Latest / Space News Today / Relativistic Beaming, Martian Waters & Cosmic Trash: The Space Nuts Q&A | Space Nuts: Astronomy...

Transcript

Relativistic Beaming, Martian Waters & Cosmic Trash: The Space Nuts Q&A | Space Nuts: Astronomy... · Space News Today

0:00
Hi there. Thanks for joining us. This is
0:02
a Q&A edition of Space Nuts, where we
0:04
talk astronomy and space science and we
0:07
answer audience questions or we just say
0:09
a lot of words that sound like answers,
0:11
but then they'll check it later on the
0:12
internet and realize we were just giving
0:14
them an absolute load of CODs. Wallop.
0:17
Uh, coming up today, uh, relativist.
0:21
>> You're not supposed to be talking yet.
0:23
Relativistic
0:25
relativistic Doppler beaming. What on
0:28
earth is that? We're about to find out.
0:30
Uh, Sunny has sent us an audio question
0:33
about Mars water. Is it water? Was it
0:36
water? Could it have been something
0:38
else? Uh, Halt is asking how much stuff
0:40
we can send off the planet before the
0:42
planet sort of, you know, starts to fall
0:44
off itself and fusion reaction in the
0:48
sun. We will dispel that confusion very,
0:51
very soon on this episode of Space Nuts.
0:54
>> 15 seconds. Guidance is internal. 10 9
0:59
ignition sequence start.
1:00
>> Space nuts.
1:01
>> 5 4 3 2
1:04
>> 1 2 3 4 5 5 4 3 2 1
1:06
>> Space nuts.
1:08
>> Astronauts report. It feels good.
1:11
>> Professor Fred Watson, astronomer at
1:12
large, is here. You've already heard his
1:14
voice. Hello, Fred.
1:17
>> Nice to see you, Andrew. I'm always
1:19
reminded of um and you might know about
1:21
this as well, even though our listeners
1:23
are all too young to remember, but on
1:25
the Goon Show, there was once an episode
1:27
where Eckles came on before he was
1:30
supposed to. Uh and had to make the
1:33
comment, "I'm not here yet."
1:36
>> I remember that. Yes.
1:38
>> I'm not here yet. Uh, which reminds me
1:41
of a famous incident on ABC radio where
1:44
I worked for 22 years, uh, where a, um,
1:47
news reader was trying to do the
1:49
bulletin,
1:51
uh, but they were halfway through a live
1:52
interview with Spike Milligan.
1:55
Spike kept interrupting at the end of
1:58
every sentence with and Spike Milligan.
2:00
And Spike Milligan. And so when the
2:02
story finished, the news reader said da
2:04
da da da and Spike Milligan. He got He
2:08
got fired for that.
2:10
>> Yeah,
2:11
>> he got fired for that.
2:13
>> It's one of the funniest pieces of radio
2:14
you will ever hear. Look it up online,
2:17
but he got canned
2:19
>> probably. Yeah. Um,
2:21
>> yeah,
2:21
>> that was in the old BBC days, probably.
2:24
>> Oh, well, yeah, probably. Well, yeah,
2:26
the times have changed.
2:28
>> Yes, rather.
2:30
>> Uh, let's uh get into some questions,
2:32
Fred. And I've got our first one here
2:34
from Ron who is in upstate New York. Uh
2:37
he says, "Spring's just around the
2:38
corner." He says, "Hope all is well down
2:41
under." Well, if you like wind. Yeah, it
2:43
is. It's going great. It's been pretty
2:45
windy here lately. Uh I have a question
2:47
about relativistic Doppler beaming that
2:50
we see on a black hole's accretion disc,
2:53
which causes the side moving towards us
2:56
to be brighter than the side moving away
2:58
from us. Why are we not seeing blue and
3:01
red Doppler shifts in the color of the
3:04
light in those respective regions? Uh
3:07
there's so much uh and thanks so much
3:08
for the great podcast. It is our
3:11
pleasure. It is our pleasure. Thanks for
3:13
the question, Ron.
