Latest / Space Nuts: Astronomy Insights & Cosmic Discoveries / Celestial Curiosities: Pulsars, Gravitational Waves & the Secrets of the Universe

Transcript

Celestial Curiosities: Pulsars, Gravitational Waves & the Secrets of the Universe · Space Nuts: Astronomy Insights & Cosmic Discoveries

0:00
Heidi Campo: Welcome back to another fun and exciting
0:03
Q and A episode of Space Nuts.
0:06
I am your host for this episode, Heidi Campo.
0:09
And joining me is Professor Fred
0:11
Watson, astronomer at large.
0:13
Voice Over Guy: 15 seconds. Guidance is internal.
0:16
10, 9. Ignition
0:19
sequence star space nuts. 5, 4, 3,
0:22
2. 1. 2, 3, 4, 5, 5, 4,
0:25
3, 2, 1. Space nuts
0:27
Astronauts report. It feels good.
0:30
Heidi Campo: Fred, how are you on this fine day?
0:33
Professor Fred Watson: I'm very well, thanks, Heidi.
0:36
And, um, I'm, um, delighted to see you again
0:39
because it is always a pleasure to take our,
0:41
uh, listener questions, uh, especially on a
0:44
nice fine.
0:45
What is here in Australia, Winter's morning?
0:48
Uh, uh, it's a sunny day, as we
0:51
often get in wintertime in Sydney.
0:55
Heidi Campo: Well, you'll be delighted to hear that it has
0:58
finally stopped raining here in Houston,
1:00
Texas. The sun has come back out,
1:02
starting to forget what it looked like. But,
1:05
um, we will be going camping this weekend, so
1:08
I'm looking forward to that. I will, um,
1:10
report back to you guys next week what, uh,
1:12
the weather from West Texas looks like.
1:16
Professor Fred Watson: If you get any great photos, Heidi, we should
1:19
try and post them on the Space Nuts website.
1:22
Heidi Campo: Oh, maybe I'll have to bring my telescope,
1:24
uh, and do some astrophotography out there.
1:27
Actually, that's. I'm gonna, I am gonna do
1:29
that.
1:30
Um, and speaking of the United States, all of
1:33
our questions are from the U.S. this,
1:35
uh, this, this go around. And our first
1:38
question comes from dean from Washington,
1:41
D.C. doesn't get any more United States
1:44
than that. Dean asks,
1:47
um, are all neutron stars
1:49
pulsars in? If so, is it not
1:52
theoretically possible that a collapsing star
1:54
has so little angular momentum that it
1:57
doesn't pulse? If not, what else
2:00
can a neutron star be?
2:03
Professor Fred Watson: So, um, yeah, this, this, this
2:06
question has a simple answer. No.
2:11
Um, thank you, Dean.
2:13
Heidi Campo: Moving on.
2:14
Professor Fred Watson: I might elaborate on that a little bit. Um,
2:18
not all neutron stars are pulsars. And
2:20
actually, look, I'm going to take a direct
2:22
quote from a NASA website called Ask an
2:25
Astrophysicist. Doesn't come any better than
2:28
that. Um, because
2:31
I love the opening of this little answer.
2:33
Most neutron stars in the universe
2:36
are old enough and tired enough that they are
2:38
no longer pulsars. Um, and
2:41
let me just interrupt that quote
2:44
by reminding us what a neutron star
2:47
and a pulsar is. A neutron star is this
2:50
highly collapsed object. It used to be a
2:52
star, but now we're seeing the collapsed core
2:54
of the star, only a few kilometers or miles
2:57
across. Uh, uh, what makes it a
3:00
pulsar is when it's spinning
3:02
rapidly, uh, and beaming radiation
3:05
from its magnetic Poles. So they behave
3:08
just like a lighthouse, flashing, uh, on
3:11
and off, pulsing, uh, as the name implies.
3:14
So, uh, Dean's question is a good one. Are
3:17
all neutron stars pulsars? And they're not.
3:20
And as the NASA website says,
3:23
most of them are old enough and tired enough
3:25
that they're no longer pulsars. They've
3:26
stopped spinning. Uh, and just one,
3:29
uh, further sentence on that, which I think
3:32
is quite illuminating. A recent paper
3:34
estimates 1000 million, what we call
3:37
a billion, normally 1000 million old
3:40
neutron stars in our galaxy in. Even though
3:43
the known number of pulsars, uh,
3:46
is only about 1000. So
3:49
there are many, many more neutron stars
3:52
that don't pulsate than there are that do
3:55
just because they've lost all their
3:57
rotational energy. So, a great question from
3:59
Dean, um, sent me to NASA's website,
4:02
which is always a good thing.
