I've watched all SciShow episodes and this is certainly in my top 10 favorites. The content is fascinating, the concepts are vulgarized just enough in the script, editing makes the pace just fast enough, the graphics and images are helpful and mister Aranda is a very captivating host. Thanks SciShow!
Six years later this episode is still relevant. Though I don't think I've heard of the lithium problem before. This is actually probably one of my favorite, of the ones I've watched recently.
@@liizs2863 Ya I'm pretty sure everything is still a problem. But work has definitely been done on them that narrows down some of the options/solutions.
The planets orbit the sun in a series of concentric circles, which lie nearly in the same plane. You can visualize this as a large, flat disk the size of the orbit of the outermost planet. The reason they are lined up in this way is that, after the Sun formed, there was still a giant disk of random rock and gas surrounding the Sun, all orbiting together. Eventually the planets formed out of this mess, and maintained their angular momentum. If you extend this plane (the disk) out into the universe, then it appears this dividing line of the cosmic background radiation density (the "Axis of Evil") very nearly lines up with the disk. This is like the coincidence of every house on your side of the street lining up to form a line pointing directly at the top of the Great Pyramid of Giza. Pretty unlikely, and slightly uncanny.
I'd also like a more in-depth video about this axis of evil - I've never heard of this universe phenomenon before so I'd really like to hear everything there is to know about it. And I'd like a separate video about that universal lithium-7 deficiency
@@eefsss4603 a row of houses in your street is a line of houses - extend that line and imagine the line happens to point directly to the top of the piramid of Gizeh. Quite an unlikely coincidence would that be! Jovetj is saying the planetary disk around our sun pointing towards the axis of evil is as unlikely and yet it does
@@kloassie That line of houses will always point somewhere. Had it pointed to the top of Mt. Everest we'd say, "Wow! Incredible." If it pointed to the EMpire State Bldg..or the Eiffel Tower...etc. You can always look back at a coincidence and impart great meaning to it.
It's nice to see someone simply saying 'we don't know'. Getting smacked in the face with 'it's TRUTH. ACCEPT it" a lot tends to sour my understanding a lot.
Yet, ask physicists if Einstein got it completely wrong and get ready to be treated like something unpleasant on the bottom of a boot. Not so many scientists are cool with the idea of the underpinning principles of all their knowledge and ideas, being proven to be incorrect.
Toffee Crisp yeah but that happens in every group of people, age takes a factor on it too, if you have more evidence it helps so they listen to you more but it'll still be needing as much testing as the current theories have, always saying it might be incomplete is better if you want them to agree with you cos its more acurate to say that most of the time, and something most scientist would say too. Remember how the saying goes "if an old but with a really good reputation scientist thinks your theory is right then it might be right, but if he says its wrong it might be that he is wrong
Cristian Verdugo Galaz I agree with what your saying, but the field of science could do with being a little less dogmatic. Ofcourse we shouldn't throw out perfectly good theories, when we have nothing to replace it with, but the recalcitrance with which the scientific establishment meet new ideas that run counter to accepted "doctrine" can be a huge impedement to scientific progress. When theories and scientific principles gain the status of being sacrosanct, it closes the door on exploration and precludes certain avenues of thought. Einstein is a big one. The guy was amazing, a genuine genius, contributing more to humanity than I or any number of my possible descendants ever could. That said, we sometimes hold him in such high esteem that we refuse to entertain the prospect that he might have been wrong about alot of things, the fact that one would have to dress it up in a more palatable way, is evidence of this. Sure, nothing in science can trully ever be stated absolutely definitively and yet, in some circumstances, it is taken as definitive. I get that in order to build on knowledge, some things have to be taken on faith, so to speak, as being solid, or certain and definitive, for that foundation to exist to be built upon. But it sometimes seems like science wants to have it's cake and eat it too (awful saying, but accurate enough) Either nothing can be definitively known and all avenues of exploration are valid, or things can be absolutely defined and therefore questions that are counter to these absolutes are irrelevant. I'll admit, not being a physicist (or any other kind of scientist) maybe we can have both states at the same time (everything is so quantum! lol) but I think in an operative sense, such conflicting approaches would be less than productive in the long run.
The problem that will keep us learning as far as phisics go is answering a little question can change the answer to a big question or raise new ones. The more we learn, the more we realize there is to learn.
@@zakarian3892 idiots trying to be funny (as if clever) when the joke isnt even correct in any way shape or form it missed the point but they carried it on anyway. Am guessing 30 yr olds who gave up learning around 10 years ago
Agreed - extremely interesting. But so many questions. He said our solar system "lines up with the Axis of Evil"... wtf does that even mean? Lines up? Like if you averaged all our planets' orbits into a frisbee, the frisbee is spinning at an angle similar to the Axis?
It means all of the planets already orbit the Sun nearly in the same plane, like a giant disc. This is because the stuff the planets came from was already orbiting the new Sun in a giant disc, sort-of like the rings of Saturn but thicker and more of it. If you extend the disk of the solar system out into the universe, it very nearly lines up with that apparent dividing line in the density of the cosmic microwave background radiation.
The Lithium is like the last few tiles on a Rubik's cube. You're gonna mess up everything try and get them in place but there is a formula for solving it so it's not impossible... just really hard.
