Latest / Space Nuts: Astronomy Insights & Cosmic Discoveries / Wormholes, Artemis 2 Updates & The Einstein Cross Explained

Transcript

Wormholes, Artemis 2 Updates & The Einstein Cross Explained · Space Nuts: Astronomy Insights & Cosmic Discoveries

• 0:00
  Andrew Dunkley: Hi there.
• 0:00
  Andrew Dunkley: Thanks for joining us yet again. This is
• 0:02
  Space Nuts. My name is Andrew Dunkley, your
• 0:04
  host and it is so good to have your company
• 0:07
  and I hope you're well. Uh, coming up on this
• 0:10
  particular episode, Artemis 2.
• 0:12
  Yes, the mission to the moon. Uh, we have an
• 0:15
  update for you and it's really good news.
• 0:18
  Could we have discovered a wormhole?
• 0:21
  That's a big question. And an Einstein cross
• 0:24
  has been spotted. They marked it with a cross
• 0:26
  and then drew a circle around it. That's all
• 0:28
  coming up on this edition of space nuts.
• 0:31
  Generic: 15 seconds. Guidance is internal.
• 0:34
  10, 9. Ignition
• 0:37
  sequence star space nuts. 5, 4, 3,
• 0:40
  2. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 5, 4,
• 0:43
  3, 2, 1. Space nuts. Astronauts
• 0:46
  report it feels good.
• 0:47
  Andrew Dunkley: And he's here again to unravel
• 0:50
  all the revelment of space space
• 0:52
  science. His name is Professor Fred Watson
• 0:55
  Watson, astronomer at large. Hello,
• 0:56
  Fred Watson.
• 0:57
  Professor Fred Watson: Hello, Andrew. I think actually we're
• 0:59
  probably as good at, uh, ravelling it as we
• 1:00
  are unravelling it. Really.
• 1:02
  Andrew Dunkley: I, I tend to agree. Yes, you're
• 1:05
  absolutely right.
• 1:06
  Before we get into today's top topics,
• 1:09
  you are, um, uh, in Melbourne, I believe, uh,
• 1:12
  attending, uh, a conference.
• 1:13
  Professor Fred Watson: I am, yes. Uh, sunny Melbourne, which
• 1:16
  isn't at the moment, although it was briefly
• 1:18
  this morning. Four seasons in one day is what
• 1:20
  they say about Melbourne.
• 1:21
  Andrew Dunkley: Uh, reputation for that.
• 1:23
  Professor Fred Watson: I think we' already this week.
• 1:25
  So, um, the conference I'm at is at Deakin
• 1:28
  University here in Melbourne. It is called
• 1:30
  Astro. Edu or Astro
• 1:33
  Edu, um, for Astronomy Education
• 1:36
  2025. And it's actually an international
• 1:38
  conference, Uh, I think I'm right in saying
• 1:41
  it's sponsored by the International
• 1:42
  Astronomical Union. Um, so
• 1:45
  it's a conference of international
• 1:48
  astronomy educators. And so quite a
• 1:50
  lot of it is about the
• 1:53
  theory of education, as,
• 1:56
  you know, applied to astronomy education.
• 1:58
  Quite a lot of it is about the practise of
• 2:00
  astronomy education. So there are real
• 2:02
  teachers here, uh, who teach kids, um,
• 2:05
  you know, from kindergarten to year
• 2:09
  12, uh, and university as well.
• 2:11
  Um, and um, one or two astronomers as well.
• 2:14
  And we're there because we're interested in
• 2:17
  education. I'm, um, only an amateur
• 2:19
  educator, but a professional astronomer. So
• 2:22
  my talk yesterday was about the
• 2:25
  possibilities for using mega
• 2:28
  constellations in astronomy education.
• 2:30
  Because there's quite a number of ideas that
• 2:31
  come out of, you know, what we and you and I
• 2:34
  talk about routinely. Uh, the mega
• 2:36
  constellations, um, a lot of astronomy
• 2:39
  in that. And in terms of, um, trying
• 2:42
  to, uh, perhaps,
• 2:44
  uh, provide some, um,
• 2:47
  background in astronomy education that might
• 2:50
  otherwise, um, be missed. Um,
• 2:53
  and I'm thinking of things like, you know,
• 2:55
  how you measure the brightness of the
• 2:56
  satellites. We use the star magnitudes the
• 2:58
  same as we do in astronomy. Uh, why
• 3:00
  satellites are bright themselves, why radio
• 3:03
  telescopes are at great risk from satellite,
• 3:05
  uh, constellations, all of the above.
• 3:08
  Um, but um, my talk aside,
• 3:10
  which was a minor contribution to this
• 3:12
  conference, there have been some fantastic
• 3:14
  presentations, um, really encouraging
• 3:17
  about the state of astronomy education
• 3:20
  in lands as far apart as
• 3:23
  Chile, uh, and uh, Germany
• 3:26
  and Belgium, Sweden,
• 3:29
  Portugal, North America, Canada.