4:05
Heidi Campo: I think they know the right answer.
4:08
Professor Fred Watson: One would hope so. Yeah.
4:10
Heidi Campo: I saw a T shirt in their gift shop a few
4:12
weeks ago when I was there, and it just. The
4:15
Earth is round. We checked. Love NASA.
4:18
I thought that was kind of cute and cheeky.
4:21
Professor Fred Watson: Yeah.
4:23
Heidi Campo: Our next question is from Ben,
4:26
who is actually a new listener. So thank
4:29
you, Ben, for writing in. This is, uh, so
4:31
much fun. Ben says, I came across the
4:34
podcast last week and I've been zooming
4:37
through it. I love the content. Thank you.
4:41
And then Ben goes on to say, I've got a
4:43
question, and hopefully you haven't already
4:45
answered it on the roughly
4:46
450 episodes I haven't had
4:49
a chance to listen to yet. Um, but he
4:52
says one, when neutron stars and
4:55
or black holes merged to
4:58
produce gravitational waves, they lose mass,
5:01
which gets converted to energy, which
5:03
comprises. Which comprises of the
5:06
gravitational wave. But how does that
5:08
conversion work? Specifically? I'm thinking
5:11
of a binary neutron star system
5:14
merging, since my understanding
5:16
is that the mass of the neutron is quite
5:19
consistent across the universe. A reduction
5:22
in mass would imply that a reduction in the
5:25
number of neutrons would imply a
5:27
reduction in the number of neutrons. If this
5:30
small leap of logic holds, what determines
5:33
which neutrons get converted to energy?
5:36
Are the faded neutrons extracted evenly
5:39
from throughout the merging objects, or
5:42
is there a region that seems to be favored?
5:45
And what does this process of converting
5:48
neutrons to energy look like?
5:52
Ben is curious and hungry for answers.
5:55
Professor Fred Watson: It's a fabulous question, Ben.
5:57
Um, I've got a question for you, Ben, as
5:59
well. How did you manage to get through 450
6:01
episodes in a week, less
6:04
than a week? That defies, um,
6:07
probably the laws of physics. I Think, uh,
6:10
but that's all right because apparently uh,
6:12
merging neutron stars also
6:15
apparently derive um,
6:18
they, they break the laws of physics.
6:22
So um, Ben, your question,
6:24
as some of our listener questions often do
6:27
because they are so good, sent me to the
6:30
World Wide Web. And the
6:32
answer to this question is
6:36
quite, uh, it's quite subtle and there's
6:38
several things going on, partly because
6:41
we're dealing with very intense
6:44
gravitational fields. Uh, and
6:47
um, you know, to answer your question, are
6:50
the fated neutrons extracted evenly
6:52
throughout the merging objects or
6:55
is there a region that seems to be favored,
6:58
um, that probably relates to
7:01
the event horizon of the neutron
7:04
stars because they do have event horizons.
7:06
Um, and I don't think
7:09
I'm capable of answering that question.
7:11
Uh, and in any case
7:14
it's more subtle than just um, you
7:17
know, neutrons getting thrown away, uh,
7:20
than what we were, than what your question
7:22
might imply. So I would
7:25
actually suggest, uh, Ben, that you have a
7:28
look uh, online, uh,
7:31
ah, at the uh, physics.stackink
7:33
exchange.com website,
7:36
uh, because
7:37
physics.stackexchange.com
7:40
has got a uh, very nice set
7:43
of question, question very similar to
7:45
yours and some quite lengthy answers
7:48
that go into some detail, um, and
7:52
look at different aspects of this question.
7:55
Um, so if you Google energy conversion from
7:58
mass to gravitational wave, the, that will
8:00
take you to this website and
8:03
maybe I can just um, you know,
8:06
talk about uh, one of those
8:09
answers. And that is that um,
8:12
if you imagine, uh, uh, one of
8:14
the sort of subatomic particles and what we
8:17
call an alpha particle, which is the nucleus,
8:19
a helium 4 nucleus, got two protons,
8:22
two neutrons, but its mass
8:26
is actually less than the
8:28
sum of those protons and neutrons.