I read somewhere that antimatter also has an opposite spin on its particules. I find it important to mention because otherwise, chargeless particules wouldn't have their opposite twins (like neutrons and antineutrons)
I think the other part of why neutrons and anti-neutrons are a thing is that anti-neutrons are comprised of the corresponding anti-quarks, which _are_ electrically charged. The proton's quark composition is UUD, which is a net charge of +1, whereas the neutron has a quark composition of UDD, which has a net charge of 0, but the up quark has a charge of +2/3 while the down quark has a charge of -1/3. Replace them with their corresponding anti-quarks, and you have charges of -2/3 and +1/3, respectively, resulting in, again, a net charge of 0. Still an electrically neutral particle, but now an anti-particle. :) It doesn't answer the question about anti-neutrinos, however, since they are considered to be fundamental in their own right, but are still electrically neutral. So... I couldn't speculate there as to why that is a thing.
jliller I'm not sure, but I assume it's just because it's a pain that jumbles up an otherwise good theory and model. More of an inside joke rather than an actual critique on the morality of the acis
The Extremely Large Telescope was done only a few years ago if I remember correctly. You know, the one which took over from the Very Large Telescope. An Overwhelmingly Large Telescope was in the works, but it got cancelled sadly. So what do you mean Astronomers are bad at naming things?
So, I'm no scientist, or anything else really, but could the detected mysterious Fast Radio Burts (FRB's) be caused by these unseen matter/antimatter collisions? Maybe a neat little theory that solves 2 mysteries? That would be cool.
Don't understand it... it might be a science fiction theory. Physics is simple. Do you know what they still haven't figured out? It's not the particles that move. It's energy. Take look at kinetic energy and a pendulum (google pendulum), for example. The ball at one end swings and cause the ball at the other end to move, by transferring the energy through other balls (particles). Transfer seems fast or instantaneous. Energy travels by propagation. Another reason physical objects can't move faster than speed of light (or more accurately, energy) (memorize it as "speed of energy"). Think of photons as particles that don't move, but allow photonic energy to propagate, which is why it spreads (or what they call scattering effect). Neutrinos might be a science theory though and particles don't move or very little.
@@starbase51shiptestingfacility No -none of what you aid is right. Energy is more or less a defined conserved quantity in a system. Fields can carry energy. The transfer is not instantaneous, but in your example transfers at the speed of sound. Energy doesn't have a propagation speed. Massless particles with energy propagate at the speed of light in a vacuum. Don't tell people to change a consistent name. Names are useful because we all know the reference. Starting with "think" everything you say is simply inconsistent with reality. Neutrinos are very much physical objects which exist, but they have little to do with how particles (which particles?) move. They interact through the electroweak force primarily.
putrifiedpuppy disemboweledkitty I don't think 6ft 205lbs is considered tall and scrawny but I do have long hair, but it's dark brown. I don't smoke weed but I do drink on occasion, I have really bad eyesight so i need my glasses constantly, no sunglasses. How old are you? I sense some angst
Pepe! It was an experiment named OPERA in 2011, there was a mistake in their fiber optic cable or something. Just Google "faster than light neutrinos" Lots of embarrassed physicists that day. lol
Godlessfuture but I’m pretty sure a matter-anti matter collision has a mass-energy efficiency of 100% (not too sure) but that would mean two solar masses worth of energy being released in a small amount of time
@@__8474 Yes, it would be 100% efficient, and a bang like we have never seen before. The total lack of antimatter in the universe is kind of the odd things about it though (technically, the question is why there is any matter. Theory says that there should have been equal amounts of matter and antimatter created and then all of it mutually annihilated, yet there is matter left over. Clearly, theory is wrong, but we really don't know why or how)
@@talltroll7092 if the Multiverse theory is true, then maybe it was just universal natural selection. Universes with equal amounts of matter and antimatter destroy themselves. therefore, we could have only existed in the universe is where that was not the case.
@@wren_. then the question becomes why isn't that the case even though it should be. Our Physics doesn't seem to favour matter over antimatter but yet we still somehow have so much matter but barely any antimatter. Even if the multiverse theory is true that doesn't explain why our universe is the way it is
uh no, dark matter is what keeps the universe together, dark energy is what is expanding the universe faster and faster, and ones matter.... and ones energy..
I watch these kinds of videos to learn more about the universe but also because I love how the more we learn about it the more we realize how much we dont know
I think the galaxy thing could likely be a shared gravity thing that is holding them all together, which could also go a long way to explaining why space is expanding faster as well its not so much moving faster its slowing down less. As galaxies move away from each other their shared gravity interacts less, which slow them down less.
Maybe the reduction in gravitational attraction between galaxies causes the space time curvature to smooth out and appear to stretch the distance axis from our point of view, as the empty space has progressively slower ‘time’ compared to the higher gravity conditions in the past - so light travelling through those areas has been stretched out as time slows down?
So, several weeks ago, y'all ran a story about the newer optics discovering previously unknown stars in the Milky Way. My question is if that could indicate that some of Dark Matter can be explained by the existence of objects we cannot yet detect with existing optics?
Up until around the 16th century, mankind completely understood the universe - the earth was at its centre and the sun and planets revolved around it. These were facts. But then more and more observations showed that there were flaws in what we thought we knew, and eventually, after a bit of murdering and persecution of heretics, we came to accept the view of the universe that we now have (OK, there's been a bit of refining by Newton, Einstein, etc, but the absolute basics remain). Problem is, that once again too many things don't quite fit what we believe to be the truth. In my more fanciful moments I sometimes wonder if we have once again led ourselves up the garden path and the reality is that the universe is actually utterly and totally different from what we understand it to be.
