I'd say he looks more like the eleventh, Matt Smith, he was the one that, paraphrasing John Hurt's War Doctor, couldn`t speak without flapping his hands around. He even sounds a little bit like him.
I love the silly, conflicting ways that Hank describes the universe. Nice, safe supermassive black holes don't come up in normal conversation. :D It makes learning fun, and I remember long after.
+Daniel Hale i swear when cloning humans becomes real the first person i'd want cloned is hank then all the clones will be sent out to schools everywhere so that he could be the best teacher everywhere. i just realized how creepy this sounds.
+Mica Santos However, since a large portion of your personality is determined by life expiriences, a lot of the clones could be terrible teachers. They would look the same, but would not be the same Hank.
@@stuartmacleod8225 Therefore, we train them all in VR by letting them live the life of Hank up to this point (you know, like in that one episode of Rick & Morty).
Definitely terrifying. Space is an insanely huge pile of nothingness sprinkled with all sorts of ludicrously powerful incarnations of death and destruction.
Reassuring. Your ancestors have lived over hundreds of millions of years, and your descendents (assuming you get some) are likely to continue existing for several million years.
"You were probably taught that the Sun is a typical star. FALSE!" THANK YOU. You are literally the first person I've heard besides my astronomy professor say that.
I'm a n00b and thought that... sup. We are soooo lucky to be placed where we are in the galaxy; YET we take it all for granted. We monetize almost everything possible, murder innocents in the name of defense/resources, lock people up for smoking a harmless plant that provokes laughter- not violence, hold onto a book that supposedly speaks of God's rules and teachings but then you realize that all wars tend to start with difference in God(s) *I.E.* Guy1: Do you accept the Lord Jesus Christ as your Lord and savior? Guy2: I really can't, it's not in my culture- **Guy1 slits Guy2s throat** I really hope we one day have a chance to prove ourselves but it can't happen with everyone stuck to a screen, learning ignorance in massive doses. I at least take solace that there may be a world out there that is living in harmony. Billions of stars in our galaxy alone- there has to a world without war... I hope... that would suck if there isn't a utopia planet out there.
Of course Earth is "perfect" for us, we were evolved to thrive on it. If there is life in other places in the universe who evolved to thrive in different conditions (in fact, such instances exist here on Earth), they would complain that the Earth is too hot or too cold for them.
+Bob Jones you dont have very much complex life forming in those volatile areas of earth. so its safe to assume that that if a planet was only all of those not so perfect areas, complex life would have a hard time forming.
+Olivér Tabbouch just a theory, how fucking dumb Are You. Tell me how it was disproven, and while you're at it give me proof of god and Jesus remember the bible isn't proof GOOO
+Olivér Tabbouch the bible was written by people, it could have been illusions or people could have made it up for fame, you can't say that every human tells the truth, can you
well since the scientists in our generation has discovered more then ever in the past century alone, i'd definitely think we got a good chance of sci technology to find other organisms out there! :)
hey guys, love your show. the way you explain things is such a nice simple way, even throwing in some comedy (thank you Hank you always make me chuckle). Even my friend are picking up some of the stuff you talk about.
The theory that life can only exist on a rocky planet with a perfect amount of water such as ours only assumes that all life must be similar to Earth's. This is kind of unreasonable because any life separate from ours would be alien and completely different and could live under its own unique conditions.
the only thing that keeps us as an intelligent species and all that is because we are highly adaptive but we cant say that for planets to have life they need to have water and land and air and something to breathe there's probably aliens that use deadly gasses like we breathe and they probably dont need water to live because every lifeform should be able to adapt or else our universe is very weird
Granted, life could be very different from what we know, but so far earth life is the only kind we know exists and how to identify. It makes sense to look for earth like life first, because the only conditions we currently KNOW life could form in would be earth like conditions. With that set of criteria, it makes sense to (at least for now) look for planets that are earth like.
