Thanks so much for watching! If you would like to hear more about black hole stars, please check out: kzread.info/dash/bejne/hX952dd_ps-TZqg.htmlsi=TsOTppz0fTANXExi

@gavynallen6254

8 ай бұрын

Love ur vids!

If you imagine crossing from dead matter to live matter as tossing a coin zillion times and getting extremely lucky, then the chance of life appearing in the early warm universe is huge, compared to the chance on Earth during the first 500 million years. Even if the warm universe period lasted only a couple million years, the sheer volume of the universe where the metaphorical coin-tossing took place was a lot larger than a single planet…

@the_lone_cheetah

8 ай бұрын

I totally agree on that one. May be life is indeed everywhere but the light from those planets didn't reach us yet. May be there are intelligent life forms dotted across space pretty commonly but the distance between them is so large that they wouldn't know about each other for a long period of time.

@gabusdeux

8 ай бұрын

​@@the_lone_cheetahnot to mention that space is constantly expanding, which, the point in which the universe was capable of supporting life was billions of years ago, meaning the sheer space between life now might be astronomical

@sasugaainz6824

8 ай бұрын

⁠@@gabusdeuxthe space between life would be very literally astronomical

@wormalism

8 ай бұрын

Earth is one of, possibly the only, planets in the whole universe where intelligent life has emerged. The odds of it being this planet are irrelevant, we just are on a planet where it happened, because we are intelligent life, and therefore on a planet where intelligent life has emerged. So we need only consider the odds of intelligent life appearing somewhere in the entire universe not of it happening explicitly here, otherwise it's a variation of the sharp shooter fallacy.

@ruhaiddoesnothing

6 ай бұрын

That's a really good analogy

“In the beginning the universe was created. This made a lot of people angry and has widely been considered as a bad move.”

My university Stats professor put out a paper that humans are most likely the 6th intelligent species in the universe.

Radioactive material is depicted as green because green paint used to have radon as an ingredient

14:47 the weight of the argument is that life didn't need such tiny areas as the surfaces of planets to emerge in, whole swathes of the universe grater than trillions of planets could have contributed dice rolls to form the first life, we aren't limited by calculations such as the Drake equation.

For how these life-forms survived space, I think it’s like how machines work. Life now is like a very complex machine and a complex machine has so many different parts and ways to break down and stop working than a small machine made of only a few simple components. So these life forms probably just went into a kind of stasis and when the conditions were right, just went back to working normally. This would not work for more complex life forms but it could happen to something very simple and basic

So I'm a bit confused about the talk about the right temperature for liquid water, when it doesn't take pressure into account at all