This axis of evil thing, could be that the universe forming big bang exploded out in a flat(ish) plane, like a squashed football, not in a perfect sphere. Makes sense that lots of matter would eventually level out and settle in the same explosion plane, with rotating objects like our solar system following the same rough orientation. Typing this, a question occurs: Is there *ANY* structure in the universe that *DOESN'T* rotate?.
perhaps an initally spherical and uniform manner but due to random noise ended up with the universe as a whole having a non-zero average rotation that then lead to a non zero oblate flatness that over time magnified into the shape you describe?vel
"thank you for uploading these videos. Even if I'm having a hard night, I just put a relaxing astronomy video on and listen. It always makes my nights go much easier. Thank you!!!"
Ahh the good ole lazy "it's not my job to educate you" trope usually immediately preceded or followed by condemning/mocking people for not being more educated. At least Axel was nice enough to provide a starting point.
+GDI Has nothing to do with lazy. People learn better with a good teacher and some people are good in condensing information in a way that's not too complicated (less complicated as a text book or wikipedia), so they are good teachers. Nothing wrong in asking, especially on a science channel. Some people are here to learn, others might have the information they are looking for. +Gman5938 But I guess this channel is not the right place for this kind of science. Try asking over at PBS Spacetime, they are usually more willing to help. And I bet it's only a matter of time before they make a video about Supersymmetry.
Fantastic episode! Updates on these subjects highly anticipated. I'd add The Great Attractor to the list. One wonders whether any of the mysteries described here vicariously explains that.
@@d3rSyg That's the point. A matter-antimatter explosion the size of a hand held rock would obliterate most all matter for quite some distance. It's kind of like how they had school children during the 60's, get under their desks to protect them from a nuclear attack... not much good.
It does make sense tho. Earth is placed on the right exact angle and distance from the sun for life, our solar system is furtherist away from the bigger stars that could cause death by too much radiation, the nearest magnatar is so far away from our solar system so as not to destroy life or disrupt our orbit. Our galaxy is in a region of the universe where fewer galaxies exist compared to the rest of the universe called the bootes void. Everything about our place in the universe says it had to be specially designed for life
@@AL-xo7ub uh no. with our without a "designer", with the infinite size of the universe and infinite amount of stars and galaxies etc, there are bound to be random places that support life. also, considering we don't fully know exactly what's out there, we cannot say how many other places there are that support life or even support life better.
Maybe it's just because they're moving. The mass isn't theirs, they just cause a little wake, like little boats. And the mass gets dragged a bit as they go by.
The Axis of Evil. Dark matter. Antimatter. Neutrinos. Can scientists please start taking just a few more moments to come up with better names for their newly discovered phenomina?
Probably not. Dark matter doesn't clumps together like normal matter, it stays in a loosely bound state, forming a halo around large structures such as galaxies and clusters.
Probably, anything that reacts to gravity should form a black hole if there's enough of it. In fact, black holes formed from ordinary matter already count as "dark matter" because they're mass that we can't see with telescopes. That only accounts for a tiny portion of the mass missing from the equations though.
Rhaegar19 so my question is if dark matter makes most of the mass of the universe and it can form black holes. Shouldn't the universe are full of dark matter black holes and dark matter planet?
Number one made me so happy. We just had our yearly Nobel Day celebration and talked a lot about neutrinos and my grandfather. Neutrinos are so cool :D
Some physicists argue that angular momentum of celestial bodies is high enough on average to add a significant amount of collective gravity to a galaxy. This would eliminate the need for dark matter.
I highly doubt it. Because we have found dark matter by itself, as mentioned in the video. So, either those measurements are wrong or those physicists are wrong. I doubt angular momentum has enough energy to do that though, we'd have to be moving at relativistic speeds everywhere, and I think we'd know if that was the case by observing the CMBR and our relative movement to it.
Razgrits Fair points, except for one: you can't move relative to the CMBR because the universe's expansion treats every point like the center. The background radiation is not a physical object but closer to a distant spherical snapshot. To say we could move relative to it would be to imply the existence of aether, which has thoroughly been shot down.
LeTtRrZ Um, we can actually do it. Google 'How can one measure speed relative to the rest frame of the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation'. It really has nothing to do with the aether and it's not really a snapshot. Of course it doesn't 'really' exist any more but it has a rest frame. It has to do with the photon distribution in the CMBR being isotropic giving us an 'average' rest frame of all matter.
The intro is a little misleading, the physics underlying the everyday reality of us here on earth *are* completely known (unless your everyday reality involves being a particle physicist). You aren't going to get souls or the supernatural out of dark matter or neutrinos.
no. There is a problem with that thinking. See, reality is just reality. We can't know it, we can only deduce what we think it could be, by using the scientific method. If our model predicts even 1% less than it should, it means that there is something massively wrong or may be something small is missing. We are part of that reality, so this model will apply to us too. The correct statement would be "The physics of everyday reality can be correctly predicted to a certain degree!". It is the nature of science that you can never know anything, you can only think you know something until a better hypothesis comes along (see karl popper logic of scientific discovery)
The explanation for why this is the case is exceedingly long winded, but if you are interested, Sean Carroll's new book "The Big Picture" touches on it in a way that is accessible to most people.
It would be nice when you say `experiments have shown ` you could briefly if possible explain what the experiments were . thankyou for another excellent post.