QuantumSeanyGlass here's a question then... if we are not looking for life and are just looking for habitable planets how are we going to get our food? i dont know about you but i would atleast find a planet with life and then find out if the lifeforms is edible then see if its a habitable planet because i dont think it will be that easy to transport food if we already have food problems still today so we either need quick transports or we need a very small population on the planet and let them live as cannibals
True life on another planet could have adapted to only live in water or to use some other type of gas besides oxygen to survive. But even finding planets like that can be difficult. Even the most simple and robust forms of life we have found could not survive the high levels of radiations found in most of the universe. Not to mention constant meteor strikes and temperature changes would make it impossible for life to evolve any further than single celled organisms.
Hank, I adore you. These are the best science/space-related videos I have ever come across, aside from Vsauce's. Thank you so much for making my days better by giving me mini doses of science-filled information. I think you're my favourite UA-camr.
Can Hank (or someone) explain how radiation is emitted from black holes when other forms of electromagnet radiation (e.g. visible light) can't escape beyond event horizon?
The radiation doesn't come from the black hole itself but from the matter which falls into it that gets accelerated to close to the speed of light as it spirals towards the black hole. I'm not sure about the exact mechanics but the important part to understand is that the radiation doesn't come from inside the event horizon (or apparent horizon.)
The pull of the black hole is so radical that the stuff that spins just before the event horizon sometimes is tossed out at great speed. It's gravitational influence doesn't begin at the event horizon, but much earlier than that. Someone correct me if I'm wrong in that xD
Why would we discount water worlds from the possibility of civilization? That's... That's geocentric! :P Seriously though, odds are that if we find life, it won't be life as we know it.
There is one main reason people don't consider water worlds capable of harbouring civilization (not life, civilization, life is more than welcome there). It is really, like REALLY hard to make tools underwater. Not only is it an amazingly destructive and makes construction many times harder than on the good old solid ground. It also has a nasty tendency of making it nigh impossible to forge anything. You know how smiths toss those red hot iron bars into a bucket of water right after working with them? Now imagine the bucket of water is CONSTANTLY SURROUNDING YOU. Maybe some form of sci-fi organic-tech based civilisation might arise from oceans. But as far as we can tell. If anything intelligent ever grew up in the oceans, they would not have tools and probably would have stable housing. They wouldn't have writing and thus they wouldn't have civilization.
MadeinHell2 I hadn't seen your comment. In response to your comment, it is an interesting rationale. It only proves that the possibility of forging would not be considered by any advanced hypothetical lifeforms. Given that we don't really have any evidence to go on here, I don't really have a counterargument beyond that.
Thumbs up! They make the channel and then don't post this video there? Perhaps they should explain if they plan to move all these videos at some point or whatever.
If you read the description it says this is the last space video on this channel and from here forward space related videos will be on the other channel :)
I wondered that too, because I only saw the title in my inbox. Maybe they filmed it before SciShow Space launched, but why not release it on that channel?
"This will be the last video covering a space related topic on this channel!" Which is immediately followed by a link to scishowspace. or so says the Description.
Isn't there a possibility that life elsewhere could be different in terms of what it needs to form and survive? Like we need oxygen, carbon, water, sunlight, etc. But life elsewhere in the universe could need only some or none of those things and could be completely different than we think.
Yes, but since we know how our sort of life works, we roughly know what hints to look for on other planets. Sure, there could be completely different forms of life out there, but would we really recognize it as such? I think that's how it works, I could be completely wrong.
We can't really know that, there are theories that there could maybe be life based on things like silicium or other close elements, But for what we know, those have lots of inconvenients compared to carbon, and we can't say for sure that it can exist. And I think it is worth mentionning that it is a lot more easier to look for something you know exists here and works, than something you don't know anything about :p
I dunno why oxygen, carbon and sunlight is so important (well, sunlight provides energy, of course. And you need energy to be alive), but water is a universal solvant. It's a unique element, in that it allows for many chemical reactions to take place, which don't happen in other substances, which is why water is a great place to look for life. EDIT: Water is also a very simple molecule, only requiring two hydrogen atoms (most of the matter in the universe is hydrogen) and 1 oxygen. And I remembered why carbon is good: It reacts very well with lots of different elements, giving it a significant advantage over other elements.
Samuel Gabites Alfred Nobel didn't win some competition to have the Nobel prizes named after him. He was disgusted with what he did with his life, and with what people though of him (which he learned from an accidental early obituary post). He left most of his estate to CREATE the Nobel prizes.