• 3:32
  Inspiring presentation from Canada this
• 3:34
  morning. Lovely chat from an educator in
• 3:37
  Hawaii, uh, who I talk to later because I
• 3:39
  used to work in Hawaii a lot. So a lot of
• 3:42
  the folklore tales in astronomy he was
• 3:45
  aware of and some, what some of his
• 3:47
  colleagues were as well. But what was really
• 3:49
  nice was getting a shout out from uh, from a
• 3:51
  couple of, particularly a couple of this
• 3:53
  morning's presenters. They did get a keynote
• 3:55
  presentation, um, um, Mari Timms and
• 3:58
  Sandra Woodward. Um, uh,
• 4:01
  um, m mentioned, um, you know, stuff that
• 4:04
  I do and that we do, uh, including a very
• 4:07
  nice shout out about space nuts, which
• 4:10
  apparently is um, very much
• 4:13
  a source of inspiration to talk about with,
• 4:15
  with kids in class.
• 4:17
  Andrew Dunkley: Oh, wonderful.
• 4:18
  Professor Fred Watson: Maybe we are useful after all, Andrew.
• 4:20
  Andrew Dunkley: Possibly. Maybe we do contribute a little bit
• 4:23
  to education. Or maybe it's pseudoscience.
• 4:26
  Professor Fred Watson: No, it's not pseudoscience.
• 4:27
  Andrew Dunkley: No, it's not, not at all.
• 4:29
  Professor Fred Watson: It's just um, you know, it's our take on the
• 4:31
  universe which might not necessarily be the
• 4:33
  same as some other people's, but I think
• 4:34
  we're reasonably near the mark.
• 4:36
  Andrew Dunkley: So that's so rare in science. Frick.
• 4:40
  Professor Fred Watson: Yes. Um,
• 4:42
  yeah.
• 4:43
  So that's why I'm here in Melbourne in a
• 4:45
  hotel room. Jordy is um, about a thousand
• 4:47
  kilometres away, so you might not hear him
• 4:49
  today.
• 4:49
  Andrew Dunkley: I think we will hear him.
• 4:52
  Professor Fred Watson: I think we will probably.
• 4:54
  Andrew Dunkley: Oh, uh, wonderful. I'm glad it's going well.
• 4:56
  And uh, a lot of people there.
• 4:58
  Professor Fred Watson: Uh, there are 81 participants. Yes. Uh, some
• 5:01
  of them are online but uh, there's quite a
• 5:03
  good healthy handful. What, what I also
• 5:05
  really like about it is the gender
• 5:08
  balance. 50. 50.
• 5:10
  Andrew Dunkley: Excellent.
• 5:11
  Professor Fred Watson: Yeah. 50.
• 5:11
  Andrew Dunkley: 50.
• 5:13
  Professor Fred Watson: Um, that's um. Yeah, I think that's a very
• 5:15
  important aspect of it.
• 5:16
  Andrew Dunkley: Yeah, I, we can't claim M.50.50, but
• 5:19
  this week we're running in Dubbo, uh,
• 5:22
  the uh, New South Wales Veterans
• 5:25
  State Golf Championships.
• 5:26
  Professor Fred Watson: Oh yes, you said you were.
• 5:27
  Andrew Dunkley: And we've got about 100 and let's say
• 5:30
  120. 130
• 5:33
  participants and about
• 5:36
  nearly 50 of them are women. So.
• 5:38
  Professor Fred Watson: Yeah.
• 5:38
  Andrew Dunkley: That's pretty good.
• 5:39
  Professor Fred Watson: That is great.
• 5:40
  Andrew Dunkley: Yeah, I'm having a crack at the championship.
• 5:43
  I've got, uh. I think the funny
• 5:46
  story is, uh, I said to someone, look, I've
• 5:48
  signed up for the state championships. I
• 5:50
  don't know why. And he said to me, oh, no,
• 5:53
  no, you gotta play. And I said, why do you
• 5:55
  think that? He said, because they need at
• 5:56
  least 40 players.
• 5:59
  Thanks. Thanks for the vote of confidence.
• 6:03
  I've actually played two rounds and I've done
• 6:05
  all right.
• 6:05
  Professor Fred Watson: Oh, that's great.
• 6:07
  Andrew Dunkley: I'm not going to win. There's a couple of
• 6:08
  guns that are just. But I'm hoping to finish
• 6:11
  top 10 state championship.
• 6:12
  Professor Fred Watson: Top 10 will be pretty damn good for golf,
• 6:15
  which is not an easy game. No, but aren't you
• 6:18
  organising the event? Isn't this a conflict
• 6:20
  of interest?
• 6:20
  Andrew Dunkley: Uh, yeah, I'm part of the committee, but, uh,
• 6:23
  my only major role is to emcee the
• 6:26
  presentation night.
• 6:28
  Professor Fred Watson: So if you're getting an award.
• 6:30
  Andrew Dunkley: Uh, I won't be giving the awards. I'm just
• 6:33
  the mc. But I. Look, that's
• 6:36
  not even going to be a problem.
• 6:39
  Not unless I shoot the lights out in the
• 6:41
  final round tomorrow. But we'll see.
• 6:43
  Professor Fred Watson: Well, you might do. You might. You never do
• 6:45
  that. Putting the lights out so was a good
• 6:47
  move.
• 6:47
  Andrew Dunkley: Yes, Golf's like that.
• 6:50
  Could go the other way as well. I've got to
• 6:52
  keep that in mind. Now we, we uh,
• 6:55
  better get down to why we're here and uh,
• 6:56
  that is to talk about things that are
• 6:58
  happening in astronomy and space science.