3:14
>> It's a good question. Um and um there's
3:18
the answer. Uh Jordy. Jordy. Yeah. Uh so
3:25
we do we do see the Doppler shift. Um
3:28
but the the the reason why we don't talk
3:32
about that is because this radiation
3:35
that's being beamed out is a continuum
3:39
radiation. By that I mean it's at all
3:41
wavelengths.
3:43
Uh so to to make Doppler work just the
3:48
backstory here if you've got something
3:50
coming towards you it's light is shifted
3:54
to the blue. If it's moving away from
3:55
you, its light is shifted to the red.
3:58
Um, but you need a feature in order to
4:02
detect that. Uh, and some sources of
4:05
light, for example, um, it actually even
4:09
works with LEDs does this. But if you
4:10
think of the old, um, orange sodium
4:13
lights, which we used to see, the low
4:15
pressure sodium lights, they emit all
4:17
their light at one wavelength, uh, which
4:20
is called the sodium D line for
4:22
historical reasons. And so if you if you
4:25
had a sodium lamp coming towards you,
4:27
then that peak of wavelength would be
4:30
moved to the blue end of the spectrum.
4:32
If it was going away from you, it'd be
4:33
moved to the red end of the spectrum,
4:35
the sodium line. But in order to so so
4:40
that happens for all moving objects, but
4:43
in order for you to be able to detect
4:44
that it's moving, you need a discrete uh
4:48
peak of light or radiation. Uh, and in
4:51
in the case of a moving sodium lamp,
4:54
that's it. The peak of the sodium sodium
4:56
emission line. If you've got a
4:58
continuum, a spectrum that goes all the
5:00
way from blue to red or violet to red.
5:03
Yes, it can be moved uh by the Doppler
5:05
shift, but you you don't see it. You
5:07
don't detect it. Uh and so in the case
5:10
of the material uh swirling around a
5:13
black hole uh in the accretion disc
5:17
exactly as Ron says it u it actually
5:21
under go something called relativistic
5:23
Doppler beaming and that's that because
5:26
this stuff is moving so fast it's really
5:29
not far short of the speed of light the
5:31
path of the photons is altered and they
5:34
tend to cluster around the direction in
5:37
which the movement is taken. place and
5:39
that's why uh an accretion disc is
5:42
brighter on one side than it is on the
5:44
other. It's brighter in the side that's
5:45
coming toward you because of this
5:48
relativistic Doppler beaming. It's quite
5:50
an esoteric topic. I'm quite amazed that
5:52
we're covering this on Space Nuts, but
5:54
it's uh it's really good stuff.
5:58
>> Thank you, Ron, because you're clearly
5:59
ve very well verssed in this stuff as
6:01
well. I mean, when you look at the
6:03
images of black holes that we now have,
6:06
you you're looking at a an orange
6:09
frosted donut basically, uh, that that's
6:11
that's the primary color, the the
6:13
orange, but it is brighter on one side.
6:16
>> Yeah.
6:17
>> Yes. There there are bite spots in it.
6:18
That's correct. Yeah. And some of that
6:20
will be due to relativistic beaming.
6:22
Yeah.
6:23
>> Okay. And, uh, how many have they taken
6:26
now? I think there's there's been maybe
6:28
three. Three or four.
6:30
>> Yes. Uh so we've got uh M52 was the
6:32
first is that right Messier 52 uh the
6:36
center of our galaxy uh Sagittarius A
6:39
star but also M52 done again with
6:43
polarization so we could see the the
6:45
magnetism in it. I think that's the way
6:47
it worked.
6:49
>> Okay. Um
6:50
>> these were with the event horizon
6:52
telescope
6:53
>> because I've got another one here that's
6:55
uh of M87.
6:57
>> Okay. So there is another object here
6:59
>> that's yeah that's the third one I was
7:00
thinking of I didn't know they done M52
7:02
again but yeah the technologies reached
7:06
a point now where we can actually image
7:08
these things they're not photos though
7:09
are they these are um gathered through
7:12
radio spectrometry of
7:13
>> yeah they are there it's a basically a
7:16
planetized array of radio telescopes
7:19
that um conspire together uh in very
7:22
cunning ways um to make these images to
7:26
synthesize the
7:28
Fantastic stuff. Yeah, Ron, thanks so
7:31
much for the question. Really enjoyed
7:33
that one and uh hopefully hopefully
7:35
we'll hear from you again. Our next
7:37
question comes from Sunny. What a great
7:40
name for somebody who listens to an
7:42
astronomy podcast.