The genome complexity thing is actually a lot more muddy. I believe they are referring to how much of the DNA is actually used, not how much varied DNA something has. We got CRISPR from a bacteria that literally cuts up DNA it finds and incorporates it into its own genome, many plants have genomes that utterly dwarf ours. Paris japonica, for example, is a Japanese plant that has 50x as many base pairs in its DNA as we do. It's also worth remembering that the oldest DNA we have is only 2 million years old, so these are looking at the MODERN life that is SIMILAR to ancient life. We know that life after the Hadean was doing some complex things and we can work out from that a reasonable assumption of complexity, but our actual genomic model of preserved ancient DNA is mostly from the last 50-100k years with a few outliers like the the 2 million year old eDNA (environmental DNA fragments found preserved in Greenland sediments without the life they originated from). The amount of DNA anything has can rapidly increase or decrease by natural processes if its reproductive cycle allows for it. Cells make duplicates of DNA when dividing, but it's not uncommon for that to result in a cell just having extra of one chromosome after a split. Humans, for example, have 23 pairs, and our reproduction requiring 23 from each parent largely keeps that number consistent, but we dropped an entire pair from our closest ancestors and they in turn added duplicate pairs. Genes can also migrate between chromosomes or have whole sections cut off of one and moved to another. And the duplicates differentiate into different uses and specializations with sections disabled or mutating over time in the cells that survive. You can build up a large stock of copies of DNA rapidly and then differentiate it to get complexity, then dump what you don't use. And that's honestly one of my complaints about the video. With the Earth-first viewpoint, we would have started with something very simple in the Hadean eon that replicated massively to access the resources that were available. The primary argument for why we don't see abiogenesis right now is because something more complex will eat such simple new life forms before we would ever see it happen, but that wasn't the case originally. With the only pressure being how well a cell line can grab resources to make copies of itself, there's a lot more room for error, and thus a lot more room for cells to lose a little ground in the copying race in the short term and stockpile a lot of DNA to put towards complexity. And microbes share DNA snippets, so the successful complexity of one can spread to other lines that were trending towards their own complexity. You get a lot more small rolls of the dice to do in parallel what takes a lot of time later on to do in series of larger rolls of the dice with evolutionary trees. Panspermia (life originating from elsewhere and spreading like this discusses) is VERY plausible as an idea, but the time periods this early universe theory suggests were poor in phosphorus, oxygen, nitrogen and most crucially carbon. We know this because we've seen the absorption lines from stars in that period of time - the population 2 stars which are specifically identified by being "metal poor" (with "metal" meaning anything heavier than helium). You need abundance and density to keep rolling the proverbial dice to get molecules to form into self-replicating structures. Much like fission, it's a numbers game and you have to have those numbers close enough together to carry on the chain reaction. (This isn't a criticism of Kurzgesagt or those whose theories they are presenting here. It is a valid idea, just not a high probability one and this is a subject where we rely a lot on probability.)

Interesting video. Not sure I agree with many ideas brought up. Some points from a paleontologist/geologist: 1. The assumption is exponential diversification of life. It’s not agreed upon that life diversified in this manner. 2. Assuming constant rate of evolution doesn’t work either. 3. The evolution of plate tectonics was a major factor in the evolution of life. Early life is hypothesized to occur at hydrothermal vents for many important reasons to allow life to evolve. For example, protection from UV, which destroys RNA/DNA. 4. Life needs carbon and water. Carbon can easily build into larger molecules due to its covalent bonding. Not many other elements can do so. You can’t ignore chemistry. 5. Oxygen also was important to allow organisms to grow larger. 6. You can’t ignore natural selection. By the way, showing a “ladder” of evolution from microbes to humans is not how evolution works and not a good message to deliver. Humans are not the “king of the hill”. We all share ancestors and are on different branches of a tree. Even as a thought experiment, I’m not sure it works with so many assumptions and those assumptions are not clearly identified. Plus, too much science is left out.

@tfolsenuclear

8 ай бұрын

Thanks for your insight!

Hey, Tyler! The first video of yours that I watched was the NileRed uranium glass reaction. I think it was recommended to me after his video. I like how you actually react to videos and put in your own perspective as a nuclear engineer instead of just playing them and sitting quietly, haha. Your channel is really great and interesting, and I subscribed. Keep it up!

@tfolsenuclear

8 ай бұрын

Thanks so much! Welcome aboard!

Panspermia is a neat theory for sure.

Congratulations, you have absolutely mastered the KZread algorithm for my feed. And I'm glad, your videos are great.

@tfolsenuclear

8 ай бұрын

Thanks so much!!

Dont forget, the simplest life just needs chemicals and a liquid. By that metric, planets weren't a requirement in the early universe. Anything complex, yes, definitely needs planets. But if its just oceans of liquids floating in space because its to hot to freeze and things are still to close together to be a vacuum, its possible.

Hey Tyler. I've been loving your videos since I found your channel! It's heartbreaking to me how negative public perception of Nuclear energy is. I'm currently a sophomore in college and I've been getting my engineering pre reqs done. I'm seriously considering majoring in Nuclear engineering but the job outlook is not great compared to say, Mechanical Engineering. What do you think the future will permit in terms of Nuclear related job opportunities?

@tfolsenuclear

8 ай бұрын

Thanks for watching! There will be lots of job opportunities at nuclear plants as there will continue to be lots of retirements. In addition, nuclear engineers can do several jobs outside of commercial nuclear, such as research, any other type of heavy industry, consulting, and so much more.