8:32
And that's because there is something called
8:35
binding energy, uh, that's
8:37
released when that particle is
8:40
formed. And so uh, the
8:43
bottom line here is that mass and
8:46
energy are uh, highly interchangeable. When
8:49
you're talking about the kinds of things, the
8:51
sort of extremes that we are looking at in
8:54
the case of um, a neutron star, neutron
8:57
star collisions. Even in a neutron star doing
8:59
its thing, it's still extreme situations.
9:03
And because of the relationship that we're
9:05
all aware of between mass and energy, E
9:07
equals MC squared. That is,
9:10
uh, why you know,
9:13
you've got this potential to
9:16
transform what looks like a mass of a
9:19
single particle, uh, into energy,
9:22
uh, to result in a lower
9:25
gravitational mass for the pair of
9:27
neutron stars. Sorry, the bottom line here,
9:29
which I should have said at the beginning, is
9:31
that often when you've got this neutron star,
9:34
neutron star collision, uh, you Get
9:37
a gravitational wave which
9:40
essentially, uh, has enough energy
9:43
to account for a difference in mass. It's not
9:46
just the sum of the two neutron stars that
9:48
come together. There is a mass loss as well,
9:50
which we see as the gravitational wave. And
9:53
this is one of the mechanisms that causes
9:55
that. So have a look Ben, at that
9:57
webpage. Uh, and if you still
10:00
don't get it, ask us again, uh, and
10:03
I'll have another shot at it. But it is a
10:06
really interesting question and a good one
10:08
too. Um, um, got me
10:10
thinking yesterday. I was worrying all day
10:13
about this question, uh, trying to
10:16
take my mind off the root canal treatment
10:18
that I was having at the dentist. At the same
10:20
time.
10:24
Heidi Campo: I also think of particle, uh, physics while
10:26
I'm at the dentist.
10:27
Professor Fred Watson: It's the only thing to do really, isn't it?
10:30
Heidi Campo: So I actually, I will give my dentist a shout
10:33
out. My dentist, um, was one of my good
10:35
friends in, uh, doing my undergrad. And it
10:38
was kind of cute because the whole little
10:40
cohort of us, we um, started, we were in
10:43
a powerlifting club in my undergrad
10:46
and uh, we were just,
10:49
you know, just a bunch of kids. And now he's
10:51
a grown up who's a dentist and we're all
10:53
doing our things. One of the other ones went
10:55
on to be um, a
10:57
neurosurgeon. And so I'm like, it's quite a
11:00
little brainiac group of strength athletes.
11:04
So shout out to, uh, Dr. Gatlin
11:07
Marks, dentist at Platinum Dentistry
11:10
in Utah. On that's, you know, unprompted.
11:14
Not paid for free advertising, but he's
11:15
great.
11:18
Professor Fred Watson: Well, I should advertise mine, shouldn't I?
11:22
Nothing like as nice a story, but I won't
11:23
bother.
11:30
Heidi Campo: Space nuts.
11:31
Um, well, our next question is an audio
11:34
question from Craig and
11:37
we are going to play that question for you
11:40
right now.
11:41
Professor Fred Watson: Hi professors, it's Craig down in
11:44
sunny Marimbula. Um, I've been
11:47
seeing items about James Webb, uh,
11:50
seeing really massive galaxies
11:53
much bigger than they, than current
11:56
cosmology expects. Are we
11:59
in an older universe? Could we
12:01
tell the difference between a big bang and a
12:04
supermassive white hole that's erupted into
12:06
an existing space time?
12:09
They're just an uh, overactive imagination. I
12:12
hope you're enjoying your week. Ciao.
12:14
Heidi Campo: All right, that was Craig's, uh, question.
12:18
Professor Fred Watson: Craig, the only person asking uh, a
12:21
question this week from.
12:24
Not from the usa.
12:27
Okay, his question about big galaxies,
12:30
is it telling us that the universe is older
12:32
than we think? Maybe, uh, that's a, it's
12:35
a nice way of Thinking about it, um, except
12:39
that we, we still,
12:43
you know, all the evidence points
12:46
to the
12:49
universe having a beginning which
12:52
was 13.8 billion years ago,
12:54
um, which, um, we think was,
12:57
um, the result of a, an event called the Big
13:00
Bang, an explosive event.