I love how this channel always present us wonderful facts about the universe in an interesting way. Keeps me humble more than from watching religious contents
I've watched all SciShow episodes and this is certainly in my top 10 favorites. The content is fascinating, the concepts are vulgarized just enough in the script, editing makes the pace just fast enough, the graphics and images are helpful and mister Aranda is a very captivating host.
Thanks SciShow!
Mine too. And as an added bonus this guy is so freakin hot and.. uhh.. his voice.. But this didn t distracted me from the content, but the contrary..
How long have you've been watching?
@@InfinityRedXX 8 years I think! But nowadays I don't watch all of them.
I guess it's just me, but his constant pointless hand gestures are what I find distracting.
@@alexbalea6404 🥵🥵
Brown dwarfs aren't failed stars, they're super successful planets!
I like the way you think.
You seem like a nice dude.
We need more people like this
I’m saying the same because everyone is too!
Just like Pluto isn't a celestial dwarf, but a big independent Brown moon.
Six years later this episode is still relevant. Though I don't think I've heard of the lithium problem before. This is actually probably one of my favorite, of the ones I've watched recently.
I'm wondering if any of these issues are any closer to being solved, but I'm too lazy to look it up
@@liizs2863 Ya I'm pretty sure everything is still a problem. But work has definitely been done on them that narrows down some of the options/solutions.
That was my bad, my planets inhabitants really loved moving lithium super great durable stuff to work with.
The dark matter is outdated now with the new findings of JWST. Also, MOND is becoming more closer to observation.
could you make a more in depth video on the axis of evil? what do you mean that our solar system lines up with it
The planets orbit the sun in a series of concentric circles, which lie nearly in the same plane. You can visualize this as a large, flat disk the size of the orbit of the outermost planet. The reason they are lined up in this way is that, after the Sun formed, there was still a giant disk of random rock and gas surrounding the Sun, all orbiting together. Eventually the planets formed out of this mess, and maintained their angular momentum.
If you extend this plane (the disk) out into the universe, then it appears this dividing line of the cosmic background radiation density (the "Axis of Evil") very nearly lines up with the disk. This is like the coincidence of every house on your side of the street lining up to form a line pointing directly at the top of the Great Pyramid of Giza. Pretty unlikely, and slightly uncanny.
I'd also like a more in-depth video about this axis of evil - I've never heard of this universe phenomenon before so I'd really like to hear everything there is to know about it. And I'd like a separate video about that universal lithium-7 deficiency
Jovetj you lost me on the houses lining up to pyramid part. What do you mean?
@@eefsss4603 a row of houses in your street is a line of houses - extend that line and imagine the line happens to point directly to the top of the piramid of Gizeh. Quite an unlikely coincidence would that be! Jovetj is saying the planetary disk around our sun pointing towards the axis of evil is as unlikely and yet it does
@@kloassie That line of houses will always point somewhere. Had it pointed to the top of Mt. Everest we'd say, "Wow! Incredible." If it pointed to the EMpire State Bldg..or the Eiffel Tower...etc. You can always look back at a coincidence and impart great meaning to it.
This is one of the simplest and most informative videos on challenges in modern physics. Thanks a lot for making such a great video.
It's nice to see someone simply saying 'we don't know'.
Getting smacked in the face with 'it's TRUTH. ACCEPT it" a lot tends to sour my understanding a lot.
If there's one thing that you should knoq about physics it's that everything you believe is true might be completely wrong
is like the bases of science, if we need to correct our self a thousand times, we'll have to correct our self a thousand times
Yet, ask physicists if Einstein got it completely wrong and get ready to be treated like something unpleasant on the bottom of a boot. Not so many scientists are cool with the idea of the underpinning principles of all their knowledge and ideas, being proven to be incorrect.
Toffee Crisp yeah but that happens in every group of people, age takes a factor on it too, if you have more evidence it helps so they listen to you more but it'll still be needing as much testing as the current theories have, always saying it might be incomplete is better if you want them to agree with you cos its more acurate to say that most of the time, and something most scientist would say too.
Remember how the saying goes "if an old but with a really good reputation scientist thinks your theory is right then it might be right, but if he says its wrong it might be that he is wrong
Cristian Verdugo Galaz
I agree with what your saying, but the field of science could do with being a little less dogmatic. Ofcourse we shouldn't throw out perfectly good theories, when we have nothing to replace it with, but the recalcitrance with which the scientific establishment meet new ideas that run counter to accepted "doctrine" can be a huge impedement to scientific progress. When theories and scientific principles gain the status of being sacrosanct, it closes the door on exploration and precludes certain avenues of thought.
Einstein is a big one. The guy was amazing, a genuine genius, contributing more to humanity than I or any number of my possible descendants ever could. That said, we sometimes hold him in such high esteem that we refuse to entertain the prospect that he might have been wrong about alot of things, the fact that one would have to dress it up in a more palatable way, is evidence of this. Sure, nothing in science can trully ever be stated absolutely definitively and yet, in some circumstances, it is taken as definitive.
I get that in order to build on knowledge, some things have to be taken on faith, so to speak, as being solid, or certain and definitive, for that foundation to exist to be built upon. But it sometimes seems like science wants to have it's cake and eat it too (awful saying, but accurate enough)
Either nothing can be definitively known and all avenues of exploration are valid, or things can be absolutely defined and therefore questions that are counter to these absolutes are irrelevant.
