True Edge of the Universe, Nuclear Rockets Adoption, Lunar Poles Exploration | Q&A 192

27 Comments

1. What are your personal beliefs about the life detected by the Mars lander (Viking mission) back in the 1970s? Was it real or not? ❓

2. How come, when discussing science and religion, is it ALWAYS the bible and christianity mentioned? Never islam and the quran or the torah and Judaism.

3. 17:57 I Agree in principal holding Satellite companies to their marketing promise of internet for the 50% of terrains not connected.

   Space is hard. Hasn’t all so far gone bankrupt, hence Elon repeating first goal for Starlink is not to go bankrupt?

4. I just had a second thought about starlink:
   In regards to 3rd world nations/ undeveloped nations like many African ones, I don't think it will help in ANY way to give the general populace affordable, or even FREE internet. I don't think that there will be many, among the general populace, who will be able to use the internet, in any meaningful way, to improve anyone's life (apart from a LOT of porn access). The people who are in a position to improve the life of their fellow Africans will be those people who are educated in the physical and medical sciences and as such, they are likely to already have internet access at work/ university/ home. I mean, suggesting that giving internet access to superstitious farmers and uneducated villagers, will allow them to innovate ways to improve their lives is a bit like suggesting that giving them Netflix access will jog their innovative abilities, allowing them to think of ways to improve their lives. Neither one is going to be helpful if part of the method involves someone who doesn't know any better saying "Let's pay a sorcerer to turn our hills into gold!"

   No, access to the internet is already in the hands of the people who can make a difference. Any wider internet access is just a luxury and it's a luxury that the already impoverished masses don't need and can't afford.

5. Re – Starlink + Connecting the world
   Hang on… Does that mean that starlink is going to provide FREE internet as well as FREE devices to access said internet, to the poorest nations on earth/ to the most impoverished people on earth? If true, then that's a pretty noble undertaking that I think we should all support. In it isn't true, then I think we should do to Elon Musk what the slaves did to the masters in Game of Thrones…

6. I find it weird Fraser thought that StarLink would provide huge access to those unable to pay for StarLink. It's a commercial company.

7. I found that Mick West is a good example of how to talk to conspiracy theorists from a sane and effective point of view.

8. Here's a question that perplexes me: The current theory is that the rate of expansion of the Universe is accelerating. As I understand it, this is based on the red-shift of galaxies and that the measured red-shift is greater the more distant the galaxy. While the measured red-shift increases with distance so does the time it takes for the light of the measured red-shift to reach us. So, we're actually measuring historical red-shift, and the velocity of the most distant red-shift galaxies is the velocity they had some 12 billion years ago. I can only assume that I'm missing something that the simplified lay-person explanations don't include, otherwise, it would seem more likely that the expansion of the universe is actually slowing down, since the nearest red-shifted galaxies, like Andromeda, are less red-shifted and is more recent measure of expansion.

9. What do you mean you have statlink for 1 more month and then it's gone???

10. Fraser, the lighting on your recent videos is absolutely fantastic. You've really dialed it in. It's almost like you have a brand new, purpose built studio on top of a mountain on Vancouver Island. Looking good.

    Question (rant?):

    I am a making-rocket-fuel-on-the-Moon denier, and I'm here to righteously rage against the notion.

    I can't help noticing that after struggling mightily with hydrogen propellant for the Space Shuttle for 30 years, we are now struggling mightily with hydrogen propellant for the SLS today. Nothing has changed. It's a horrendous hassle, a horrendous molecule, a horrendous propellant. And that's with throngs of engineers and technicians and science communicators on site to work to the problem. The universe hates us. It's almost all hydrogen.

    Imagine how that's going to go on the Moon, in a hard vacuum, at extreme temperatures, in a perpetual cloud of razor sharp, ionized regolith particles, but in the absence of throngs of onsite engineers, technicians and science communicators. Imagine those wet dress rehearsals. Do we cry at the prospect or giggle?

    Also, Starship runs on methane, not hydrogen. We're gunna need carbon to make methane to refuel Starships from the Moon to open up the inner solar system for human exploration. The water in the permanently shadowed craters at the lunar south pole does not contain carbon. I see that getting glossed over a lot both by onsite and offsite science communicators. "Water can be split into hydrogen and oxygen and used as rocket fuel," they say. Not all rockets. That's what I say.

    So it did not surprise me when you snuck in the phrase "in 50 years" when you were talking about a permanent Moon base and lunar resource extraction in this video. You know the truth, don't you. Making-rocket-fuel-on-the-Moon is cray-cray. Admit it.

    Besides, the Book of Genesis makes no mention of it.

    Dogs are clearly superior to cats.

11. Fraser, Why can't Starlink and other satellites not be colored black? Would still affect the night sky for telescopes?

    As for Gateway, I believe that it is a pathetic way of getting to the Moon. A better way would be to build Sea Dragon. Its design is 490 ft high by 75 ft wide. The station itself can be 75 ft wide by 20 ft tall. We can fit an entire space station, already assembled, to the Moon. It would fit right inside a fairing, detach and reach the Moon directly. No need for multiple missions to carry Gateway one piece at a time. With SLS, you have to take the space station in pieces. That will require assembly in space, something that could be dangerous for the astronauts piecing them together. SLS is also greatly expensive to launch per pound.