@sudasatoshi9769

8 ай бұрын

@@tfolsenuclear Thanks for getting back to me on this! I'm thinking that is probably the route I'll go down. I'm still a bit sketched out because I could go to my local uni and pay a quarter the price (IE no debt...) but they don't offer Nuclear Engineering, if I did that I'd probably go Electrical. I really am interested in Nuclear though and if there are good prospects I don't want to compromise on my education. Thanks again for getting back to me!

Interesting concept.

@10:53 I think, the "seeds of life" which would be advanced large protein molecules, could be spread evenly across the universe in form of space rocks aka asteroids. There could be in the Mars soil, Europa, Enceladus, or even on every rocky celestial body. Still frozen, still waiting for liquid medium, preferably water and temperature to start reacting. Once you had mobile proteins, then by chance then can start producing cell components, assembling etc. Once they develop one cell, that can produce more of them, that's start of life. That is assuming they were produced in early cosmos, consolidated in large quantities and variety (you need a lot of different proteins for cell functioning), preserved in the frozen space rock, and hit other space rock in the habitable zone, that had the right conditions to to destroy them. On the other hand, cosmic radiation, gamma/x-rays could have ionized them enough to get destroyed even in frozen state. Unless they were shielded by the rock, maybe lead? (Is lead naturally present in metallic form? I doubt it.) A lot of if's, buts and maybes. But given enough sample, there might have been this one rock that carried this life building blocks, which could populate earth. Harsh conditions of this survival can mean, that we are statistically the only one, and life isn't as spread in the universe. After this video, I changed my mind from "given enough time, life can evolve from nothing" because there might have been not enough time on earth. Now I'd rather prefer "there was enough matter in the universe, that some part of it assembled building blocks of life". Kind of interesting thought, same statistical ideas of giving large enough samples, that improbable vents can happen. But not in the time dimension, but in matter (quantity) dimension. Or maybe both?

From now on, I'll be refering to you as the "Mr. Green-glow-man"

Makes sense, comets seem like a phenomenal way to preserve delicate molecules.

What came first the Proteine or the genome?

Interesting hypothesis. Most essential elements are pretty light, and there'd be tons of lightning in the primordial universe from all the charged particles, so why couldn't amino acids and ribonucleotides form? We should be able to test this by looking for their emission lines with a telescope like Webb, right? Unless they'd be out of range and we need to do far infrared or near microwave wavelength observations to see this specific period?

The part you may not know, or may not understand, simple life, just bacteria, is virtually impossible for us to detect on other planets with 100% certainty, as so many other geological factors can do basically the same thing life does, and usually it's not on a scale large enough we can easily detect it. The second problem is, if the exponent is true, we could very likely be the fist given the time scales involved. The final problem is, with how close we've come to destroying ourselves in the past, and the fact that we'd be hard to detect even with the technology we do have, it's not likely many other planets that have been seeded, would even develop the kind of life that could even detect us, let alone communicate with us. The issue isn't so much frequency, as it is "quality" of life that may have seeded on other planets.

There is no chicken/egg patsdox. Egg wins.

4:15 No! The whole point is that becoming alive from becoming dead is way harder (less likely to happen by chance) than becoming complex from alive. The difference in time (the harder part taking less time) is a discrepancy that they're explaining with the theory.

@colemiller2149

8 ай бұрын

Seems like he understood in the next couple minutes after with the exponential growth explanation

You should watch the video John Oliver made on nuclear waste. Love the videos btw :)

It's honestly the most fascinating thing EVER to consider how the universe went from inorganic matter/chemical reactions/ physics, yet somehow Organic matter found a way to come into existence.. There is no simple answer & we would be ignorant to think we actually have the answers.. it's such a complex problem with a ton of chicken and egg paradoxes bundled with in it... (I'm really curious about how much Magnetism & electricity alongside many other aspects played important roles. Especially when we are dealing with scales so vast that we can barely wrap our heads around throughout the cosmos, or so small with such little gravity, etc. That things could happen that we've yet to grasp? Who knows? We sure don't..)