13:03
Uh, we believe that's the case partly
13:06
because of what we observe today. But we can
13:08
also still see the flash of that Big Bang by
13:10
the fact that the light has taken 13.8
13:13
billion years to get to us. So, um,
13:16
it's very hard to see how,
13:19
uh, if the universe was older than that Big
13:21
Bang,
13:24
how galaxies would survive that
13:27
explosive event. Um,
13:29
so you know what, um,
13:33
Craig's question is about is,
13:35
uh, are, uh, there galaxies that are older
13:37
than we think the universe is? And
13:41
it defies logic. It's like saying,
13:44
um. And in fact, for a while, this was one of
13:47
the problems with the Big Bang theory. People
13:49
thought, uh, the um,
13:52
planets, uh, stars and
13:55
atoms were actually older than the
13:58
measurement of the age of the universe that
13:59
we got. And that was one of the problems for
14:01
the Big Bang theory, uh, which was, uh,
14:04
only really resolved in the 60s,
14:07
1950s and 60s. Um,
14:10
so I think that's still a
14:13
step of logic that we're not prepared to
14:16
dismiss, uh, that yes, there is that,
14:19
um, the Big Bang does mark the
14:22
start of, uh, the formation of galaxies
14:25
and the galaxies in the universe. Um, I have
14:27
a colleague and uh, friend, uh,
14:30
who's a, uh, very distinguished astronomer in
14:33
the uk, Richard Ellis. And he is
14:36
absolutely. He's a cosmologist. He's somebody
14:39
who looks at the history of the universe,
14:40
very interested in the history of the early
14:42
universe. He is absolutely certain,
14:46
uh, that those galaxies that we can see
14:49
that do look bigger and older than what we
14:51
expected them to be, uh, that they do not
14:54
defy, uh, conventional cosmology,
14:57
that we can still, um,
15:00
you know, work out theoretical models that
15:02
would allow those galaxies still to be young,
15:05
even though they look more advanced in years
15:08
than we thought they would be.
15:11
So, uh, it's all about our understanding of
15:14
galaxy formation rather than having the
15:16
cosmology wrong, rather than having, uh,
15:19
the age of the universe wrong. So, a good
15:22
suggestion, uh, uh, but I think we are
15:25
still stuck with trying to understand how
15:27
these galaxies got so big so quickly.
15:31
Heidi Campo: And stuck is what it is. Sometimes
15:35
that's what I get excited about with space.
15:37
There's so many questions that have to be
15:40
answered. Other sciences are so defined,
15:43
but space is infinite for us to figure out.
15:48
Professor Fred Watson: Okay, we checked all four systems and.
15:50
Heidi Campo: Dealing with the space nets, our, um,
15:53
our last Question is from another curious
15:55
listener. Mark from Bloomington,
15:58
Indiana says hello there.
16:01
What might meteors look like to a person on
16:04
the surface of Mars or Venus, if that were
16:07
possible. The planets are at uh,
16:09
extremes of atmospheric density. But carbon
16:12
dioxide is the primary aspheric gas
16:15
for each. The primary aspheric gas
16:18
for each. And there is very little oxygen
16:20
present compared to Earth and to each other.
16:23
Would meteors appear brighter or dimmer,
16:26
different colors travel faster or slower,
16:28
more or less likely to be seen given the
16:31
thick or thin clouds and the uh, clouds
16:33
altitudes more or less likely to strike the
16:36
surface. Thanks for any insights or even
16:39
guesses.
16:42
Professor Fred Watson: I think we've been sprung here, Heidi. People
16:44
have realized that we just take guesses at
16:47
these things.
16:50
Um, so it's uh,
16:52
it's another great question. You know, we uh,
16:54
this is, I think none of the questions that
16:57
we've had today have ever come in before.
17:00
Uh, maybe, maybe people have been speculating
17:02
about the um, the mystery of these early
17:05
galaxies. But this is a great question. What
17:08
would meteorites, sorry, what would meteors
17:10
look like, uh, to somebody. Let's
17:13
just stick with Mars for now because that's
17:15
the easier one to deal with. I um,
17:18
think Venus will be a problem because the
17:20
atmosphere is so thick, uh, so
17:22
opaque that uh, you probably wouldn't see any
17:25
meteors at all just because,
17:28
you know, there's very little transparency in
17:30
the atmosphere. Mars however, is different.