7:44
>> Hello, Space Nuts. This is Sunny Skies
7:46
from Southern California,
7:49
Long Beach. In fact, my question for you
7:51
today is regarding geological formations
7:56
on Mars which indicate there was large
7:59
quantities of water for a long period of
8:02
time
8:04
similar to something we'd see on Earth.
8:06
Is there any other corroborative
8:09
information or data to support that it
8:11
actually was water and not some other
8:13
crazy liquid that we don't have here
8:16
possibly on Earth? Love the podcast.
8:20
Stay sunny.
8:22
>> We're trying to. It's coming into winter
8:24
here, so um yeah, it won't be sunny for
8:26
long. Uh Sunny, lovely to hear from you.
8:28
That's a good question. Uh because we
8:29
we've got a lot of evidence that shows
8:31
there was water, rivers, oceans,
8:33
streams, um you know, um ces pits,
8:37
whatever you want to call them on Mars,
8:41
but that's all gone. Um but we are, you
8:44
know, the telltale signs are there. Um,
8:47
Sunny's question is, was it really water
8:50
or could it have been something else? We
8:52
do know there are other liquid oceans in
8:56
in our solar system that are not water.
8:58
>> Yes, we do. That's right.
9:00
>> Um, and there's more than one kind of
9:02
water, which is also a a factor to
9:04
consider. So, um, yeah. Could he be on
9:07
to something or are we absolutely dead
9:09
set certain that Mars had water?
9:12
>> I think water perhaps. Yes, that's that
9:15
and that's why uh for that reason we
9:17
still we can still see it. So um and
9:20
I'll explain that in a second. Yes. Uh I
9:23
I guess excuse me Sunonny's point is
9:27
>> um we see evidence of liquid. Uh could
9:30
it have been something peculiar that we
9:32
don't know about? And in a way it is um
9:36
because uh we have seen evidence on Mars
9:42
from principally from the Phoenix uh
9:44
lander which was on the which is near
9:48
the northern polar regions the northern
9:50
Arctic of Mars um which actually
9:53
analyzed chemically some of these
9:55
materials. So you might remember Andrew
9:57
Phoenix had a little backhoe. It was
9:59
didn't have any wheels. It was
10:00
stationary, but it had a backhoe with
10:02
which it could scrape away the top
10:05
surface of the soil of Mars. And it
10:07
didn't have to scrape much before it got
10:09
to solid ice. Um, and the first hint
10:13
that this was ice uh was in the color.
10:16
It was white. The second hint was that
10:19
some scraps of this material that had
10:21
been dug up by the backhoe um basically
10:25
disappeared after a few days. they had
10:28
turned directly into vapor. Uh they'
10:31
sublimed and that's exactly what you'd
10:33
expect for water ice to do. But more
10:36
especially that backhoe wasn't just
10:39
there to scrape things. It was to pour
10:41
the things it had dug up into a chemical
10:45
analysis. And that's the smoking gun. uh
10:49
because the chemical analysis
10:50
demonstrated that yes this was water uh
10:53
water ice solid ice and that's there in
10:56
large quantities under the surface of
10:58
the Arctic regions of Mars uh and we
11:01
know it's there in the on the surface
11:03
actually in the polar caps of Mars and
11:04
we know it's water ice from there
11:06
because it's got the spectral signature
11:08
of water ice um but the reason why I say
11:11
it could be a bit different is that we
11:14
believe that um this water is very
11:17
briney
11:18
that it's rich in what are called
11:20
pchlorates which actually lower the the
11:23
freezing point. Um and there there's
11:25
evidence that for a short time there
11:27
were droplets of water actually on the
11:30
legs of the Phoenix lander probably made
11:33
of ice that had been melted during uh
11:36
the descent uh vaporized condensed out
11:39
onto the onto the legs of the lander and
11:41
stayed liquid for a little time uh while
11:44
the heat was while the temperature was
11:46
high enough. So um all the all the
11:49
evidence points to those oceans having
11:51
been made of water. Although it might be
11:53
very briny, it might be chemically
11:56
different uh from from what we
11:58
experience on Earth. But you you've only
12:00
to look at the different forms that
12:02
water comes in on Earth when you've got
12:03
some of them where you've got cyanide
12:05
dissolved in it in some of these pools,
12:08
you know, in in Yeuseite and places like
12:11
that. So, I think uh I think it's a good
12:14
question, but I think basically H2O is
12:17
what makes up the contents of those
12:19
former oceans.