• 7:00
  And one of the things we've talked about, uh,
• 7:03
  on a fairly regular basis is, uh, these, uh,
• 7:05
  NASA missions to the moon, known as the
• 7:08
  Artemis project. Um, Artemis
• 7:11
  1 has been, and done its thing, ah, a
• 7:14
  lap of the moon with nobody on board or maybe
• 7:16
  a couple of plush toys. Um, but,
• 7:19
  uh, now they're saying that they
• 7:22
  think Artemis 2 will be on its way,
• 7:25
  uh, at the latest. April, but possibly
• 7:28
  sooner.
• 7:29
  Professor Fred Watson: Well, it was, um, no sooner than April. That
• 7:31
  was the deal, uh, so far. But
• 7:34
  the news we've had today is that
• 7:37
  the launch window, uh, in fact is being
• 7:40
  brought forward and could be as early as the
• 7:42
  5th of February.
• 7:43
  Andrew Dunkley: Yes.
• 7:44
  Professor Fred Watson: So we're looking now at ah,
• 7:46
  Artemis flying much earlier than
• 7:49
  we had expected. Artemis 2.
• 7:52
  Um, and I think one of the reasons for that
• 7:54
  is that we've, We've been seeing news
• 7:57
  reports. I'm sure you've caught them as well,
• 7:59
  Andrew, that um, the hardware is
• 8:01
  ready to go, that the, you know, the space
• 8:04
  launch system, which will take astronauts to
• 8:06
  the moon. And um, the, the
• 8:08
  Orion capsule, it's all ready to go.
• 8:11
  Um, and bearing in mind that this, this
• 8:14
  mission is essentially a Repeat of the
• 8:16
  11-22-2022 mission,
• 8:19
  uh, which was a 25 day mission, it's actually
• 8:22
  a shorter, shorter version of it. Uh but
• 8:25
  Artemis 1, um, basically did what
• 8:27
  Artemis 2 will do. It launched and
• 8:31
  uh, sent this, the capsule into
• 8:33
  orbit around the moon, um taking it actually
• 8:36
  quite a lot further away than the moon's
• 8:38
  distance, um, and then bringing it back re
• 8:41
  entering and picking it up in, in the ocean.
• 8:44
  So that was a very successful um,
• 8:47
  dress rehearsal for what Artemis 2
• 8:50
  will be like. And I'm sure the four
• 8:51
  astronauts who are going to fly uh, trained
• 8:54
  up to the gunnels, uh and it
• 8:57
  will be really great to see them
• 9:00
  stepping into the spacecraft in February I
• 9:02
  think.
• 9:02
  Andrew Dunkley: Yes, yes. Won't that be exciting? And the
• 9:04
  first time in 54
• 9:07
  years is it uh, we've
• 9:10
  sent people to the moon?
• 9:12
  Professor Fred Watson: Uh, yes, um, well 1970.
• 9:15
  No, 72 was the last. 72,
• 9:18
  that's right, yes it's, it will be 54. Yes,
• 9:20
  you're right, 54 years. Um, um,
• 9:25
  the thing that, a
• 9:27
  point I didn't make is that um, these, the
• 9:30
  astronauts will not land on the moon. That's
• 9:32
  Artemis 3. Artemis 2 is
• 9:34
  purely going around the moon, uh, and going
• 9:37
  through all the required manoeuvres that will
• 9:40
  be needed when um, they actually do
• 9:43
  go to the moon in Artemis 3, for example, um,
• 9:45
  this idea of you know,
• 9:48
  undocking spacecraft ah from a, from a
• 9:51
  module, a service module, turning it around
• 9:53
  to be facing the way you want it to and then
• 9:55
  re docking again. That kind of manoeuvre very
• 9:58
  much the stocking trade of the Apollo era
• 10:00
  astronauts. But of course now we've got new
• 10:02
  technology, quite uh, different technology.
• 10:05
  Um, a quick shout out to the crew. Uh,
• 10:08
  Christina Koch, Richard Glover. Victor
• 10:11
  Glover. Not Richard Glover,
• 10:14
  Victor Glover, sorry Victor. Um, uh,
• 10:17
  Reed Wiseman and Jeremy Hansen. They are
• 10:20
  the ah, the Crew of Artemis
• 10:23
  2. Heavily in training I'm sure
• 10:25
  still and all ready to take their um, their
• 10:28
  Orion capsule around the moon to give us
• 10:31
  a fabulous view. So yes, the point um,
• 10:34
  I think that you're making is that this is
• 10:36
  the first time in 54 years that
• 10:39
  astronauts will have gone out of low Earth
• 10:41
  orbit which is where they've been uh, in the
• 10:43
  International Space Station. We haven't had
• 10:45
  anybody going, venturing out and of course
• 10:48
  when you do that, when you go between the
• 10:50
  moon and the Earth, you're in what we might
• 10:52
  call deep space from A point of view of a,
• 10:54
  uh, spacecraft, uh, which means that
• 10:57
  you're uh, subject to the sun's radiation and
• 10:59
  all of that other stuff. And uh. So there'll
• 11:01
  be lots and lots of medical work done, um,
• 11:04
  on analysing how these astronauts have
• 11:06
  reacted to that and responded to that.
• 11:08
  Andrew Dunkley: Yes, yes. And uh. I believe that they
• 11:11
  will be, um.
• 11:13
  Travelling further than any other human being
• 11:16
  has ever gone in terms of space travel.
• 11:18
  Because they'll be travelling
• 11:20
  9,200 kilometres past the moon.
• 11:23
  Professor Fred Watson: Yes, that's right, yeah. Yeah.