Sometimes UA-cam channels create a video weeks in advance, and upload it as a private video. Then, they make the video public when it is scheduled to be released. I am not entirely sure, but that could be what happened here.
Oh, it does! Now that you mention it. The notes are similar to her "Kimmunicator" ringtone--not quite the same, but close. That's probably what's doing it. :)
>Expected video on the likelihood of planets being inhabitable (preferably with a mention of Drake's Equation) >Received video on the likelihood of PLANETS FORMING AT ALL PERIOD
ebkdan I mean no disrespect. The all caps is to be imagined being spoken with the awe of someone who has had his mind blown, because that's what this video did. I had no clue that planetary formation was such a sensitive process.
The Sun is of an average size :) .. Not too big, or too small. However there are A LOT more small (red dwarf) stars than there are averaged sized or giant stars out there in the known universe :)
It is, size-wise. I mean, on the spectrum of the smallest star to the biggest star, our sun ends up somewhere towards the middle. But it's not average if you take into account how many stars are smaller and larger than ours, as Hank stated.
As informative (and fun!) as this video was, I'm very sceptical about concrete claims of things that we don't yet know. Certainly the claims of what would constitute a nice 'neighbourhood' in space apply to life _as we know it_, but if history as taught us anything (even on this lonely planet), is that life is diverse and unpredictable. What if there were other forms of life than [earth] DNA based life? What if there was life that thrived in those hellish conditions mentioned? What if our time-scale of what constitutes a successful eco-system is wildly different than what potentially exists? What if our spatial scale of what a living-creature is, is infinitesimal? Not only would these questions make for a very interesting science fiction story, they also remind us to stop assuming that Earth holds a monopoly on life in the universe. As such, as we search the cosmos for neighbours, we should not restrict ourselves to looking for mirrors.
I'm not criticizing what we are doing in searching for life, and assessing the likelihood of its existence in various regions. Not by a long shot: I earnestly and enthusiastically support the impressive endeavours that are currently being undertaken. My argument is simply that it should be clear that we are looking for "life as we know it," considering we know next to nothing about what life may be in the universe.
Indeed, while I think your speculation is interesting and there may be other 'forms' of life that aren't based on DNA (for example 'life' based on pure energy in certain sci-fi films), you have to consider the evidence of the knowledge based on what we do know. Life works because carbon is a very versatile material, having four available electron positions (Hank actually does a video about carbon in regards to life on scishow). This allows for many configurations that are essential to life as we know it, although I have heard speculation that maybe life could be silicon based because of its similar valence of four. That aside though, you have to consider temperature as well. We have forms of life on earth that are adapted to very cold temperatures and very hot temperatures (or moderate temperatures like most macro-oranisms) but evidence suggests that they can't be adapted to both. Planets with wildly fluctuating temperatures probably would not be able to support life based on this. Lastly, you should take into consideration temperature limits in regards to chemical bonds. Even if something was not dna based, it would still have to deal with radiation and extreme heat breaking down the structure of their bodies. Okay maybe I got carried away and keep in mind I am also just speculating myself, but I think scientifically speaking 23 need to do research based on evidence of things we know instead of things we cannot yet fathom, and maybe later down the road perhaps other possibilities may be understandable.
"...remind us to stop assuming that Earth holds a monopoly on life in the universe." I'd just like to note that I don't know *anyone* who holds that assumption and I've never heard it expressed. I'm sure they exist but most people I know (myself included) actually assume the opposite based on the sheer enormity of the universe.
Colin Prevatt There is a possibility that a life form based on Dark Matter could exist (it does make up more of the universe then normal matter). As Dark Matter doesn't seem to be affected by normal matter things like radiation might not be a concern for Dark Matter based life forms. Aside from that I pretty much agree with your comment.
"Certainly the claims of what would constitute a nice 'neighbourhood' in space apply to life as we know it, but if history as taught us anything (even on this lonely planet), is that life is diverse and unpredictable." People who do this shit for life are aware of this, and i doubt you are aware of how dangerous the universe is for life, fortunately the universe is HUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUGE so life elsewhere than our solar system is very very very likely
I actually planned on making a game where you can fight natural disasters with a legendary katana containing the soul of an angel. There was a demon living in a black hole stirring up this trouble, but now i'm going to have him eventually upgrade it to a Quasar. That's gonna have a shitton of HP.