12:20
>> I think what's interesting about Mars
12:22
water is that um it's it's heavier than
12:27
Earth water. It's got a a much higher
12:30
ratio of isotopes um heavy isotopes of
12:34
hydrogen I think is which is which is um
12:37
you know heavy water not the stuff out
12:39
of the nuclear reactors but um
12:42
>> you natural water.
12:44
>> Yes, that's right. It's it's it's
12:46
similar to to what was used in the
12:47
nuclear reactors. So it's it's um
12:50
hydrogen with an extra neutron I guess.
12:54
Is that right? To make dutyium. Uh and
12:57
um and yes, you're right that the ratio
13:00
of uh and once again this comes from
13:02
analysis by machines like Phoenix on the
13:05
surface of Mars. Um there's a higher
13:07
ratio of I think that's the way around
13:10
it is a higher ratio of heavy water to
13:12
normal water on Mars than there is on
13:15
Earth. I think that's the case.
13:17
>> Yeah. And the other thing um Sunny is
13:20
you couldn't drink it in its current
13:22
state. It's It would need to be cleaned
13:25
up a bit.
13:26
>> Yeah. Do you remember we once uh we once
13:29
talked about how much heavy water you
13:31
could drink and still survive? And it's
13:33
I can't it's a fair bit actually. It was
13:35
a few percent.
13:36
>> Yes. But
13:37
>> but if you drank it for long enough, it
13:40
would start you'd start to basically
13:43
>> fall apart. literally fall apart
13:47
>> because the the the dutyium wouldn't you
13:50
know your body's we're not built for it
13:52
basically.
13:53
>> Yes. Exactly.
13:54
>> If if you if we were to find a water
13:55
world that was 100% D2O rather than H2O
14:00
or we couldn't live there.
14:02
>> It would kill us.
14:04
>> Yeah.
14:05
>> Even though it's water just not
14:08
water heavy heavy water. Yes.
14:10
>> Yes. So your point is very very good
14:12
Sunny. there there there's a bit more to
14:14
it than meets the eye. And uh yes, it is
14:17
water on Mars, but it's not the same as
14:19
our water. It's close, but it's not
14:22
quite the same. Thanks for the question.
14:26
And uh hopefully hopefully we'll hear
14:28
from you again, Sunny. Great question,
14:29
that one. This is Space Nuts with Andrew
14:32
Dunley and Professor Fred Watson.
14:36
Let's take a break from the show to tell
14:38
you about our sponsor, NordVPN.
14:41
Now, if you've ever felt like your
14:43
online privacy is slipping through the
14:45
cracks, then you're not alone. Hackers,
14:48
scammers, harvesters, they're all out
14:49
there trying to get your private info.
14:51
Whether that's your passwords or your
14:53
personal details to sell on the dark web
14:56
or to use themselves to access your bank
14:59
accounts, credit card details, and who
15:01
knows what else. But you can protect
15:03
yourself with NordVPN.
15:06
You can take control at home or or more
15:09
importantly when you're out in public
15:11
using free Wi-Fi. Right now uh using the
15:15
exclusive Space Nuts offer, you can
15:18
receive four extra months for free on a
15:22
nordvpn.com
15:24
plan. NordVPN encrypts your internet
15:28
connection, hides your IP address, and
15:30
offers access to over 7,700 servers
15:33
around the world. Plus, with features
15:36
like threat protection pro, meshet,
15:40
ultra fast speeds via Nord links, your
15:43
digital life stays private and
15:46
efficient. So, don't miss out. Visit
15:49
nordvpn.com/spacenuts
15:52
and enter the code spacenuts to claim
15:55
this deal. Remember, there's a 30-day
15:57
money back guarantee, so it's riskfree
16:00
to try. Stay safe, stay private, and
16:03
browse with confidence. That's
16:05
nordvpn.com/spacenuts.