• 11:25
  Andrew Dunkley: They still, they still won't be the most
• 11:27
  isolated human humans in history. Michael
• 11:29
  Collins still retains that because he was by
• 11:32
  himself, uh, in orbit around the
• 11:34
  moon. And uh, I believe in his
• 11:37
  mission, Apollo 11, he was further out
• 11:40
  than any of the others that were on the
• 11:42
  command module.
• 11:44
  Professor Fred Watson: Yes, I think that's correct. I mean all the.
• 11:47
  All the Apollo, uh, uh, missions had a
• 11:49
  command, a command module pilot.
• 11:52
  Uh, as you said, Michael Collins was the one
• 11:54
  for Apollo 11. But I think you're also right
• 11:56
  that the orbit that Apollo 11 was uh,
• 11:59
  in was further out from the moon's surface.
• 12:01
  Andrew Dunkley: Then that's how I understand it. However,
• 12:04
  the difference with this one is every, uh,
• 12:06
  other mission we've sent to the moon has had
• 12:08
  three astronauts. This has got four.
• 12:10
  Professor Fred Watson: Yes.
• 12:11
  Andrew Dunkley: Um, so that's a first.
• 12:12
  Professor Fred Watson: Yep, it is. That's. That's right. That's a
• 12:14
  big first. New technology. It's a much
• 12:17
  more spacious capsule, the Orion capsule,
• 12:20
  uh, which I think, uh, will
• 12:24
  really be, um. It'll be luxury
• 12:27
  compared with. With the Apollo.
• 12:29
  Apollo capsules.
• 12:31
  Andrew Dunkley: I imagine so. And we wish them well. Uh,
• 12:33
  three representatives of NASA and one, uh,
• 12:36
  Jeremy Hansen from the Canadian Space Agency.
• 12:39
  So that's. That's pretty good too. Ah, we'll
• 12:41
  watch with interest. And as you said,
• 12:43
  Fred Watson, all the gear is ready to go.
• 12:45
  This, uh, space launch system, the Orion
• 12:47
  capsule, which had a couple of glitches
• 12:49
  coming back to Earth, uh, on Artemis 1.
• 12:51
  They've fixed that. I think it overheated.
• 12:53
  Uh, and a few other things that they've
• 12:56
  sorted out. So they're good to go. So, um.
• 12:59
  Yeah, just waiting for the right. Right
• 13:01
  weather and the right data to set off. So,
• 13:03
  um, yes, there'll be more to talk about as we
• 13:06
  get into the early months of 2026
• 13:10
  for the Artemis 2 launch. This
• 13:12
  is Space Nuts. Andrew Dunkley. Oh, if you
• 13:14
  want to read about that, of course, uh, it's
• 13:16
  everywhere but BBC, uh, dot com has a good
• 13:19
  story about it.
• 13:22
  Generic: Three, two, one.
• 13:25
  Andrew Dunkley: Straight Space nuts.
• 13:26
  Now we'll keep the introduction to this one,
• 13:28
  fairly short. Could we have discovered a
• 13:30
  wormhole, Fred Watson?
• 13:32
  Professor Fred Watson: Um, that's the usual answer.
• 13:35
  Maybe.
• 13:36
  Andrew Dunkley: I knew it.
• 13:39
  Professor Fred Watson: Yeah, maybe. Um, so what we're
• 13:42
  talking about is a gravitational
• 13:44
  wave signal. Excuse me, a
• 13:47
  slight frog in my throat there. Not a geordie
• 13:50
  in my throat, just a frog. Um, it's
• 13:53
  one that was recorded back in 2019.
• 13:55
  So, uh, we've had access, ah, to
• 13:58
  the gravitational wave sky, if I can put it
• 14:01
  that way, for 10 years now. And in fact,
• 14:04
  um, the first gravitational wave
• 14:06
  signal was uh, on the
• 14:09
  14th of September, 2015, Marnie's
• 14:12
  birthday, as it happens. Uh, so the
• 14:14
  LIGO people, the large Interferometric.
• 14:17
  Sorry, a Laser Interferometric Gravitational
• 14:20
  Wave Observatory, uh, they
• 14:22
  have been celebrating their 10th anniversary
• 14:25
  since operations came in. Um,
• 14:28
  they have been joined by Virgo, uh,
• 14:31
  another gravitational wave observatory. And
• 14:33
  since then Kagura, which is in Japan.
• 14:36
  Uh, so, um, these, uh, three
• 14:39
  facilities are currently routinely
• 14:42
  looking at gravitational wave science.
• 14:45
  They're seeing exploding or
• 14:47
  colliding neutron stars coming in ten a
• 14:50
  penny. Um, uh, however,
• 14:52
  this, and this goes back to when it was just
• 14:55
  LIGO and Virgo. In 2019, there
• 14:57
  was a very, very different
• 15:01
  gravitational wave event detected
• 15:03
  by uh, uh, the
• 15:06
  two interferometers.
• 15:08
  Um, you and I have spoken
• 15:11
  before about the characteristic sound,
• 15:15
  uh, because it is in the audio frequency
• 15:17
  regime. Characteristic, uh, sound of two
• 15:20
  neutron stars colliding or a neutron star and
• 15:22
  a black hole or two black holes. It's that
• 15:24
  chirp sound. It's uh,
• 15:27
  with the frequency increasing as these things
• 15:30
  spin together and then just vanishes when
• 15:32
  they collide. It's when they undergo what's
• 15:35
  called the ring down where the two black
• 15:37
  holes actually merge. Yeah, but this one was
• 15:39
  nothing like that. And I'm not going to
• 15:41
  impersonate what it sounded like, but it was
• 15:43
  more of a crack.