You should reference the meme 'Shoop dah Woop' for the demon; it doesn't have to be his name but if he is a quasar, i would be a humorous reference. :3
This brings up a new question. so the moon is tidaly locked but it is moving away from the earth ever so slowley. how far out must it be to get tidaly unlocked?
also if the moon wobbles back n forth a bit, which I herd it does, how far away would it get before it's tidal lock wouldn't pull the wobble back the other direction, and it starts rotating slowly, or what I imagine to be slowly
Grinsekatze Cheshire I am realy sry to inform you that moon is never going to get tidaly unlocked it will just one day float away leaving us 4 ever. Its the same thing with the every moon of every planet, if its spinning too fast it will float away but if its moving too slow it will crash in the planet.
Anthony Rezic The moon is wobbeling so if it looses its grip to earth it will start to spinn Im sure of that. or can you name an object alone in space that is not spinning?
that's what i'm thinkin, and since we know it's slowly moving away, this is going to happen right? the only question is will it start spinning while still in orbit
It would depend on how u define habitable. Sure microbes could live there, but that isn't very useful to us. Odds are that any such area on such a planet would be a never-ending mega storm as they mentioned, as the cold atmosphere at the edge of the dark side met the superheated atmosphere of the hot side. It would be fanatic to study from orbit, but I wouldn't actually want to go there. Also, one variable that has a large effect on the "habitable zone" of a planet is how hot the planet is when it forms. A hotter planet can be habitable farther out while uninhabitable when closer in. A cooler planet with otherwise similar make up would be uninhabitable further out, but habitable closer in
arxiv.org/pdf/1405.1025.pdf "Life, if it manages to struggle along on such a planet, will be very hard or perhaps be underground. More likely a circular belt between the two sides - a sort of “twilight zone” - could be the place for life to evolve and flourish. In this dusk band around the planet, where star will be permanently hanging very low near the horizon or perhaps the stellar disc partially peeking above the horizon, with an ever-colourful red, yellow sky due to scattered light, the temperatures would be more moderate, right in between the hot and cold sides. However the heat on one side would cause the air to rise, creating a low pressure system, while the cold on the other side would cause the air to sink, creating a high pressure system. This would cause the planet to experience a constant and violent circulation of air, or, essentially a planet-wide hurricane. The constant air circulation would actually circulate the temperatures extensively and extremes in temperature would mitigate. Water cycles with huge rivers crossing from cold to hot side might make living there possible. "
I have a question. How do we have pictures of the milky way? I know that sounds stupid but I know that none of our satellites haven't gotten out far enough to turn around and take a picture and they won't for a loooooong time. Are all the pictures we see of the milky way really just computer generated pictures of what we think it looks like?
it could be ,as one possibility,a combination of images from different angles of satellites/telescopes combined into unified shot of galaxy.one of possible ways...
I think the pictures of the Milky Way are actually based off of pictures of the Andromeda Galaxy, since they're both spiral galaxies. How they know how many arms out galaxy has, I have no idea.
It's a computer-generated artist's representation. It's definitely not a composite of pictures... the distance from the galaxy you would have to be to get a picture like that is immense, and all of our telescopes orbit Earth. our only "real" pictures are from within the galaxy.
Michael Figueroa We can measure the distance to stars using a variety of techniques (imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/ask_astro/answers/970415c.html), and this lets us build an actual map of the Milky Way. When we plot the location of all the stars, we see that they are structured into giant arms!