16:10
Roger, you're here. Also,
16:12
>> Space Nuts.
16:13
>> I like this next question from Halt
16:15
because it's it's it's so simple and yet
16:19
it's it's something that that people
16:21
wonder about. uh because we have reached
16:25
a point where we've been going, you
16:26
know, sending stuff into space for for
16:29
decades now. And he goes on to say,
16:32
"We've sent several objects beyond
16:34
Earth's gravitational field. How much
16:36
can we send before it affects Earth's
16:39
orbit?" That comes from Halt. I don't
16:41
know where you're from, but uh great
16:43
question, Halt. Love this one. Uh yeah,
16:45
we we're bas basically filling the
16:46
universe with our own junk. Um, but all
16:50
of that stuff that we're sending out
16:52
there comes off planet in one way or
16:55
another. Um, so yeah, what could be the
16:58
long-term effect?
17:00
Yeah, great question. So, um, the
17:03
figures are, and I'm pulling this from
17:05
my memory, but I think this is right. In
17:08
orbit, we have something like I think
17:10
it's about 11,000 tons of stuff.
17:14
>> Is that all?
17:14
>> Um, yeah, something like that. Uh that's
17:18
with uh all of the spacecraft that have
17:21
been launched. Remember these spacecraft
17:23
are made of very light materials because
17:25
you can't you don't want heavy stuff
17:27
being sent into orbit because you're
17:29
wasting fuel. The lighter you can make
17:31
your spacecraft, the less fuel you need.
17:34
Uh so it's all about economics. But I
17:36
think it's about 11,000 tons in orbit.
17:39
Um and when you look at spacecraft that
17:41
have gone beyond that, it's vanishingly
17:44
small. um you know it's probably less
17:46
than 100 tons. It might be about 100
17:48
tons for stuff that's gone out beyond
17:51
Earth orbit. So uh that when you compare
17:56
it with the mass of the Earth, which I
17:59
can't remember off hand, but it's a lot.
18:01
It's one Earth mass actually in units.
18:04
Uh and um you know, but it's it's
18:06
gazillions of tons compared with what
18:08
we've put into space. So um it's not
18:12
going to affect the Earth's orbit. And
18:14
actually the orbit itself, even if we
18:17
put, you know, a significant fraction of
18:20
the Earth's mass into orbit around the
18:22
Earth, it wouldn't necessarily affect
18:24
the Earth's orbit because it tends to
18:26
need an interaction between two objects
18:29
to change the orbit of something, a
18:32
cloud from another planet or something
18:34
like that, that would change the orbit.
18:36
All right?
18:38
Whereas whereas just doing something
18:40
that has the same center of mass as the
18:42
Earth does, if I can put it that way,
18:44
doesn't necessarily change the orbit at
18:46
all. But even notwithstanding that,
18:48
we're no we're nowhere near anything
18:50
that would actually affect the Earth's
18:52
well-being.
18:54
>> The mass of the Earth is 5.97219*
18:58
10 24th power kilogram.
19:02
>> Yep.
19:04
10^ the 24th power kilogram. That sounds
19:07
right.
19:08
>> It's a lot.
19:10
>> I seem to remember that the sun is
19:13
something it's about 10^ the 27 kg I
19:16
think or it could be tons. I can't
19:18
remember but it's
19:20
>> I can look that up too.
19:21
>> Yeah. See mass of the sun. I think it's
19:24
>> 1.989
19:26
10 times 10^ the 30th power kilograms.
19:29
>> Okay. That's that's kilograms. Okay. So
19:31
it's 10 27 tons.
