed, then we cannot print enough money to fix all that is wrong with people and society in general. To avoid anarchy, an entity has been found necessary to decide what balance is appropriate. It is called a government. So, in sum, as a space enthusiast I am keen to see this new voyage. As a Canadian, my taxes are going to our share of this program as well. My concerns above are I am quite sure well-known to the managers and NASA in general and yet they have proceeded. They are smarter than I and will look forward to Monday morning as I did in April of 1981 and November of 1967. Thank for again for your work. Henri van Bemmel

I really like all the resources/links in the description box below the video. And the edition is flawless, really well done. Thanks! ♥♥

Huh. Maybe I'm too young and naive, but I can't wait for the next manned moon landing from the Artemis Program. The idea that people will land and walk on the moon again, and that I will be able to see it live (instead of it being way before I was born), is absolutely breathtaking to me. I am essentially counting down the number of years until it'll happen!

while i dont disagree artemis is expensive (too expensive because of sls and some other reasons), i do disagree that probes can do anything humans can do. actually being there, especially long term, is vital to doing more than just sample return and simple soil testing missions via rovers/probes. also, we desperately need to get off the planet in any way possible as fast as possible while it is still possible. while a few years probably wont make a difference missing out on this and waiting a few decades to get a moon base going could be critical. we need to do more than just have an outpost there, we need manufacturing and large scale living on the moon as it is SO much better to launch missions from the moon than it is from earth both for exploring and colonizing the solar system as a whole but also sending things to earth orbit and deep space. consider the idea of power satellites for just one thing, its currently the widely held position that it is far too expensive to launch them into orbit vs just using ground based ones....but if we were manufacturing them on the moon and moving them to earth orbit the energy and monetary costs are vastly lower which opens up both more options for power generation but also better for planetary health options as you could beam that power where needed where as currently many locations on earth are not great for wind/solar/tidal/hydro etc. and energy storage concerns ease as well. all of that for smelting aluminum and silica from the rocks on the moon which also releases hydrogen, oxygen, and nitrogen as gas byproducts which we could use for rocket fuel and water and air. that's just one example but there are a million other good reasons to go there and set up asap in a major way (safety of the species, technological advancements, potential solar shields on the cheap without modifying the atmosphere, harmful manufacturing in an environment off earth, eventual population pressure relief (both actual and perceived for many groups), the dreams of children who grow up to be the next generation etc). it all starts with a moon base, not a rover.

@tracyavent-costanza346

Жыл бұрын

once space-launches are a reality, the cost of heavy launch from EARTH, will begin to look drastically different with respect to both economics and vessel design.

I got a number of the big Bang stories in my news feed. I noticed none of them were from science sites, so immediately looked up primary sources and quickly found a more accurate narrative. This is a really good example of how taking stories at face value or comport with your biases is a poor way to determine the truth.

As a scientist myself, I am a lot more enthusiastic about Artemis when I don't think of it as displacing science budgets. Because realistically it is not; Congress appropriated money specifically for the SLS/Artemis because it benefits some large aerospace contractors, creates jobs across almost all 50 states, and is pretty good PR. I personally find it more inspiring than a lot of the other things the federal government does with money.

I'm not sure the Artemis project is unfounded. I agree that the science value of it is the least significant portion of it. But I think there's strong value in becoming a space-faring race, and I don't think that can happen without massive projects like this that pushing us in that direction. (There's also a secondary argument about capturing the public's attention.) Do we need it "now," when there are so many other worthy causes, rather than "later" when it becomes less burdensome on resources? Good topic for debate, though I'll counter that any argument supporting the "wait until later" side will still be a valid argument in 1000 years, and in 2000 years, and in 3000 years... At some point you just gotta pull the trigger.

@smeeself

Жыл бұрын

There no "gotta", and I cheer on those that want to explore for their own reasons, but at the moment it's a very inefficient way to gain knowledge of the universe. Good for PR though, I grant you. I will cheer on Artemis on Monday, but the knowledge of the number of probes and landers we could have had instead it's a tad frustrating.

I think anything that moves us closer to becoming a two world species is a positive, but yeah, you could have done a lot of amazing science with the Artemis budget..

Great video...as for the Artemis mission? I can't wait. IMHO NASA should get a lot more money for space exploration and scientific research. But without the interest of the public....those things will not get funding. So I think it's important to bring these things to the forefront. I understand the scepticism though. The government doesn't do things efficiently. That's why I'm glad SpaceX is involved. But I'm completely looking forward to this and you might be also the closer it gets to us actually going to another world.....

hiya, Dr. B! great show, as always. JWST photos are always appreciated but, as you said, it takes time to convert the raw data to beautiful, colorized photos. especially when there is so much data to analyze. patience is a virtue, people! speaking of patience, i pre-ordered your blackhole book when it was 1st announced. sssooo, now that it's being released next week, how much longer must i wait?🙃 see you next week, Dr Becky!