I'll admit, not being a physicist (or any other kind of scientist) maybe we can have both states at the same time (everything is so quantum! lol) but I think in an operative sense, such conflicting approaches would be less than productive in the long run.
Axis of Evil would make a great death metal band name.
Thomas Gabby well there is The Axis of Awesome
That band already exists lol
Band members name would be Iran, Iraq, North Korea and Venezuela .
Groud Frank Saudi Arabia?
Groud Frank Venezuela?
The problem that will keep us learning as far as phisics go is answering a little question can change the answer to a big question or raise new ones. The more we learn, the more we realize there is to learn.
Can we go back to that sugar packet and wobbly table analogy?
Yeah, that was a sweet analogy.
Master Therion I see what you did there you snake🐍
You never fixed a table with sugar packets? Neither have I. Salt forever
Just fix the table by rotating it.
That's how you get ants
Wait, wait, wait... neutrinos have mass?
... I didn't even know they were Catholic...
They converted.
Ahahahahah
I don't get it, someone please explain the joke
@@zakarian3892 idiots trying to be funny (as if clever) when the joke isnt even correct in any way shape or form it missed the point but they carried it on anyway. Am guessing 30 yr olds who gave up learning around 10 years ago
😂
I DEMAND a video with the best discoveries of 2016.
But 2016 isn't over yet, there may yet be more!
HAhahaha well thought
AHAHAHHAHAHAHAHSHAAHAHAHAHAHHAHABA FUCK
Lol best discoveries of 2016: We found more problems
+Fabizinha Bingboing I agree that would be a great video
Love this stuff, nothing like cosmological inquiries in the morning to get your brain going.
My gf has OCD. She heard the word "supersymmetry" and I think it changed her views of the universe.
We need t shirts with the CMB graphic and the Axis of Evil Labeled.
That last one is very interesting
Agreed - extremely interesting. But so many questions. He said our solar system "lines up with the Axis of Evil"... wtf does that even mean? Lines up? Like if you averaged all our planets' orbits into a frisbee, the frisbee is spinning at an angle similar to the Axis?
It means all of the planets already orbit the Sun nearly in the same plane, like a giant disc. This is because the stuff the planets came from was already orbiting the new Sun in a giant disc, sort-of like the rings of Saturn but thicker and more of it.
If you extend the disk of the solar system out into the universe, it very nearly lines up with that apparent dividing line in the density of the cosmic microwave background radiation.
The answer is 42
Andrew M yep
Andrew M but what is the question
Storm Graser Unfortunately, no one knows what the question is
:(
Storm Graser look if you want to build a computer to discover the question then go ahead, but dont come running to me when it gets distorted
The Lithium is like the last few tiles on a Rubik's cube. You're gonna mess up everything try and get them in place but there is a formula for solving it so it's not impossible... just really hard.
I read somewhere that antimatter also has an opposite spin on its particules. I find it important to mention because otherwise, chargeless particules wouldn't have their opposite twins (like neutrons and antineutrons)
I think the other part of why neutrons and anti-neutrons are a thing is that anti-neutrons are comprised of the corresponding anti-quarks, which _are_ electrically charged. The proton's quark composition is UUD, which is a net charge of +1, whereas the neutron has a quark composition of UDD, which has a net charge of 0, but the up quark has a charge of +2/3 while the down quark has a charge of -1/3. Replace them with their corresponding anti-quarks, and you have charges of -2/3 and +1/3, respectively, resulting in, again, a net charge of 0. Still an electrically neutral particle, but now an anti-particle. :)
It doesn't answer the question about anti-neutrinos, however, since they are considered to be fundamental in their own right, but are still electrically neutral. So... I couldn't speculate there as to why that is a thing.
Some particles are their own antiparticles and are identical.
So what's evil about the universe's "Axis of Evil"?
jliller I'm not sure, but I assume it's just because it's a pain that jumbles up an otherwise good theory and model. More of an inside joke rather than an actual critique on the morality of the acis
Astronomers are either really bad or really good at naming things
The Extremely Large Telescope was done only a few years ago if I remember correctly. You know, the one which took over from the Very Large Telescope. An Overwhelmingly Large Telescope was in the works, but it got cancelled sadly. So what do you mean Astronomers are bad at naming things?
It must be a science/engineer thing... ohm/mho bit/byte/nibble... lol...
If a problem is fiendishly difficult to solve, it's labeled, in a tongue-in-cheek way, "evil". And it's an axis, so the name basically writes itself.
The axis of evil is where the Reapers are hiding.
Cars Simplified lets go there. They sound fun.
I thought that was dark space.
that is gorram terrifying. Cāo wǒ i hope we never make it that far out in the 'verse...
@@dudepool7530 aww, I miss the brown coats..😢
So, I'm no scientist, or anything else really, but could the detected mysterious Fast Radio Burts (FRB's) be caused by these unseen matter/antimatter collisions? Maybe a neat little theory that solves 2 mysteries? That would be cool.
Easily my favorite episode
How about a better theory , Lets call it lab. tested . THUNDERBOLTS PROJECT CHANNEL. This is better 'cause it's REAL !
Completely intrigued by physics. Don't understand it!!!