19:33
Yeah, because this Yeah, that's what it
19:36
means. One more one more thing that Halt
19:40
might be interested to know is that um
19:43
you know you've you've given us the
19:44
numbers of how much material
19:47
>> in terms of weight has has left the
19:49
planet which is a negligible amount but
19:53
scientists estimate that roughly 100
19:55
metric tons of cosmic dust like
19:58
micrometeorites enters the earth's
20:00
atmosphere
20:01
>> y
20:01
>> every day.
20:02
>> Every day. That's right.
20:04
>> Every day.
20:05
>> Yeah. So, we're actually getting
20:07
heavier.
20:09
>> Yeah, we are. Yes.
20:10
>> Or more massive, depending on which way
20:12
you want to look at it.
20:14
>> It's it more massive is the correct
20:16
term. You're quite right. To be heavier,
20:19
you need to be in the gravitational
20:20
field of something.
20:22
We are in the sun's gravitational field,
20:24
but we wouldn't think of it that way.
20:26
>> No. No. So
20:29
when you when you think about it, what
20:30
we're what we're kicking out of our
20:33
planet, our gravitational field
20:35
>> is being replaced like
20:38
>> Yes.
20:39
>> by much more.
20:40
>> Yeah. Exactly. So thank you for pointing
20:43
that out.
20:45
>> It's been very useful today.
20:47
>> It's about 100 um 100 tons uh or
20:51
thereabouts. It's a and it's just
20:53
meteoritic material.
20:54
>> Yes. that really usually contributes to
20:56
the Earth's atmosphere because it gets
20:57
vaporized most of it.
20:59
>> To to um quote a famous Scottish
21:02
astronomer, it's space clap
21:04
>> is what it is.
21:07
>> I don't know who that is. I think he
21:08
used to be on my staff at the
21:10
observatory.
21:12
>> Oh dear. All right, Halt, great
21:14
question. Um made made for some
21:16
interesting discussion and and made me
21:18
sound useful for a brief second. Thanks
21:20
for sending it in. Our final question
21:23
comes from Ken. Hi Andrew and Fred. Ken
21:26
from Maruchidor. Longtime listener and
21:28
fan and love the way you make complex
21:30
issues sound so simple.
21:33
I'm trying to understand the basic
21:35
fusion reaction that both me and my
21:38
accountant are struggling with.
21:40
The basic fusion reaction in our sun and
21:43
all main sequence stars converts
21:45
hydrogen to helium to create energy.
21:49
To summarize the reaction for hydrogen
21:52
nuclei that is four protons go through
21:55
two steps to create one helium nucleus
21:58
containing two neutrons and two protons.
22:01
Additionally gamma rays neutrinos and
22:04
posetrons are released.
22:07
My astronomy textbooks say that about
22:09
600 million tons of hydrogen are
22:12
converted to 596 million tons of helium
22:15
every second in our sun.
22:18
The 4 million tons is converted to
22:20
energy as per E= MC².
22:25
If neutrons had a lower mass than
22:27
protons, it would make all perfect
22:30
sense. But they don't. They have a
22:33
higher mass. So the mass of the helium
22:36
nucleus is higher than the mass of the
22:38
four protons.
22:41
All the explanations I've read sound
22:43
pretty dodgy. And my accountant says he
22:46
could never get away with such
22:47
explanations with the tax department.
22:50
Could you please explain the devil in
22:52
the detail that I'm missing?
22:55
>> Thank you, Kenji. He did his homework on
22:57
that one, didn't he?
22:58
>> Wow.
22:58
>> He did. He's absolutely right, too.
23:02
>> And and was in such a terrible part of
23:04
the world there up in Maruchi door. What
23:07
a what a hole.
23:10
Um, I don't think I I think uh I think
23:15
Ken's going to find this answer that I'm
23:18
going to give him pretty dodgy as well.
23:21
Uh because but it is the correct answer.
23:25
Um because it turns out that unlike uh
23:29
Ken's accountant who can do sort of
23:32
arithmetic because dollars don't change
23:36
their mass you know randomly.
23:38
>> Yeah.
23:39
>> You can't do the same with subatomic
23:42
particles.