One term missed here is the Goldilocks Zone, a specific distance from a specific type of star that in theory allows a planet to be just the right conditions for life to form. The description of, not to warm, not too cold, not too big, not too small - most people get the referance; main point, it's an extremely specific set of conditions that even our own planet isn't quite settled. The life of the earth has gone though a ridiculous number of changes, volcanos causing earth to actually become inhabitable for a while with the mixture of acid rain and sulphurous clouds both blocking out the sun and reducing the oxygen level to practically nothing - this was repeated almost exactly with the meteor that killed the dinosaurs; essentially a galactic reset button. Next we have the ice age, not inhabitable, but in terms of how much it changed the earth it ranks pretty high. What I am getting at is this. A planet we look at now that could potentially support life but doesn't, either has, or it might at some point; and it could be the most seemingly insignificant change that could cause life to form. Knowing how much luck was involved in the evolution of life on earth is the main reason I get so annoyed by any form of conflict, be it a war or just an arguement over something like sport for example.
Read the wording again... lol Inhabitable means it doesn't support life, I said it's not inhabitable - sort of a double negative. The ice age was a habitable climate, but it was harsh; on the land as well which was my main point.
How would we get to any place similar to earth? Our space ships would take too long i think. (Unless we somehow have a colony just living and dying hanging out on the way(i like that idea))
Today's spacecraft would certainly take a very, very long time!! But in the far future who know what we may invent! There have been ideas of space colonies on giant revolving (to produce a simulation of Earth's gravity) spacecraft that could journey to another star. But of course, we have a long way to go with technology to achieve this!! It's really interesting though :D
that way of travel that you mentioned exists and are call "Generational Vessels" (or something along those lines) it basically means a ship large and advance enough to produce a "natural" habitat for its population while being self sustained on thing like food and fuel, it also means, as the name suggests, that it will be generations until it gets to its objective. consider that to go from earth to pluto takes 27 earth years, so yeah. in other words it means that the first colonists that set to space would not arrive to their destination, but their childrens childrens childrens childrens would. by current level of tecnologhy the other douable possibility is cryo-sleep
Solar-sails, ion drives, ridding nuclear explosions could all do the job with our current level of technology, but they would all take something like 100 years.
Cheng Wong , you would say earth is perfect because thats the planet you were born, but if you look at people living and dying in harsh environments you wouldn't say that
Cheng Wong We may be destroying ourselves, but we can't do shit to the planet. Even if we manage to wipe out 95% of the species along with ourselves, it'll be like the 5th time that's happened in the last billion years. It'll recover. We'll just be gone.
Cheng Wong you mean perfect for us. I'd say the universe is pretty perfect everywhere, and that includes not being perfect for us in a vast many places. heh - I'm just being a jack-hole :P
I find it interesting that a video talking about our space neighborhood mentions Alpha centauri and we recently discovered a planetary system there which is one of the most interesting so far(and that at the time of the making of this video it wasnt discovered) earth-sized in habitable zone and all.
Ah I just rewatched this vid and I love how some of the things are already outdated^^ scientists really are fast these days even though they usually don't get the funding they deserve...
Yeah, and Venus is just barely outside of it too. The Goldilocks zone is just a guideline anyway though, and there are plenty of variables to that could allow life to exists outside of that zone.
David Kelly Lmao. You have got to be kidding me. Will? Sheer will??? LOL. We are so fucking insignificant we cant willingly do shit besides live our normal day to day lives. Replace the word "will" with "luck".
x2eXu50x It's just a matter of probability. Sooner or later, the right combination of conditions will simply occur. It seems unfathomable to us, but imagine the sheer number of planets in the universe.
I don't think intelligent life forms on the Waterworld would be impossible; via evolutionary adaptation but not in the forms of mermaids or thousands of Atlantis'...Atlantisses? Atlanti?
It always amuses me when people believe that some higher power is the reason why the conditions for life are so fine tuned. Because it supports the idea that we were put here or planned. The probability of life cropping up in various places in the universe according to scientists is pretty high. We are a result of the conditions being right in one place in the endless cosmos, we aren't special, we're just a positive result of the probability that states life could have cropped up on earth. We did, but that's simply by chance.