Considering the old saying "if you think you understand the quantum jump, it means you don't understand it", you must be on the right track. :D
Don't understand it... it might be a science fiction theory. Physics is simple. Do you know what they still haven't figured out? It's not the particles that move. It's energy. Take look at kinetic energy and a pendulum (google pendulum), for example. The ball at one end swings and cause the ball at the other end to move, by transferring the energy through other balls (particles). Transfer seems fast or instantaneous. Energy travels by propagation. Another reason physical objects can't move faster than speed of light (or more accurately, energy) (memorize it as "speed of energy"). Think of photons as particles that don't move, but allow photonic energy to propagate, which is why it spreads (or what they call scattering effect). Neutrinos might be a science theory though and particles don't move or very little.
@@starbase51shiptestingfacility No -none of what you aid is right. Energy is more or less a defined conserved quantity in a system. Fields can carry energy. The transfer is not instantaneous, but in your example transfers at the speed of sound. Energy doesn't have a propagation speed. Massless particles with energy propagate at the speed of light in a vacuum. Don't tell people to change a consistent name. Names are useful because we all know the reference. Starting with "think" everything you say is simply inconsistent with reality. Neutrinos are very much physical objects which exist, but they have little to do with how particles (which particles?) move. They interact through the electroweak force primarily.
Hahah! Oh I'm so glad I'm not the only one!
@@miacat5630 I hated physics in school ---and 50 years later I still haven't an effing clue about it .
Brilliantly explained
Hey ya'll remember that time neutrino's went faster than the speed of light and broke physics?
putrifiedpuppy disemboweledkitty radical dude
putrifiedpuppy disemboweledkitty I don't think 6ft 205lbs is considered tall and scrawny but I do have long hair, but it's dark brown. I don't smoke weed but I do drink on occasion,
I have really bad eyesight so i need my glasses constantly, no sunglasses.
How old are you? I sense some angst
I membe
Can you send me a link to that video/article?
Pepe! It was an experiment named OPERA in 2011, there was a mistake in their fiber optic cable or something. Just Google "faster than light neutrinos" Lots of embarrassed physicists that day. lol
I imagine a massive star consisting of matter colliding with an antimatter one would be...extremely violent,to say the least.
Kinda like how a regular star colliding with another regular star also would be lol? I mean after a point violent is violent.
Godlessfuture but I’m pretty sure a matter-anti matter collision has a mass-energy efficiency of 100% (not too sure) but that would mean two solar masses worth of energy being released in a small amount of time
@@__8474 Yes, it would be 100% efficient, and a bang like we have never seen before. The total lack of antimatter in the universe is kind of the odd things about it though (technically, the question is why there is any matter. Theory says that there should have been equal amounts of matter and antimatter created and then all of it mutually annihilated, yet there is matter left over. Clearly, theory is wrong, but we really don't know why or how)
@@talltroll7092 if the Multiverse theory is true, then maybe it was just universal natural selection. Universes with equal amounts of matter and antimatter destroy themselves. therefore, we could have only existed in the universe is where that was not the case.
@@wren_. then the question becomes why isn't that the case even though it should be. Our Physics doesn't seem to favour matter over antimatter but yet we still somehow have so much matter but barely any antimatter. Even if the multiverse theory is true that doesn't explain why our universe is the way it is
I thought Dark Energy would have been on this list too.
Spluff5, Goes with Dark Matter I'd guess.
+stringduality No. Dark energy and dark matter are two completely different things.
Dark Energy is completely different than Dark Matter
NutritiouslyHigh, I know that but the two mostly go hand in hand, they probably just forgot to mention it...
uh no, dark matter is what keeps the universe together, dark energy is what is expanding the universe faster and faster, and ones matter.... and ones energy..
There are many lists of unexplained things in the universe. This is by far the best and most informative list that I've seen so far.
Glad "why does anything exist at all?" didn't make into the top 5. That should be the very last of all possible questions.
Quite simple, really. Everything exists because existence > non-existence.
This is a philosophical question, this is a science show.
+Feynstein 100
Existence is bigger than non existence? Greater than? What are you talking about sizes for, as if that could explain anything?
Materialistic Science will never solve those questions , MORPHOGENIC FIELD THEORY by Rupert Sheldrake is a good start .
That question doesn't even make sense. There is no intrinsic purpose of existence.
Absolutely fascinating episode, thank you for bringing this to us for free!
Awesome stuff!
This is the best science channel. New videos are uploaded every day.
Seeing problems as opportunities is what I like about science.
I watch these kinds of videos to learn more about the universe but also because I love how the more we learn about it the more we realize how much we dont know
I think the galaxy thing could likely be a shared gravity thing that is holding them all together, which could also go a long way to explaining why space is expanding faster as well its not so much moving faster its slowing down less. As galaxies move away from each other their shared gravity interacts less, which slow them down less.
Maybe the reduction in gravitational attraction between galaxies causes the space time curvature to smooth out and appear to stretch the distance axis from our point of view, as the empty space has progressively slower ‘time’ compared to the higher gravity conditions in the past - so light travelling through those areas has been stretched out as time slows down?
Thank you so much, you rock! I loved this video! Please talk more about physics, this is such an exciting topic!
So, several weeks ago, y'all ran a story about the newer optics discovering previously unknown stars in the Milky Way. My question is if that could indicate that some of Dark Matter can be explained by the existence of objects we cannot yet detect with existing optics?