I wonder if part of the logic behind the moon missions are that they are relatively easy to explain and hype to the general public, which might lead to both more interest in science, and more funding for future projects 🤔

@peterkelley6344

Жыл бұрын

Now if they could just knock some sense into those flat Earthers. fake science guys.

@miridium121

Жыл бұрын

@@peterkelley6344 oh man, I wish 😑

It's the human nature to go out and explore! You are entitled to your opinions and priorities, but as a person who experienced Apollo moon landing live as a kid, I always cherished that moment in my life as it was the most exciting event I have ever witnessed! I couldn't wait for a follow up program to take us further to Mars and beyond, but alas, politics and wars kept us from doing this for a long time, but now, finally, there is hope for the future! Both because of the Artemis program and the Starship project of SpaceX. Just think about the amazing possibilities a big permanent moon based telescope could provide! Or a whole new colony of humans on Mars that can do amazing scientific research on an alien planet! And one more thing... without the advancements in space technology that resulted from such ambitious endeavors like the Apollo program, neither your beloved JWST nor other unmanned missions would have been possible! I simply cannot take this point of view seriously that always questions human spirit's need to try the impossible, and to explore new horizons. We are never satisfied just being confined to the limits of our home planet! We are made of star dust, and this what makes us go back to explore where we came from. To counter your argument, one could also argue that spending a lot of money on building new telescopes on Earth is also a waste of resources! Telescopes in Space will always be far superior! :)

@txmike1945

Жыл бұрын

I too remember the Moon landings, I had just finished grad school when Armstrong (Go Purdue!!) landed on the Moon. Space exploration is always fun and exciting. However - there doesn't seem to be any meaningful "cost-benefit" analysis done during the conception and approval of big projects such as Artemis. Some scientists convince enough politicians that it is a good idea and run with it. The project takes so long that the finished product is old technology. We can't aimlessly spend billions and billions on everything that someone thinks is a good idea. We need to also take care of Earth because odds are good that it will forever be the only home suited for humans.

@MaryAnnNytowl

Жыл бұрын

@@txmike1945 we cannot let the Earth "forever be the only home suited for humans!" Ever heard of putting all your eggs in one basket? It's never a good idea! One measly asteroid is all that it would take to end the story of the species, and I don't know about you, but I'm not ready for that to happen, yet! We MUST become a multi-planet species, if we have any hope to continue as a species for long!

@DrBecky

Жыл бұрын

I agree the Apollo missions were incredible, with all the people inspired into science and engineering and the technological advancements. But my argument was for *going back AGAIN*. The problem with the argument that it enables further space travel is that I don't think it is a good idea for humans to visit other planets. I talked about this the other day on my video about Mars. If you want to know if life existed on Mars, the worst thing you can do is send humans there because you contaminate the surface. Especially if you find life and then want to know if it had a common origin with Earth or not. Anything you find after humans have been will always be cast in doubt

@laurawhite203

Жыл бұрын

@@MaryAnnNytowl I believe you answered the 'why not' in your point. Humans are destructive of the home which they already inhabit. With the way corporate and political interests are guiding this expansion concept, do you really think humans are not going to make an ethical disaster out of such expansion? We cannot convince most to look after their own communities on this planet. As someone who absolutely loves the idea of exploring our universe, I get the ideal and the drive. I just don't trust our species to manage it ethically.

@txmike1945

Жыл бұрын

@@MaryAnnNytowl OK Mary Ann, please explain how we would get to a different star system many light-years away.

Dr.Beck, congratulations on the release of your new book! Can't wait to get a copy!

Can you provide link to the sky survey you mentioned in the end of the video

Going back to the moon is about technology, not science. We need to have the ability to go there when needed, for future explorations, discovery of mineral and energy resources, and yes to have the means for potential military defense capabilities.

I'm more excited for the sls rocket than actually going to the moon, BUT I think despite this large price, it's gonna be a huge way to raise public interest in space projects. Is that really worth the money? Idk, but it could mean increased funding to future projects which I think would be a great thing

@DrBecky, would be great to see (live?) how you would grap and proces one of those images and follow your metholgy to start analyse and hypothise over the data.

How long did the narration take to record? I'm curious! congrats on the book btw, I'm defiantly picking up a copy!