• 15:44
  Andrew Dunkley: Uh, was it, Was it, Was it.
• 15:47
  Professor Fred Watson: No, it could be something completely
• 15:50
  different
• 15:55
  because I'm sure there's a joke about Uranus
• 15:57
  you can make with that, but I'm not, I'm not
• 15:58
  even going to go there. So,
• 16:02
  uh, the, um. Yeah, so it was more of a crack.
• 16:05
  It was, it was less than, uh, a tenth
• 16:08
  of a second in duration. These normal
• 16:10
  signals take a few seconds to build up the
• 16:13
  frequency and then they disappear with that,
• 16:16
  you know, that chirp. Um, but this
• 16:18
  one was over in 10 seconds.
• 16:23
  So, um, there has been work done on trying
• 16:26
  to explain this. It's got a name. All these
• 16:28
  things have a name that starts with GW and
• 16:31
  ends with the date spelled backwards. Uh, so
• 16:33
  this was GW190521
• 16:37
  for the date, which was the 21st of May,
• 16:40
  uh, 2019. And, um,
• 16:45
  the best interpretation,
• 16:48
  which I guess is what you might call the
• 16:50
  standard picture, is that. Yes, it is. Two
• 16:53
  black hairs. Two black hairs.
• 16:55
  Generic: Two.
• 16:55
  Professor Fred Watson: Two black holes.
• 16:57
  Andrew Dunkley: It's about all you've got on your head,
• 16:58
  Fred Watson.
• 17:01
  Professor Fred Watson: Uh, I'll have to look for the other one. Um,
• 17:03
  there's two, uh. Two
• 17:06
  black holes snaring each other. Not.
• 17:09
  Not two black hairs snoring each other. Which
• 17:11
  is, I think, is what I was going to say. Two
• 17:14
  black holes snaring each other. Uh, in
• 17:16
  passing, I'm reading the account that is, um,
• 17:18
  on Science Alert, uh, written by Michelle
• 17:21
  Starr, an old friend of Space nuts, uh, with
• 17:23
  a name that tells it like it is. Um,
• 17:27
  so, uh, that's the standard interpretation.
• 17:29
  But there's a new paper that has come
• 17:32
  from, um, astronomy, um,
• 17:35
  astronomers, physicists actually,
• 17:38
  uh, which is what you need to be to do
• 17:40
  gravitational waves, I guess. But
• 17:41
  astrophysics is probably the real name. A
• 17:44
  physicist in China, University of Chinese
• 17:47
  Academy of Sciences. Uh, we've seen a new
• 17:49
  interpretation which is
• 17:52
  that, uh, what this
• 17:55
  event depicted was not two
• 17:58
  black holes colliding in our
• 18:01
  universe, but in another universe.
• 18:04
  Whoa. And what we're hearing, or what
• 18:07
  we're sensing is the gravitational
• 18:09
  disturbance, uh, of an event in
• 18:12
  another universe that comes through a
• 18:15
  collapsing wormhole that
• 18:18
  was, um, basically, um,
• 18:21
  formed in the merger and collapsed after
• 18:23
  the end of it.
• 18:25
  Andrew Dunkley: So, um, that's a huge claim.
• 18:28
  Professor Fred Watson: Yes, it is, isn't it? So
• 18:31
  let me quote from Michel's article, um, in
• 18:33
  Science Alert. To be clear, the black hole
• 18:36
  collision right here in our own universe is
• 18:38
  still the preferred interpretation of the
• 18:41
  strange signal. But that preference is not
• 18:44
  strong enough to rule out the wormhole
• 18:46
  model entirely. Uh, and that's, um,
• 18:49
  basically a quote from the. The preprint that
• 18:52
  these, um, uh, scientists in, In
• 18:54
  China have published.
• 18:57
  Um, so it's,
• 19:00
  you know, it's, it's.
• 19:03
  It's. It's a quite a remarkable thing.
• 19:06
  Uh, Michel's article is relatively
• 19:08
  short, although there's quite a lot of detail
• 19:10
  in there. Uh, but the bottom line
• 19:13
  is, you know, if. If it was.
• 19:17
  If that was the correct interpretation,
• 19:19
  uh, of, uh,
• 19:21
  GW190521,
• 19:24
  uh, and anything else we found that was like
• 19:26
  it. If that was the, uh, the
• 19:29
  confirmed interpretation that it was a
• 19:31
  temporary wormhole, allowing us to sort of
• 19:34
  hear the, uh, the echo of.
• 19:38
  Excuse me, I'm gonna sneeze. Andrew. Sorry
• 19:40
  about that.
• 19:40
  Andrew Dunkley: It's. That Time of the year over here.
• 19:42
  Professor Fred Watson: I think that was a, I think that was a
• 19:43
  wormhole collapsing. Um, yeah, it
• 19:46
  wouldn't, it wouldn't. If you could, if it,
• 19:48
  if that was the preferred interpretation, it
• 19:50
  wouldn't just suggest that these things
• 19:52
  exist. Wormholes have been a feature of
• 19:55
  science fiction as well as science writing.
• 19:58
  The, the fact that they theoretically could
• 20:00
  exist but we've got no evidence of them. Uh,
• 20:02
  but what she says is it wouldn't just confirm
• 20:04
  the existence of these, these things. Um, it
• 20:07
  also gives uh, us a, ah, a new way
• 20:10
  of, of investigating their
• 20:13
  properties. Um, and you know, that might
• 20:17
  lead to a whole new branch of astronomy,
• 20:19
  wormhole studies. Well, wouldn't that be
• 20:21
  extraordinary?