Up until around the 16th century, mankind completely understood the universe - the earth was at its centre and the sun and planets revolved around it. These were facts. But then more and more observations showed that there were flaws in what we thought we knew, and eventually, after a bit of murdering and persecution of heretics, we came to accept the view of the universe that we now have (OK, there's been a bit of refining by Newton, Einstein, etc, but the absolute basics remain). Problem is, that once again too many things don't quite fit what we believe to be the truth. In my more fanciful moments I sometimes wonder if we have once again led ourselves up the garden path and the reality is that the universe is actually utterly and totally different from what we understand it to be.
Why not on scishow space?
with all the particle physics in the beginning it's not exclusivly about spacey stuff.. at least that what i think
Marketing ploy to get people to check out the wild sci(de).
Because it's a ListShow episode. Even since they started giving those their own day, they always air on the main channel.
I absolutely love the scientific conversations these videos spark.
Anuses....Anuses everywhere...Why has science forsaken us?!
Well it is the first meme this show have created, some ppl just too excited about it.
Wonderful post. Grateful for the share.
This axis of evil thing, could be that the universe forming big bang exploded out in a flat(ish) plane, like a squashed football, not in a perfect sphere.
Makes sense that lots of matter would eventually level out and settle in the same explosion plane, with rotating objects like our solar system following the same rough orientation.
Typing this, a question occurs: Is there *ANY* structure in the universe that *DOESN'T* rotate?.
perhaps an initally spherical and uniform manner but due to random noise ended up with the universe as a whole having a non-zero average rotation that then lead to a non zero oblate flatness that over time magnified into the shape you describe?vel
Pour yourself a glass of water and then figure out how many molecules of water line up with the bottom of the glass.
Wow what an amazing episode!
How many times did he say "particles" during that video?
Wow! My girl is here!
Can i just say that you really have a very chill voice like i could listen to you for hours everyday
There's always more to learn.
"thank you for uploading these videos. Even if I'm having a hard night, I just put a relaxing astronomy video on and listen. It always makes my nights go much easier.
Thank you!!!"
TIL that we need to establish THE FIRST GALACTIC EMPIRE!
chill
First we need positronic robots with human appearance. But I'm okay with the whole galactic imperial thingy
So this is how liberty dies… with thunderous applause
+sevoftalpha Positrons are as possible as the Force.
+Master Therion I AM the Senate!
Good info on what we don’t understand!
can someone explain super-symetry in more detail for me
Gman5938 2 boobs that look alike
Axel is right, do your own research
Ahh the good ole lazy "it's not my job to educate you" trope usually immediately preceded or followed by condemning/mocking people for not being more educated. At least Axel was nice enough to provide a starting point.
NickGreyden You mean lazy
+GDI Has nothing to do with lazy. People learn better with a good teacher and some people are good in condensing information in a way that's not too complicated (less complicated as a text book or wikipedia), so they are good teachers. Nothing wrong in asking, especially on a science channel. Some people are here to learn, others might have the information they are looking for.
+Gman5938 But I guess this channel is not the right place for this kind of science. Try asking over at PBS Spacetime, they are usually more willing to help. And I bet it's only a matter of time before they make a video about Supersymmetry.
I love these videos so much
You forgot the mystery 'If we ignore Kanye West, will he go away?'
Antifoul Awl The answer is no
He hasn't so far.
Fantastic episode! Updates on these subjects highly anticipated. I'd add The Great Attractor to the list. One wonders whether any of the mysteries described here vicariously explains that.
scify story ..a man made of antimatter picks up a nomal rock... he explodes ... end
Only an amount of him that is equal to the mass of the rock would explode. The rest of him would be fine (shaken, but fine). 😁
@@tarnishedknight730 Well, if you don't count the massive explosion of energy that would likely have vaporized him, yeah, perfectly fine.
@@d3rSyg
That's the point. A matter-antimatter explosion the size of a hand held rock would obliterate most all matter for quite some distance.
It's kind of like how they had school children during the 60's, get under their desks to protect them from a nuclear attack... not much good.
This was an incredibly fun one to watch, Michael. Fascinating stuff
Oh god. We're placed in a near perfect spot? Come on! You're giving the creationists ammo to lob at us!
As you say "oh god" lol
It does make sense tho. Earth is placed on the right exact angle and distance from the sun for life, our solar system is furtherist away from the bigger stars that could cause death by too much radiation, the nearest magnatar is so far away from our solar system so as not to destroy life or disrupt our orbit. Our galaxy is in a region of the universe where fewer galaxies exist compared to the rest of the universe called the bootes void. Everything about our place in the universe says it had to be specially designed for life
@@AL-xo7ub uh no. with our without a "designer", with the infinite size of the universe and infinite amount of stars and galaxies etc, there are bound to be random places that support life. also, considering we don't fully know exactly what's out there, we cannot say how many other places there are that support life or even support life better.
Maybe it's just because they're moving.
The mass isn't theirs, they just cause a little wake, like little boats.
And the mass gets dragged a bit as they go by.
the missing lithium was used to create the song from Evanescence .... yes i'm fun at parties
Those sources...awesome!
Thank you guys!
The Axis of Evil. Dark matter. Antimatter. Neutrinos. Can scientists please start taking just a few more moments to come up with better names for their newly discovered phenomina?
These are not phenomenons, these are actual physical things. Secondly, Physicists are known to name things in a shitty way. :P
So you want to call Dark Matter. Invisible Matter or something?
There's still a lot we don't know about the Universe... But geez, how deep you have to dig to find stuff you can't explain... it's mesmerizing...
I was supposed to be playing Game of War but this one player keeps kicking my ass
Logan B fuck off
Logan B thelegend27?