I was just about to ask about the audiobook and then you answered my question ha very cool that you narrate it yourself, too. Will def be picking it up. Congrats! Also, gotta agree. The moon thing is kind of a yawn fest. Been there done that. Would much rather see a mission to Titan or Enceladus or some other potentially life bearing moon out there. Honestly, I’d take anything other than the moon.

Great video and wow, I actually find myself disagreeing slightly on the benefits of the Artemis mission. From my way of looking at this, we (humankind) are entering a new space age and this one kick-starts everything. We may not feel the scientific benefits from of this specific mission directly, but if it goes well, it will green light a whole bunch of stuff that is waiting in the background. (I want to see people on mars before I die, so lets get this started already!)

@DrBecky

Жыл бұрын

The problem with that is that I don't think it is a good idea for humans to visit other planets. I talked about this the other day on my video about Mars. If you want to know if life existed on Mars, the worst thing you can do is send humans there because you contaminate the surface. Especially if you find life and then want to know if it had a common origin with Earth or not. Anything you find after humans have been will always be cast in doubt

@greggary7217

Жыл бұрын

@@DrBecky I enjoy your videos and commentary but IMO it’s not that clear. As a species we’ve always grown. Maybe we’ll get wise and stop but so far I see no evidence of it. We’ll go to the planets in part because that’s who we are, and in part because there is ultimately more knowledge, wealth and power out there. That is also who we are. So far. I agree it will be a shame if scientific opportunity is lost but based in history it seems almost inevitable.

@SpaceCadet4Jesus

Жыл бұрын

@@greggary7217 I feel its pretty clear, contamination is a real thing, so is dying on the moon, or the inevitable accidents. Send robots and probes to get a better idea if we are going to spend blood, sweat and tears on these projects that lead to habitation. Creating the infrastructure that builds upon and supports future space discovery by means of robotics is woefully neglected. I'm always reminded that we're earthlings, bound to the earth for the necessities that nuture life.

@charlesackman892

Жыл бұрын

@@greggary7217 Gary, after browsing through all the comments and replies I have to write that your's aligns with mine the most closely. I am 66 yrs old and have had many hours of solitude where I have mentally investigated this intangible idea of the human condition. When the concepts of progress is magnified in conversation(s), I often find the that the train or motion of these conversations to all end in the same spot: The betterment of the human specie. PEACE LOVE and GROVINESS Well what and who defines BETTERMENT? What is one person's trash is another's treasure. This is a reflective thought and nothing more, we as a specie have done quite well by slaughtering each other. Most of our "technologies" have been developed and brought to market that were initially originated for the purpose of blowing the shit out of someone else. So in my my and only my opinion we seem to be doing rather well. If all the countries and people of the world somehow came together and started hugging and kissing each other, perhaps the concepts of innovation and achievement would evaporate because there would be no need to compete any longer. Which sort of gets back to your take: WE ARE WHO WE ARE! And we can't be anything else By the way if I wrote Gary instead of Greg please pardon, getting old sucks and your not going to like it. Well I hope I didn't misinterpret your comment. I think I'll smoke a cigarette and drink a cold beer. Thx Chuck

@greggary7217

Жыл бұрын

@@SpaceCadet4Jesus well I just simply disagree. You want not to explore because people might die? You remove one of the fundamental underpinnings of our makeup as a species. Those who wish to remain safe & warm certainly can but our species explores. As for contamination, by the time we get to Mars there will have been many robots looking for life. What % of the surface would they need to cover in order to avoid an argument that humans contaminated the place? To what depth? It’s reasonable to have a look robotically but with current technology it’s simply not possible to be there seriously with robotics. There are always those who won’t go to the new world, do not want to fly or think the railroad is evil. History has never seen them prevail & I’ve seen nothing to suggest humanity has changed so much that they will this time.

Re lack of enthusiasm for Artemis. I'm an old fogie and I remember the same kind of debate back in the days of Apollo. I think Fred Hoyle may have been annoyed at the money being spent on the moon shots. But look at it this way. By developing a human capability in space and on the moon then maybe one day we will able to build and "man" 50 km diameter mirrors in space, just for you astrophysicists. :) :) Love your channel and your enthusiasm.

Always love to see some bloopers. Tosh.. I'm going to use that word more now

I feel just the opposite about manned space missions versus studying far away galaxies, etc. I come to this from the perspective that we are all stuck here, all of us eggs in one basket, subject to a single catastrophe wiping human kind out. Much better to my mind to disperse ourselves to preserve the species. We have wasted so much time not learning and developing space travel over the last 50 years. We should be aiming to go to the stars not sitting here just looking at them.