• 20:22
  Andrew Dunkley: It would be, but it also opens up
• 20:25
  um, another thing that's only theoretical
• 20:29
  multiple universe theory. So if we've
• 20:32
  detected the collision of two black holes
• 20:35
  in another universe and detected it through
• 20:38
  the opening up of a temporary wormhole, I
• 20:40
  mean that's a double banger.
• 20:42
  Professor Fred Watson: Uh, that is, uh, except that
• 20:44
  you would need to rule out the possibility
• 20:47
  that this wormhole was linking two bits of
• 20:49
  our own universe because
• 20:52
  that's one of the things that has been
• 20:55
  suggested. But maybe the Chinese paper,
• 20:58
  uh, actually uh, has ruled that out. I'm not
• 21:00
  sure because I haven't looked at the
• 21:01
  preprint. Um, but yes,
• 21:04
  uh, it is, is really
• 21:07
  rather remarkable. Uh, what the
• 21:10
  uh, scientists in uh, China have done is
• 21:13
  basically modelled what you would get
• 21:16
  if you had a gravitational wave signal
• 21:19
  from another universe coming
• 21:22
  through a wormhole. Um, and they've
• 21:25
  modelled that and they've compared that with
• 21:27
  this particular event, um,
• 21:30
  and uh, reasonably happy that their model
• 21:33
  actually fits the data. Um, in fact
• 21:36
  they say um,
• 21:38
  that uh, you know, it's, it's comparable
• 21:41
  with it. I don't think it's as
• 21:44
  accurate as the black hole merger
• 21:47
  waveform, uh, which is, would be a
• 21:49
  conventional view that you've got two black
• 21:51
  holes that have merged together in our
• 21:52
  universe. Um, it's uh, that's
• 21:55
  apparently just a very slightly
• 21:58
  better fit to the observed signal than their
• 22:01
  wormhole model. But it's still a
• 22:04
  possible scenario. So
• 22:06
  uh, I think uh, this
• 22:09
  will be uh, very
• 22:12
  much uh, a pathway
• 22:15
  for further investigation of wormholes.
• 22:18
  Uh, just generally. Um, so what
• 22:21
  should we expect if wormholes do exist? What
• 22:23
  should we expect? It's not, it's all very
• 22:24
  well just talking about space worms I
• 22:26
  imagine.
• 22:29
  Yeah. Well there you go. You can, I think you
• 22:31
  can get um, tablets for those.
• 22:35
  Uh, anyway, um, it's, yes, it's,
• 22:38
  it's a really interesting piece of work
• 22:41
  obviously. Uh, quite controversial,
• 22:44
  quite attention grabbing, headline grabbing.
• 22:46
  Generic: Yeah.
• 22:47
  Professor Fred Watson: And um, I'm gonna have a look at the
• 22:49
  preprint, which I haven't had time to look at
• 22:51
  yet. In fact I'm clicking on the link now.
• 22:54
  Uh, and it's, it takes me to A paper called
• 22:56
  IS GW 190521 A Gravitational
• 22:59
  Wave Echo of a Wormhole Remnant from Another
• 23:01
  Universe. What a great title.
• 23:04
  Andrew Dunkley: That is a great title. And uh, hopefully it's
• 23:06
  true. I think that'd be great. Uh, it would
• 23:08
  give us something new to study and we might
• 23:11
  even work out how to create our own wormholes
• 23:14
  and travel long distances at the blink of an
• 23:16
  eye.
• 23:16
  Professor Fred Watson: Wouldn't that be great?
• 23:17
  Andrew Dunkley: Wouldn't it be awesome?
• 23:19
  Professor Fred Watson: Yes. We had a little certainly get you.
• 23:21
  Andrew Dunkley: Out of jury duty.
• 23:24
  Professor Fred Watson: Not necessarily. Because if you're in the
• 23:26
  other side of the world they'd write to you
• 23:28
  and say look, you've just got to use your
• 23:30
  wormhole machine and.
• 23:31
  Andrew Dunkley: Yeah, well, yeah, that's a possibility. All
• 23:33
  this exciting stuff. Uh, if you'd like to
• 23:36
  read about that, you can do that at the
• 23:37
  Science Alert website, sciencealert.com
• 23:40
  and read Michelle's article. Or you can go to
• 23:43
  the source, the preprint server on
• 23:45
  archive. This is Space Nuts with
• 23:48
  Andrew Dunkley and Professor Fred Watson
• 23:50
  Watson.
• 23:53
  Generic: 0G and I feel fine.
• 23:55
  Andrew Dunkley: Space Nuts, our final story.
• 23:58
  Fred Watson, uh, takes us uh, into space
• 24:00
  to see something very rare indeed. An
• 24:03
  Einstein cross has been spotted.
• 24:07
  Uh, X marks the spot and they drew a circle
• 24:09
  around it.
• 24:11
  Professor Fred Watson: Well that's kind of what you have to do. Yes,
• 24:14
  uh, in uh, this case, uh, the observations of
• 24:17
  the Einstein cross weren't made with visible
• 24:19
  light telescopes or infrared telescopes,
• 24:22
  but with our old friend alma, the Atacama
• 24:25
  Large Millimetre Submillimeter Array, which
• 24:27
  we're more used to seeing, uh,
• 24:29
  connected to images of protoplanetary discs
• 24:32
  and a high frequency radio radiation
• 24:35
  from protoplanetary discs is something
• 24:38
  that is very much the stocking trade of alma.