17:33
Uh, it does have clouds, but not as many as
17:35
we have here on Earth. Uh, let's get
17:38
to the easy question, the easy part of this
17:40
question, uh, which is, um,
17:44
Query. Are they more or less likely to
17:47
strike the surface? And the answer is they're
17:49
more likely because Mars's atmosphere is much
17:52
thinner. It's less than 1% of the pressure of
17:55
the Earth's atmosphere. That means that um,
17:57
it's uh, more likely that a meteoritic
18:00
object would survive its passage
18:03
through the atmosphere to reach the ground.
18:06
Um, and we do find meteorites on Mars. There
18:08
are many examples that the uh, various Mars
18:11
rovers have found meteorites on the planet
18:14
Mars. A uh, meteorite is a meteor
18:17
that's got as far as landing on the, on the
18:19
ground, but what they would look like in
18:22
the uh, in the sky, uh,
18:26
uh, doesn't really have that much to do with
18:28
what the constituents of the atmosphere are.
18:30
Uh, uh, because what you
18:33
see when you see a meteor, a shooting star
18:36
is the fact that it is simply
18:39
um, it's being um, heated
18:41
up to incandescence. It's not
18:44
burning in the sense that
18:47
things burn in the presence of oxygen. Uh,
18:50
and that I think is the thrust of, uh, Mark's
18:52
question. But what you're seeing is this
18:55
thing shooting through the atmosphere. It is
18:57
meeting a gas. Uh, the gas is
19:00
providing some resistance, but also a lot of
19:03
friction on the outside of this particle or
19:05
stone or rock or baseball, whatever it is
19:08
that's coming in, uh, whatever size it is
19:10
that's coming, coming in. And that's what
19:12
causes the brightness of the meteorites being
19:15
flashed into incandescence by its speed
19:18
rather than a chemical reaction taking place.
19:21
Um, that would, um, make uh, that much
19:23
difference. Although certainly we do see
19:26
evidence of the oxygen in the light of some
19:28
of these. So meteors on Mars would look
19:31
similar to what they do on Earth. There's
19:34
some dispute because the
19:37
atmosphere of Mars, whilst it's also much
19:39
thinner than Earth's atmosphere, is
19:41
distributed differently. You know, uh,
19:45
the way in which it falls off in pressure as
19:47
you go up in height, uh, is different
19:50
from what it is on Earth. So that might mean
19:53
that the height at which meteors start to
19:56
glow as they come through the surface, sorry,
19:59
come through the atmosphere of Mars might be
20:02
different. And if they were lower, if they
20:04
were burning up lower down in the atmosphere,
20:06
then they would look a bit brighter than they
20:08
do here on Earth. If they were burning up
20:10
higher in the atmosphere, they would, uh,
20:12
look a bit fainter. And it's not quite
20:15
clear which of those is the case. Uh, there's
20:18
some dispute among the. Certainly the things
20:21
I've read about whether they will be brighter
20:23
or fainter, but they will be much the same.
20:26
So, uh, we hope that maybe one
20:29
day when, uh, astronauts are
20:32
exploring, uh, but not colonizing
20:35
Mars, uh, that they might send us
20:38
back reports of meteors that they've seen in
20:40
the night skies of Mars. And maybe you'll
20:42
hear about it on Space notes.
20:45
Heidi Campo: Maybe so. And it is my understanding that
20:48
that is one. I mean, there's so many concerns
20:50
with Moon to Mars missions. And a potential
20:52
Mars colony is it's not as safe.
20:55
Our atmosphere does surprisingly a lot to
20:58
protect us. And that is, um, in a
21:01
lot of student design competitions that
21:04
is something they're really asking for
21:06
students to look at is, hey, how can we
21:08
protect potential analogs
21:11
or colonies or any other assets we put
21:14
on Mars? How do we protect those from these
21:16
constant, um, impacts? And
21:19
ah, that is really kind of an interesting
21:21
question right now. And that's not really my
21:24
wheelhouse. But, um, people in the
21:26
engineering world are, um. There's a lot
21:29
of fun things for them. To do with those
21:30
projects.
21:32
Professor Fred Watson: Indeed. That's right. Look, it's a different
21:35
world from ours.
21:38
Everything's different. Uh, radiation,
21:40
meteoritic bombardment, all of those things.
21:42
Low pressure, low gravity, different
21:45
world and a lot to think about if we are
21:48
ever going to have humans walking on Mars.