@txmike1945

Жыл бұрын

I look at it differently. We should take care of Earth AS IF it will be the only chance humanity gets, we need to do whatever is necessary to insure we won't extinguish ourselves. For practical purposes being able to travel to another star system is very, very far away, if at all achievable. There is a chance it can never happen so banking on that would be very chancy indeed. But let's say it will be possible, how about in 500 years. The rate humans are going now we may not last 500 years here on Earth. Every country needs to wake up.

@Paul99T

Жыл бұрын

@@txmike1945 500? We'll be lucky to get through the next 50!

To me, Artemis is about learning to live and work away from Earth so that we can someday have a self-sustaining colony somewhere else in the solar system (Mars for example). If we don't do this before the next mass-extinction, there will be no more Humans to do science.

@marinmitu995

Жыл бұрын

It's just a project for now only on papers!

@objective_psychology

Жыл бұрын

In that case I hope we don't succeed

I put your audiobook on my wishlist, can't wait to listen to it :)

So, I was sitting in the shipyards where I work, enjoying another phenomenal Dr. Becky episode. Long day at work, on duty with the US Navy, grabbing a quick dinner, nice and chill. Then 15:40 happens. Now there's a fine mist of Diet Coke all over my table, I'm choking and wheezing, and definitely am no longer chill because my sides hurt from laughing.

Actually, astronomers are panicking. They're wondering if they're going to survive the lack of sleep that comes with a massive dump of brand new very-exciting data that keeps them up at night.

@michaelsommers2356

Жыл бұрын

They're running around, screaming and shouting "TOO MUCH DATA! TOO MUCH DATA!"

Disagree with Artemis funding… so many technologies we use today everyday were developed to solve problem of keeping humans alive in space. Developing technologies to keep people alive in environments they aren’t supposed to survive in might prove valuable here on earth with climate change.

@larryschweitzer4904

Жыл бұрын

Many new technologies have been developed. They could have been done much more efficiently by direct means but likely wouldn't have been funded. The difference in efficiency of funding by government and private can be seen in SpaceX VS NASA's contractors. Do you throw it away or design for reuse? Looking at speed of development, constant innovation, reducing system costs I see a huge difference in how NASA's traditional system works and a private company going into the rocket business. I believe robotic systems could be used to accomplish more science but the political gains would be less. Which takes precedence?

I really like your presentation of the information...i discovered you through a one of your scifi movie watches...and I'm glad 've stuck with you. You very much remind me of Neil Tyson, and Carl Sagan... I really liked your interview/podcast with chief scientist on the JWST

I cant wait to read your book Dr Becky, so excited! Will be pre ordering asap. Great video as usual, 5/5!

Great episode! Like others have said I'm also excited about Artemis but I realize the science results could be achieved by robotic missions. I believe that the main point is to work on the engineering of interplanetary travel, which is something I'd love to see. Just like pure or basic science, the resources spent may seem too large, but we never know what returns it will bring to our everyday lives. It does seem a bit expensive lol

I think the Strategy behind Artemis is to eventually use the Moon as a staging area for missions to Mars and other planets. In the meantime technology has changed so much since the last lunar missions (NASA no longer has to control the mission with an Apple ][+ or PC Jr. for instance) that more things are possible. Yes, we've been there, but we haven't done all that yet. On a non-related note, it came to me as you were describing the latest James Webb Space Telescope discoveries (JWST) I think from now on we should all call it "Westy" for short. Or J-Westy maybe.

I really enjoy astronomy, and am blown away by the distances the same way I am with the nano scale achievements. But I really enjoy your enthusiasm (and knowledge) about astronomy and find it contagious. Please keep posting, and writing, and learning, and sharing....

Congratulations on Your New Publication, Can't wait to Read it!!!

I am more excited about the Artemis mission and its objectives than anything else in my lifetime! Making steps towards becoming a multiplanetary species is the only guarantee we have to survive any, or many of the earth based existential threats this planet faces so it seems pretty darn important. Can we definetley detect all asteroids that present a threat?... Nope... Can we stop them if we could... Nope... Do we have a certainty that the spinning iron core of our planet will continue to provide protection from the sun in the even the near future?...nope Do we know when the next catastrophic volcano may erupt?.. Nope The list goes on. Becoming a multiplanetary species just equates to not putting all our eggs in one basket really... Seems like a fairly wise plan to make such progress.

@stevenwilson5556

Жыл бұрын

Solar flare might disrupt electrical systems, power generation, communication, etc. That could be catastrophic for our advanced civilization but it won't wipe out all life.