• 24:41
  But now they've been observing, I mean they
• 24:44
  do observe galaxies as well. What they've
• 24:46
  observed is an Einstein cross.
• 24:49
  This is usually uh, it's
• 24:52
  four images of one object in a shape a
• 24:54
  little bit like the Southern Cross in our,
• 24:57
  ah, Southern Hemisphere sky,
• 24:59
  um, which are all images of the same
• 25:02
  object. Uh, but there's
• 25:05
  something intervening, there's something
• 25:06
  between them that creates a gravitational
• 25:09
  lens, uh, that separates,
• 25:12
  splits the light coming from the distant
• 25:14
  object. And uh, as it passes through the
• 25:17
  gravitational lens in the foreground, uh,
• 25:19
  it's split into four components forming a
• 25:22
  cross the reason why this one is particularly
• 25:25
  rare is that it has a central image as well.
• 25:27
  It's a five image
• 25:30
  Einstein cross. And I think there's only one
• 25:31
  other one that is actually known, uh,
• 25:34
  with gravitational uh, lensing. Um, and
• 25:37
  so uh, yeah the story is that um,
• 25:41
  this object, uh,
• 25:44
  the Einstein cross is the
• 25:46
  multiple images of a uh,
• 25:50
  background galaxy, uh, known as
• 25:52
  hers three or her S3.
• 25:55
  Probably her S3. Um, that's
• 25:58
  a uh, galaxy which is 11.6 billion
• 26:01
  light years away. So we've got a look back
• 26:03
  time of 1.6 billion years. Well on the way to
• 26:05
  the beginning of the universe. Yes. And
• 26:09
  it's gone past uh, a group of
• 26:11
  galaxies, a sort of
• 26:14
  cluster of galaxies uh, which are in
• 26:17
  the foreground and ah, they're only 7.8
• 26:20
  billion light years from us, which is still a
• 26:23
  staggering distance. But that is the gravity
• 26:26
  uh, source that is bending the space and
• 26:29
  forming these multiple images. Uh,
• 26:31
  and so um, it tells us
• 26:34
  about both objects, it tells us about the
• 26:36
  distant galaxy of which this is a, a uh,
• 26:39
  multiple image. It tells us about the
• 26:41
  distribution of matter in the foreground
• 26:44
  galaxy cluster. And the really interesting
• 26:46
  thing is that what they've shown uh,
• 26:49
  the scientists who've done this work,
• 26:52
  um, it's ah, a Parisian
• 26:54
  group based in Paris, uh, or the leader
• 26:57
  is um, based in Paris. Uh,
• 27:00
  what they've shown is that the
• 27:03
  sort of centre of mass of the
• 27:06
  galaxy cluster is not,
• 27:09
  is off to one side of where the galaxies
• 27:12
  are. And that in itself is
• 27:14
  peculiar because we interpret that as saying
• 27:17
  that the most of the mass in this cluster is
• 27:19
  in the form of dark matter. Uh and it's the
• 27:22
  dark matter clump uh, that is kind of
• 27:25
  offset from the galaxies that we can see.
• 27:27
  That's not um, unique. There are other
• 27:30
  circumstances like that in the
• 27:33
  universe but this is quite unusual that you
• 27:35
  know we've got an Einstein cross created by
• 27:38
  a cluster of galaxies whose centre of mass,
• 27:40
  if I can put it that way, is off to one side
• 27:43
  because of the distribution of dark matter
• 27:45
  around it.
• 27:46
  Andrew Dunkley: Fascinating. I suppose it also begs the
• 27:48
  question that uh, we're looking at the same
• 27:51
  thing in five different timelines.
• 27:54
  Professor Fred Watson: Yes, that's right. And that actually adds
• 27:58
  uh, something really interesting to this. Um,
• 28:01
  uh, and certainly in the early days of
• 28:03
  these kinds of observations, Einstein
• 28:05
  crosses. And it goes back actually to the
• 28:07
  1970s. I remember when the first double
• 28:10
  quasars were being observed and they're
• 28:12
  formed by a similar process. There's
• 28:13
  something in between the quasar and yourself.
• 28:16
  The quasars are kind of delinquent galaxy,
• 28:18
  uh, that's multiplying the image. Um,
• 28:21
  there's a, um, a quote from,
• 28:24
  uh, Tanu Dylan,
• 28:27
  who's at Washington University in St.
• 28:30
  Louis, wasn't, uh, involved in this research.
• 28:33
  But a very nice quote that says the
• 28:35
  magnification may allow
• 28:38
  unusually detailed studies of
• 28:41
  a star burst galaxy at redshift
• 28:44
  3. And that's redshift 3 is
• 28:46
  what tells you it's, uh, that far away.
• 28:49
  11.5 billion years, light years,
• 28:52
  uh, when the universe was less than a fifth
• 28:54
  of its current age, including its gas, star
• 28:57
  formation and possible outflows.