21:52
Heidi Campo: All right, Fred. Well, ah, this has been
21:55
another fantastic Q and A episode. I
21:58
always, I love the way you answer these
22:00
questions. I feel like, uh, every time we
22:03
write in, I feel like each one of us
22:06
has an opportunity to be a, uh, collaborator
22:08
with you and gets to experience what it's
22:11
like to be on this intellectual journey
22:14
together. So keep sending in your amazing
22:17
questions. You guys are, you guys are half
22:19
of the brilliance of this show. So thank you
22:21
so much.
22:22
Professor Fred Watson: That's right. I agree there
22:24
wholeheartedly, Heidi. At least half. In
22:26
fact, maybe more than that.
22:30
Heidi Campo: Excellent. Well, thank you everybody to
22:32
listening to another episode of Space Nuts.
22:34
We will catch you next time.
22:37
Professor Fred Watson: Sounds great. Thanks again, Heidi.
22:40
Andrew Dunkley: Hi, Fred. Hi, Huw. Hi,
22:42
Heidi.
22:43
It's Andrew from the southwestern
22:46
Indian Ocean. We've just finished a seven day
22:48
crossing of the Indian Ocean and stopped
22:50
yesterday at the beautiful island
22:53
country of Mauritius. And it's
22:56
winter there, but the temperature was in the
22:59
uh, mid to high 20s. So,
23:02
um, yeah, if that's winter, I'll take it.
23:04
It's been beautiful. The seas were quite
23:06
smooth after our, uh, treacherous rounding
23:09
of south, uh, southern Australia. Uh, but
23:12
now that we've left Mauritius, we're heading
23:14
into, into some heavy seas as we move
23:17
towards the Cape of Good Hope and then
23:20
come up the other side of Africa. But
23:22
Mauritius was absolutely beautiful, lovely,
23:25
uh, people, interesting story behind
23:26
Mauritius. It's a, an island that
23:29
was discovered by Arabian, uh, sailors.
23:32
Uh, it was unoccupied, so they moved in and
23:36
uh, of course they brought their slaves with
23:37
them. Um, somewhere along the line they
23:40
handed us over to, um, the Dutch
23:43
and the Portuguese. Uh, the Dutch
23:46
kind of decimated everything they possibly
23:48
could. My wife's half Dutch, so I've got
23:51
to be careful what I say. But, uh, they
23:53
killed off the dodo bird, they destroyed most
23:56
of the forests. Uh, they killed off the
23:59
native giant turtles. Uh,
24:02
so, um, yeah, nothing like that is there
24:05
today. But then, uh, the French moved in and
24:08
they stayed there for a very long time until
24:10
they were tipped out by the British. And the
24:11
British held sovereignty over Mauritius until
24:14
independence late last century. Beautiful
24:17
country, very rugged volcanic
24:20
landscape. Uh, saw, uh,
24:23
the volcano at the top that still, uh,
24:25
exists. It's dormant. It hasn't erupted for a
24:27
long, long time. And I hope it doesn't
24:28
because it's got houses all over it. Uh, but,
24:31
um, just a, just a beautiful landscape. They
24:33
speak French and English as their
24:36
predominant, uh, languages. But the, but the,
24:39
the native people who are originally, uh, you
24:42
know, from the slaves of South Africa speak
24:44
French Creole. So it's really, really
24:47
interesting mix of people. But, uh, a lovely
24:50
country and, and very, very much
24:52
worth visiting. Uh, and a very big
24:55
Hindu population as well.
24:57
And so we visited, visited a Hindu temple and
25:00
the sacred waters that were discovered by a
25:03
Hindu many, many years ago, uh, where
25:06
people were blessing children and uh,
25:09
walking through the waters, which are just as
25:11
sacred as the Ganges, apparently. Uh,
25:14
and um, there was a little monument there to
25:16
the sun and the planets. So, uh, there
25:19
was a little astronomical connection,
25:23
uh, while I was there.
25:24
Anyway, that's where we're up to. Next stop
25:27
will be Cape Town. It's going to take us five
25:29
days of sailing to get there, so I'll report
25:31
on that next time. So hope all is
25:34
going well with Space Nuts. See you soon.
25:37
Professor Fred Watson: You've been listening to the Space Nuts.
25:39
Podcast, available at
25:42
Apple Podcasts, Spotify,
25:44
iHeartRadio or your favorite podcast
25:47
player. You can also stream on demand at
25:50
bitesz.com This has been another quality
25:52
podcast production from bitesz.com