As for going to the moon -- you're completely right that it's a suboptimal investment for the science return. HOWEVER, the political element can't really be ignored. China is, like it or not, setting itself up as a space-flight rival to the US/Europe, and "the good guys did it better" is worth considerable real-world resources. (Just think of the mess that a war between China and Taiwan would cause.) The US landed on the moon as much to show India, China, Egypt, et al that we were the better horse to back. Given all that, going to the moon is a lot cheaper and more constructive than a war, should it ever turn out that the Artemis program was useful in heading off such a war. Also, if we're ever going to go to Mars with people (or even to go get Percy's vials of dirt), re-establishing the institutional knowledge of deep space travel at NASA is critical to that mission, and so this is a worthwhile increment.

@daedaluscenter2825

Жыл бұрын

no, she is not she is well wrong and so are you having people on the moon will do so much for the whole world It will give us hope and answer we don't know we needed. so why spend all that money on the JSW telescope?

@majorbruster5916

Жыл бұрын

I think that the political angle is just a small part of it. China has clearly demonstrated that it wants to be a world super power, and has accelerated it's space program, even deploying satellites that have covert military capability against other satellites. Thinking far ahead into the future, if the Chinese colonized the moon first, think what disruption/damage a future space weapon could cause if deployed against satellites and missions from competing nations. They have already proved to the world that they are untrustworthy with Earth's resources and hold human life in little regard, what would they do if they monopolized the lunar surface? No, a joint US/EU mission is by far the better option, no matter the cost at today's money. Extrapolating further, do we want the Chinese to be the first human ambassadors to another civilization?

@kevinrusch3627

Жыл бұрын

@@daedaluscenter2825 If you want hope, watch a Disney movie or watch an Apollo documentary. JWST is far cheaper than Artemis.

@daedaluscenter2825

Жыл бұрын

@@kevinrusch3627 on thanks LOL ad they are around the same price, by the way, it's not hope without apollo you wouldn't have JSWT

@EBDavis111

Жыл бұрын

@@daedaluscenter2825 "having people on the moon will do so much for the whole world " Oh? Will it please the Moon God and then he'll bless us with his bounty? "so why spend all that money on the JSW telescope?" Because it's actual real science.

Just pr-ordered my copy of A Brief History of Black Holes. I can't wait to read this and I'll probably get the audiobook for work, as well. Thanks for being my favorite source for space news and edu Dr. Becky.

@DrBecky

Жыл бұрын

Hope you enjoy it!

Great work on the channel, if I was to comment on your thoughts on Artemis. Yes the pure economics of probes v crewed flight has merit but. Human exploration has been a personal thing. To motivate and enthral the future generations there must be crewed space flights and we must look to have a human presents where we wish to go. It may not be cost efficient but it’s inspiring and will motivate the explorers of the future. Keep up the good work.

Dr. Becky, I think the importance of the Artemis mission is to prepare us for Mars, and we desperately need to become a multi-planet species before a random asteroid we didn't see in time to nudge out of the way comes along and dooms us. That's why we need to do this!

I think the main objective with Artemis is to get the general public interested in space travel again.

I did learn so much from you that i might have a phd already....love you so much...we need more people like you in this planet

I watch Anton Petrov every day and in his video today he recommended your channel. I enjoyed this. Subscribed.

I respect this opinion for a bit of short term, but the long term benefits of developing a lunar base are immense! Especially with the potential of producing rocket fuel on the moon will make everything in the future way easier in terms of space research and frankly so much more. Tbh we know… plenty. At this point I feel we should be looking for results, industry and technology rather than more science. And this is coming from someone obsessed with science. Is it really that important for humanity to understand dark matter and energy? I’m not convinced.

Actually I really hope to be able to see Betelgeuse going supernova in my lifetime. It would be amazing either by astrophysics and by sociologic point of view. You can imagine? People freaking out, a lot of disinformation spreading and so on.

@robjohnston1433

Жыл бұрын

YES!!!!

@SpaceCadet4Jesus

Жыл бұрын

Considering the distance, it would have had to supernova around 642 years ago. And light from it today shows no sign of its impending doom. People freak out and spread misinformation too much as it is....over nothing. The world is mad.

Dr Becky! I’m interested in your book… the audio book appeals to me for my morning commute, but would it be better to purchase a hard copy since it sounds like there’s some stuff (equations, for example) that might not be as digestible. Is that the case?

I love your videos and have a pre-order in for your book, cant wait. A quick question, will JWST ever be used to have a look at Betelgeuse?