23:44
um because you have to look at other
23:47
factors and the factor that comes into
23:49
being in this case and I'm sure this is
23:51
what uh what Ken was referring to when
23:54
he talked about dodgy answers is
23:56
something called the binding energy. Um,
24:00
so he's right that the helium 4 that's
24:04
formed by the four hydrogen atoms should
24:08
have slightly more in mass. Uh, should
24:12
have slightly more mass than uh than uh
24:16
the four hydrogen atoms. Um,
24:19
that's because you're uh you're doing
24:23
doing the calculation. I beg you,
24:24
pardon. Um, it's the other way around.
24:26
it should should have slightly less mass
24:28
in order to give you the energy that
24:30
makes the sun shine. But it actually
24:32
turns out to be the other way round. And
24:35
the difference is what I've just called
24:37
it's something called binding energy. Uh
24:39
the difference is the binding energy in
24:41
the helium nucleus which is called a
24:44
mass defect which lowers the actual mass
24:47
of the helium nucleus slightly. So what
24:51
what what Ken's saying is that when you
24:53
add up the masses of all these
24:55
particles, you get something that's more
24:58
massive than what you started. And it
25:00
and you should expect it to be less
25:02
massive than what you started because of
25:04
that the fact that you've got this um uh
25:07
large amount of mass being turned into
25:09
radiation. That's how the sun shines. Uh
25:13
but in fact, it is less than what you
25:15
started with because of this mass
25:17
defect, the binding energy. there's an
25:19
energy that holds uh nuclei together
25:22
which actually effectively contributes
25:25
to their mass because of exactly what
25:27
Ken said, E= MC². And I hope you don't
25:30
think that sounds too dodgy, Ken, but
25:32
that's the answer.
25:34
>> Yeah, Ken and you and your accountant
25:36
can relax now. The numbers do add up.
25:38
They're just a bit weird,
25:40
>> as my grand would say.
25:43
>> I'm sure she would. Uh and she probably
25:45
does the same calculation that I had,
25:47
too. It's um it's just that atoms don't
25:50
behave like dollars do. They they change
25:52
depending on what they're doing.
25:54
>> Yeah. Yeah. My um
25:58
my money acts like atoms that sort of
26:02
implode on each other. They just Yeah.
26:05
That's pretty well what happens. Um
26:08
>> that's called that's called nuclear
26:09
nuclear fishing where it leaks away.
26:12
>> Yes, that's what it is. Yep. Yep.
26:14
Indeed. Um, so yeah, well done, Fred. I
26:17
I
26:19
you might have noticed my eyes glazed
26:21
over when you tried to explain that, but
26:24
um I'm sure Ken understands because the
26:27
the homework you put into that question
26:28
was uh spectacular. Thanks, Ken. Lovely
26:31
to hear from you. Hope all is well in
26:33
that um hideous place called Maruchi
26:35
Door on one of the most beautiful parts
26:37
of the east coast of Australia. It's a
26:39
lovely area. Absolutely beautiful. I'm
26:41
so jealous. Uh I'm going to we got a bit
26:43
of time up our sleeve. Quick one, Fred.
26:45
Um, just a question without notice,
26:47
actually. This comes from Sandy in
26:49
Melbourne.
26:50
>> Good day, Fred and Andrew. I was
26:51
recently watching the live views of the
26:53
Arteimus 2 spacecraft, and there was
26:56
what appears to be dust going past the
26:59
spacecraft. What on earth is it? Uh, is
27:03
it rocks, dust, debris, or exhaust
27:05
material from the ship's maneuvering
27:07
engines? Uh, and he did send a link to
27:10
um a YouTube video of it and and it's
27:12
just really bright pieces of material
27:15
just zipping past the um spacecraft. Uh,
27:19
I would think exhaust maybe. Have you
27:22
>> um come across?
27:23
>> No, I need to look at that. Uh, which
27:25
I'm just going to try and do because um
27:27
I I didn't have a chat. I've been flat
27:29
out all day talking about alum all over
27:32
the place. Wait a minute. Where are we?
27:34
Uh, it's an email that I received. Uh,
27:38
>> just sent it to you again. This is like
27:40
live radio, Fred. We're just like
27:42
>> just doing it on the hop.
27:45
>> Uh,
27:46
yes.