This is actually makes a little sense, it’s a pretty good theory ngl.

Can we call you Mr. Nuclear?

Actually chicken and eggs paradox isnt a paradox in reality. Eggs were before the "chickens". Chickens in quotes cause there is obviously more to the actual species than just a name. And that is my point.

Dude... I thought you were Doug McKenzie

Green = active 😮

"kurtsgesats" xD

Day 4 of asking: Chernobyl Unit 3 (Roblox)

I think it's possible that primitive life could survive in space via some form of cryptobiosis like a tardigrade can. Also, I love the alien birbs Kurzgesagt used in the animation. So cute.

@WhateverMan35

8 ай бұрын

Viruses are much more durable and it's suspected to be the first "living" things. Size is all that matters when you are being frozen, the smaller you are, the likelier to are to survive the crystallisation process. Even hamsters can be brought back to life when frozen.,

i am honestly starting to feel like you are just reacting to my youtube feed

@napoleon6221

8 ай бұрын

Same, I’d really like to see him react to some archeology and linguistic content to complete it lol

There has been speculation about silicon-based life forms, but I want to know what a uranium-based life form would be like! Would their lifespan be based on their radioactive halflife? Would they communicate or interact by controlling or directing their radiation emissions? How would they metabolize?

Hi

To be fair to the original content creators, I'd suggest you wait a few weeks before you do a react video on newer content. This allows content creators to gain more views and give them more revenue. It's their hard work that needs to be rewarded after all.

@IndianaDipper194

8 ай бұрын

to be fair to kurzgesagt he has 21 MILLION subscribers, Tyler's reaction video going to 45k subs is not harming his view count even a miniscule amount, because chances are if you are watching this you've already seen the original video. and if kurz feels like hes been wronged he can claim this video as his content and take the monies.

@napoleon6221

8 ай бұрын

To be fair to Tyler he mostly reacts to channels with tons more views and subs than him, so it’s likely people see the other video first then his. Also he does pause the video enough to make people who haven’t seen the original want to click on it.

cool

We don't know nearly enough about any of this to know for sure that multi-cellular life only appeared more recently. The fossil record is so small and insignificant compared to what has actually lived on our planet, that people coming to such conclusions is the real paradox for me.

I love to see your reaction but at this point it's all just reaction content. Do you have anything else planned for the future of the channel?

@norbert099

8 ай бұрын

This is what the channel is about... a nuclear engineer reacting to videos. Maybe he could play Realistic Boiling Water Reactor instead. Since he's licensed on a PWR, it's going to be interesting to see if he is able to operate the Reactor. Btw Tyler Folse, if you see this comment, create a Private Server for yourself so that nobody annoys you and it's free aswell. The Private Server for Chernobyl Unit 3 isn't, it's 10 R$.

@roseannelajara8659

8 ай бұрын

Wow, that's a rather rudely entitled comment on something someone does for free in his spare time. Creating content takes time and effort, and he's a nuclear engineer, not a full-time youtuber.

@jepoxy

8 ай бұрын

@roseannelajara8659, I don't think you understand how easy it is to create reaction content. The only time wasted is a little more than the time he would have spent watching the video. These videos only require him to go on OBS and open a small window of the video. There is no editing or post-processing that needs to be done.

@computersales

8 ай бұрын

​@@jepoxysounds like you should start making reaction videos instead of complaining. 🤔

@The_Driver_Kong_2918

8 ай бұрын

​@@jepoxyreaction content may be easy to make, but this is a reaction channel, thats the whole thing.

i found you from styropyro!

This dude keeps showing up in my suggestions. Look at his entire list of videos and its all 100% just straight up taking other people's videos and adding next to nothing. If I wanna watch a 45min Kyle Hill video and hear someone just tell me hes correct every minute or so, I'll just watch a Kyle Hill video and say "He's right" aloud every minute or so. This dude seems alright, but it'd be a lot better channel with some original content and not just 100% rehashed shit.

I love you hair. 😂 no for real. Its like a book of the days travel