Favorite episode yet! Keep it up:)
mamamia so many answers we have to answer.
how come i just came across this channel today?? :) :) great video :) :) subbed :)
btw, the video was published on my bday, hhehehe :) :)
Does dark matter forms dark matter black holes just like ordinary matter does?
Probably not. Dark matter doesn't clumps together like normal matter, it stays in a loosely bound state, forming a halo around large structures such as galaxies and clusters.
Probably, anything that reacts to gravity should form a black hole if there's enough of it. In fact, black holes formed from ordinary matter already count as "dark matter" because they're mass that we can't see with telescopes. That only accounts for a tiny portion of the mass missing from the equations though.
Rhaegar19 so my question is if dark matter makes most of the mass of the universe and it can form black holes. Shouldn't the universe are full of dark matter black holes and dark matter planet?
Yeah, I don't know enough on the subject to say anything definitive. Leopoldo has the best answer.
Here: scienceblogs.com/startswithabang/2016/10/28/why-doesnt-dark-matter-form-black-holes-synopsis/
Realy good episode! :D
We are so ignorant to think we will know everything there is to know about the universe.
I think it's possible, but there's so much more outside of our universe so we can't ever know everything I don't think
Ostebrix exactly!!!
Such smart. Much knowledge.
I'm not saying it was aliens...
...but it was a poor understanding of particle physics.
Number one made me so happy. We just had our yearly Nobel Day celebration and talked a lot about neutrinos and my grandfather. Neutrinos are so cool :D
Illuminati confirmed
Can you do one on cerebral aneurysms? I had one rupture at 19 and would love to learn more!
It's a thin spot in the wall of a blood vessel
Video of what you want. m.ua-cam.com/video/nn9TNJsSpj4/v-deo.html
Some physicists argue that angular momentum of celestial bodies is high enough on average to add a significant amount of collective gravity to a galaxy. This would eliminate the need for dark matter.
I highly doubt it. Because we have found dark matter by itself, as mentioned in the video. So, either those measurements are wrong or those physicists are wrong. I doubt angular momentum has enough energy to do that though, we'd have to be moving at relativistic speeds everywhere, and I think we'd know if that was the case by observing the CMBR and our relative movement to it.
Razgrits Fair points, except for one: you can't move relative to the CMBR because the universe's expansion treats every point like the center. The background radiation is not a physical object but closer to a distant spherical snapshot. To say we could move relative to it would be to imply the existence of aether, which has thoroughly been shot down.
LeTtRrZ Um, we can actually do it. Google 'How can one measure speed relative to the rest frame of the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation'. It really has nothing to do with the aether and it's not really a snapshot. Of course it doesn't 'really' exist any more but it has a rest frame. It has to do with the photon distribution in the CMBR being isotropic giving us an 'average' rest frame of all matter.
How could angular momentum add gravity? Isn't angular momentum the force that balances gravity so we don't collapse to the source of it?
Could we get an entire playlist of Michael videos? I love his voice
8 views? Damn, I'm early.
I've decided this guy is my fav out of all SciShow's presenters
Positive Comemnt
They measuring age of stars by metalicity and that age confirms metalicity.
what if lithium 7 reacted with something?
This was a really good scishow video.
*...one of nature's mysteries.*
This show is really informative
Jesus is the greatest at...
Dude if Jesus's said it it must be true.
CUZ HE'S JESUS!!!!
Ezekiel Elliott Cancel that
Jesus but jesus? I'm christian jesus fuck that I'm now considered an atheist yo momma created earth
Jesus oh yeah
Im out
Good video, explaining the complicated fairly easy.
what if i told you the universe dies when you die?
Merry Christmas SciShow and all my fellow SciShow fans :)
The intro is a little misleading, the physics underlying the everyday reality of us here on earth *are* completely known (unless your everyday reality involves being a particle physicist). You aren't going to get souls or the supernatural out of dark matter or neutrinos.
no. There is a problem with that thinking. See, reality is just reality. We can't know it, we can only deduce what we think it could be, by using the scientific method. If our model predicts even 1% less than it should, it means that there is something massively wrong or may be something small is missing. We are part of that reality, so this model will apply to us too. The correct statement would be "The physics of everyday reality can be correctly predicted to a certain degree!". It is the nature of science that you can never know anything, you can only think you know something until a better hypothesis comes along (see karl popper logic of scientific discovery)
The explanation for why this is the case is exceedingly long winded, but if you are interested, Sean Carroll's new book "The Big Picture" touches on it in a way that is accessible to most people.
This was such a great and interesting video, thank you for making it. :)
VSauce is better. he makes sure you understand. you just explain things by bringing up other shit we dont know
yeah it's more like he talks about something briefly which can spark interest and let you research it for yourself
5:20 this is waaay too scary, but also amazing af
very interesting! thanks for this video :)
Scientist: WHY CAN'T YOU JUST BE NORMAL?!
Lithium 7: *screams*
It would be nice when you say `experiments have shown ` you could briefly if possible explain what the experiments were . thankyou for another excellent post.
I love how this channel always present us wonderful facts about the universe in an interesting way. Keeps me humble more than from watching religious contents
I want to hit the thumbs up button multiple times... ♡♡!!
so annoying when my sub box misses out videos, good thing this was in my recommended
Something about complex cosmology coming from a handsome young man with a warm, golden voice makes it so much more enjoyable somehow.
This is fascinating. I watched it twice