    One Sea Dragon, with a 2-month turnaround time to being reused, can launch 30 space stations, already built, in 5 years or half that many with the other half being heavy equipment and supplies.

    As for nuclear rockets, the best design would be an Orion nuclear pulse propulsion ( Also, a 1960s design.). It will not need to stop at Gateway or even the Moon. However, a supply of nuclear pulse units can be waiting on the Moon in order for the spaceship to travel faster. Two months is what a spaceship to ars would take.

12. Occasionally you'll come across "Alien Believers" that will bring up the argument that they are so advanced they can't be seen because they are so advanced and choose not to.

    If you come across them, just remind them that no matter how advanced they are they can't erase their past.
    As in, they had to have followed an evolutionairy process there which they would leave past progress in the Universe.
    They can't go back an erase their past because we see backwards in time.

    Yw! ;O)-

13. “If you want to understand the secrets of the universe, think in terms of energy frequency and vibration” I love that einistein told the reporter when asked what’s it like to be the smartest man alive?” He replied “ask Tesla” Einstein: “reality is merely an illusion; albeit a very persistent one” peace to all

14. Better, more realistic answer to hating NASA: People are more mistrusting of the government than private companies. Most flat-Earthers are probably trolls and such. For the list of arguments of us not landing on the moon, not one I've heard has ever been religiously-backed. Even though it's pretty clear we got there, the government has had a record of spreading misinformation and abusing its citizens through various programs. Hence why there is less trust. It is easy to be religious and a scientist if you ask me. That's how people like Isaac Newton were.

    Also, question for Fraser: we are getting closer to seeing where the big bang happened, past quasars. However, what will be past that? Things tend to expand/explode in all directions, so certainly we should be able to assume there is just more stars and galaxies on the other side of the observable universe. Will it ever be possible to view these unseen galaxies in the future? Thanks!

15. Can they really not just make satellites non-reflective?

16. Smart Phone emergency Satellite use will save lives. I'm all for it! Thank's Fraser! <3

17. Hey Fraser, love your shows and this one was no exception. I 100% share your exasperation with conspiracy theorists! To quote the late, great Carl Sagan: “You can't convince a believer of anything; for their belief is not based on evidence, it's based on a deep-seated need to believe.”
    However, I can't help but think you kind of downplayed the elephant in the room with Starlink, namely the ramifications re space junk/possible Kessler effect. Seems to me, 42,000 extra objects whizzing around in LEO is a heck of alot to keep track of by anyone's standards, and there is no international regulatory body to ensure the flight paths of these and other similar satellites remain clear – as far as I'm aware(?). It would potentially only take one, or a fragment of one to see a future manned space launch end in tragedy… unless I'm missing something here..?

18. “The internet is the method for equalizing wealth on earth.” Lol, you got that wisdom from Zuckerberg or Bezos?

19. There is no evidence that Starlink or its competitors are bringing internet access to a significant number of people and communities which are lacking to it. People and communities which lack internet access tend to be too poor for satellite internet. It would have to be their countries' governments which would have to pay, but satellite internet for poor communities won't be any higher onthird world governments' list of things to do than land-based internet for poor communities.

20. The Big Bang was just the moment when God said let there be light

21. Thank you, always great info. Luv the rant, cathartic. "Those" people are not "believers" they are just Contrarians, the original Trolls. Just life's gremlins, but only here were they believe they have anonymity, which they do not. I myself live in Freedonia! Duck Soup anyone? Take care, Dr Cain.

22. Is there different images every day or every so often do they effect anything in the universe?

23. Nothing moves fastwer than the speed of light UNLESS it does not fit into your THEORY then it does move faster than the speed of light. Typical lftist hogwash.
    Freedom of spech UNLESS it goes against what I believe. Then you must shut up.

24. SpaceX and Methane production. They have to make Methane on Mars. That is non trivial. In fact the whole colonization enterprise is non trivial. At the peak they will be sending 1000 Starships to Mars, and return flights every conjunction. Making the methane for them, on both Earth and Mars, is just a minor cog in that effort.

25. I loved the Bobiverse series by Dennis E. Taylor. I'd read the whole series a while ago based on your suggestion, so thank you. When I think about Von Neumann Probes, in reality, it is easier said than done, almost impossible in fact. In order to manufacture even a single chip, you need whole industries, mining operations, factories, vehicles and whatnot. Not to mention that the said planet might be devoid of a certain materials needed to replicate the probe. Then the whole operation would cease to exist. What's your thoughts on this?

26. Your conversation / ideas / insights starting at 32:54: are profound and mind bending !!! You have a new fan in me because of it ! We are NOT worthy oh rantful one ! WE ARE NOT WORTHY !

27. Hey Fraser, just as an FYI, there's nothing in the Bible to lead to the conclusion that Earth is flat. Anyone arguing from the Bible on that point started somewhere else and is just trying to justify their belief

Comments are closed.