• 29:00
  And what you really need,
• 29:02
  um, is some visible
• 29:05
  variation in the
• 29:08
  light of the source
• 29:10
  galaxy because the light path,
• 29:13
  uh, to form each of these five individual
• 29:16
  images of that object is different. And
• 29:19
  so you expect these to be
• 29:21
  delayed. Uh, and in fact, that was the
• 29:24
  thing about the double quasars. You could see
• 29:26
  variability in an object which
• 29:29
  was mimicked by the second
• 29:33
  image of it. This is how we knew that there
• 29:35
  were two images of the same thing back in the
• 29:37
  day. Uh, uh, an object would get brighter,
• 29:40
  the quasar would get brighter, and there'd be
• 29:43
  a delay between one image and the other. If
• 29:45
  you could do that with five images, then you
• 29:47
  can learn an awful lot. Um, there is another
• 29:49
  quote, uh, from one of the investigators.
• 29:52
  Usually people use quasars,
• 29:55
  uh, for this purpose of time
• 29:58
  delay, uh, since they
• 30:00
  naturally vary, uh, very
• 30:03
  rapidly as a function of time. But,
• 30:06
  uh, uh, her, uh, s.
• 30:09
  Uh three is star forming,
• 30:12
  raising the prospect of detecting a
• 30:14
  supernova, uh, whose light would arrive
• 30:17
  at each image at different times, giving the
• 30:19
  time delay. And from that you can actually
• 30:22
  work out what the Hubble constant is. And the
• 30:24
  Hubble constant is still, uh, a topic of
• 30:27
  discussion. We've talked about the Hubble
• 30:29
  tension several times. This will give us
• 30:31
  another way of measuring that, and that will
• 30:33
  be very interesting.
• 30:35
  Andrew Dunkley: That would indeed be quite exciting. Gee,
• 30:37
  we've covered some really interesting stories
• 30:39
  today, Fred Watson, haven't we? Just if you'd
• 30:41
  like to read more about that particular
• 30:43
  Einstein cross story, you can do
• 30:45
  it@skyandtelescope.org or you
• 30:48
  can read the, uh, full paper which has
• 30:51
  been published in the Astrophysical Journal.
• 30:55
  Uh, we are just about done, Fred Watson.
• 30:57
  Before we finish, I might just direct, uh,
• 31:00
  people to the Space Nuts podcast group. This
• 31:03
  is a Facebook page that was created
• 31:05
  by our audience and has,
• 31:08
  uh, quite a few thousand people. Uh,
• 31:11
  2.7 is 20, uh, 700
• 31:14
  members. It's got now, um, people who
• 31:17
  discuss, uh, science and
• 31:19
  astronomy together, publish stories that,
• 31:22
  uh, they are interested in, um, ask
• 31:24
  questions of each other, try to solve all the
• 31:27
  mysteries of the universe. Uh, it's a great
• 31:30
  little group, so if you'd like to join, it's
• 31:32
  Facebook. Uh, um, yes, the Space
• 31:35
  Nuts podcast group. That's what you've got to
• 31:37
  put in your Facebook search engines. Uh,
• 31:39
  Space Nuts page podcast group. There's also
• 31:41
  an official Space Nuts Facebook group if you
• 31:44
  want to join that as well. I think it's got
• 31:46
  around, um, about the same number of members.
• 31:47
  Probably all the same people. Very likely,
• 31:50
  um, quite a few of them anyway.
• 31:52
  Professor Fred Watson: Yes, I'm sure that's right. I am. I'll check
• 31:54
  that out. I'm not a big Facebook
• 31:56
  user, but once in a while I go online. I have
• 31:59
  to first of all find out once again what my
• 32:02
  password is because it keeps, seems to keep
• 32:04
  getting changed. So, um, I'll get into
• 32:07
  Facebook, um, or Face Ache as I call it. It's
• 32:10
  what my dad used to call me. Yeah, um,
• 32:13
  Facebook. Um, and have a look at SpaceNuts
• 32:15
  podcast group and see what they're saying.
• 32:17
  Andrew Dunkley: And I've got a shout out to our
• 32:19
  administrators who do a great job of keeping
• 32:21
  it all in ship shape condition. So thank you,
• 32:24
  Paul, thank you Misty, and thank you Steve
• 32:26
  and everybody else who's involved. There's a,
• 32:29
  there's a few people who look after it for us
• 32:31
  voluntarily too, I might say. Um, so,
• 32:33
  yeah, excellent, Fred Watson, we're done.
• 32:36
  Thank you very, very much.
• 32:37
  Professor Fred Watson: Uh, it's a pleasure and good to see you
• 32:39
  again, Andrew. And we'll talk again very
• 32:41
  soon, I think.
• 32:42
  Andrew Dunkley: Very soon, I expect.
• 32:43
  Professor Fred Watson: Yes.
• 32:44
  Andrew Dunkley: Uh, Professor Fred Watson Watson, astronomer
• 32:46
  at large. And thanks to Huw in the studio,
• 32:47
  who couldn't be with us today. His, uh, his
• 32:50
  dog Einstein was naughty. He's very cross
• 32:52
  with Einstein.
• 32:53
  Professor Fred Watson: Oh, geez.
• 32:56
  Andrew Dunkley: And from me, Andrew Dunkley, thanks for your
• 32:57
  company. Catch you on the next episode as
• 32:59
  well. Space Nuts. Bye Bye.
• 33:02
  Voice Over Guy: You've been listening to the Space Nuts
• 33:04
  podcast, available at
• 33:07
  Apple Podcasts, Spotify,
• 33:09
  iHeartRadio or your favourite podcast
• 33:12
  player. You can also stream on
• 33:14
  demand at bitesz.com This has been another
• 33:17
  quality podcast production from bitesz.com