27:46
>> But it's it's a fascinating video. I'm
27:49
just looking at it now and um it's only
27:52
about 15 seconds, but yes, you can see
27:53
all these bright flashes just zipping
27:56
past the spacecraft.
27:59
>> Um
27:59
>> um
28:00
>> it could be exhaust material.
28:03
I'm not able to see your incoming email.
28:06
What's Who is the
28:09
>> It's from um Sandy. Sandy
28:12
>> that um
28:13
>> No, it must have come via Hang on. Here
28:15
we are. Space Nuts.
28:17
>> Yeah.
28:17
>> Is this Yeah. Okay. All right. I've got
28:19
the link.
28:19
>> Okay.
28:20
>> Let me open that up and look at it.
28:24
>> Okay. Uh it could be could be ice.
28:29
>> Oh, I didn't think of that.
28:32
A little bit of stuff going past. Um, it
28:36
could be ice because they have had
28:38
problems with the toilets. Oh.
28:41
>> Uh, which, uh, have frozen up. The
28:44
toilets frozen up. Uh, the exhaust vent
28:47
for the liquid waste has frozen. Uh, and
28:51
they've tried to unblock it. That might
28:53
be what that is.
28:55
>> Okay.
28:56
>> Uh, that's the best guess I can give,
28:58
but I guess well be it. Yeah,
29:00
>> I think it's a good guess and Sandy is
29:03
so glad he asked. We only just talked
29:04
about the toilets the other day. All
29:06
this innovation and and new tech and
29:10
>> yes, the hygiene facility or whatever it
29:12
was.
29:12
>> That's right. It's given all kinds of
29:15
problems, but it's because of the the
29:17
the venting pipe has been freezing up.
29:19
So, they've turned a couple of times
29:21
they've turned the spacecraft towards
29:22
the sun. It's also got heaters in it,
29:24
which might be faulty or something like
29:26
that. But um I believe uh Victor Glover
29:30
who uh is one of the crew members I
29:33
think he's the plumbing expert.
29:36
>> What a great job.
29:39
>> What's your job? I'm a plumber on
29:40
Optimist.
29:40
>> He charges 75 bucks an hour too by the
29:43
way. So
29:44
>> with $150 call out fee as well.
29:46
>> That's right.
29:48
That that happened to me once. I called
29:50
a plumber and he said, "Oh yeah, that's
29:51
a council problem." And then build me 40
29:53
bucks.
29:56
It's true story.
29:57
>> Uh there you go, Sandy. It was It was
29:59
the toilet. It was the toilet. Uh maybe.
30:02
Thanks for the question. I love doing
30:04
questions without notice. You just never
30:06
know what's going to get thrown up.
30:07
Boom. Boom. Um thank you, Fred. We're
30:10
all done.
30:11
>> Um thank goodness for that.
30:14
>> Maybe so. Maybe so.
30:16
>> Yeah, we'll talk again soon, Andrew.
30:18
Thank you.
30:19
>> Professor Fred Watson, astronomer at
30:21
large. And uh don't forget to visit us
30:23
online, especially our website um where
30:26
you can send us your questions, text and
30:28
audio. Spacenuts.io
30:31
is one of the URLs you can use or just
30:33
do Spacenuts podcast as a search in your
30:36
favorite search engine and click on the
30:38
AMA link at the top uh where you can
30:40
send us text and audio questions. So
30:42
don't forget to tell us who you are and
30:45
where you're from. And thanks to Hugh in
30:47
the studio who actually was with us
30:49
today, but he's had to leave because he
30:51
had to go and see his accountant uh
30:53
because uh apparently the tax department
30:55
says there are confusion reactions that
30:57
they want to discuss with him.
31:00
And from me, Andrew Dunley, thanks for
31:02
your company. We'll see you on the next
31:03
episode of Space Nuts. Bye-bye.
31:05
>> Space Nuts. You've been listening to the
31:08
Space Nuts podcast
31:11
>> available at Apple Podcasts, Spotify,
31:14
iHeart Radio, or your favorite podcast
31:16
player. You can also stream on demand at
31:19
byes.com. This has been another quality
31:22
podcast production from byes.com.