+PyroWingzA.K.ASplinter I'm all for scientific skepticism as you are. Religious people state with certainty that there exists a higher intelligence. And just like that, atheists state with certainty that there is none. To that, I ask you, where is your conclusive scientific evidence? Or do you think that just because you learned some math and physics in high school, you know everything? As a wise man once said, learning is but the mere progressive discovery of our ignorance. We cannot even observe clearly the whole of our galaxy, leave alone the universe. Even the most learned astronomers and physicists cannot claim to know about such major aspects of the universe with all certainty. And almost every single day, new discoveries are being made which make null and void our pre-conceived notions about the universe. And here you are claiming with all certainty that you know the answer to such a major question about the universe. That is not rationality. That is not learning. That is presumption. Its idiocy. And funnily enough, its typically people who don't really have much to do with science that spout most of the atheist rhetoric most vocally (same applies to religious side too). These people don't really care about science. Not really. Although some just may. All observations have exceptions. These people with their baseless sanctimony, merely have an axe to grind. And science and math is used as an excuse for it.
+Gaurab Chatterjee Dude, people aren't saying with certainty there is no higher power, so there is no burden of proof to "disprove it", just as there is no need to disprove ghosts or fortune-telling. The onus is on the people who claim these things to be true to prove it so. In the absence of evidence for something's existence, the default should be that it does not exist. Not "oh well it's a wash because it can't be proven either way". I might add that this "higher intelligence" has in recent years been redefined in such a way that proving it does not exist is impossible btw; earlier conceptions of such things were able to be and have been proven to be false. PS: I should put this more simply. You say atheists claim with certainty there is no "higher intelligence"- this is not true- though some atheists may also claim this, all one has to do to be in the atheist camp is not believe in any Gods. Not believing in something because there is no evidence for it is not the same thing as claiming beyond any doubt it's not true.
Gaurab Chatterjee You are presenting a false dichotomy. There is belief and there is what is true. Regarding truth, we have varying evidence on a given topic to suggest it is. Based on that evidence, people make a decision regarding what they believe. In the case of God(s), atheists simply make the decision not to believe because they see no evidence to convince them. So no, it's not claiming there is definitely no God (though some may do so), it is only saying there is no or not sufficient evidence to make the decision to believe in it. I fall in this camp. Many others believe without evidence because of "faith"; that's fine too and I'm not here to shit on anyone's religion, but to claim Atheism is inherently dogmatic or unscientific is simply untrue. There may be some atheists like this but their dogmatism and fanaticism is not what puts them in the atheist camp, there not choosing to believe in God does. As Bill Maher once said "Claiming atheism is a religion is like calling abstinence a sex position". I think that puts it quite nicely. Peace.
Me and the milky way apparently have more in common than I originally thought. My black hole is also kept quite close to my bulge and posistionally is in between my two arms... who would've thunk?
I absolutely love Hank dramatic swing as he faces the screen when he said "FALSE!"
Right?
Don't you mean faces the camera?! :D :D :D
Joey Enochs it makes him look like the 10th doctor
Joey Enochs he
I'd say he looks more like the eleventh, Matt Smith, he was the one that, paraphrasing John Hurt's War Doctor, couldn`t speak without flapping his hands around. He even sounds a little bit like him.
I love the silly, conflicting ways that Hank describes the universe. Nice, safe supermassive black holes don't come up in normal conversation. :D It makes learning fun, and I remember long after.
+Daniel Hale i swear when cloning humans becomes real the first person i'd want cloned is hank then all the clones will be sent out to schools everywhere so that he could be the best teacher everywhere. i just realized how creepy this sounds.
+Mica Santos However, since a large portion of your personality is determined by life expiriences, a lot of the clones could be terrible teachers. They would look the same, but would not be the same Hank.
@@stuartmacleod8225 Therefore, we train them all in VR by letting them live the life of Hank up to this point (you know, like in that one episode of Rick & Morty).
"space excitement is terrible" just fantastic.
I don't know if it's more terrifying or reassuring that black holes are actually relatively safe...
Definitely terrifying. Space is an insanely huge pile of nothingness sprinkled with all sorts of ludicrously powerful incarnations of death and destruction.
Reassuring. Your ancestors have lived over hundreds of millions of years, and your descendents (assuming you get some) are likely to continue existing for several million years.
Why would it be more terrifying? That doesn’t make sense
I do hate it when my toddler emits deadly radiation.
I hate it when my little brother emits nuclear radiation and oozes nuclear waste.
I know it's soo annoying
I think u mean *eminations* ☣😂
Jack Jack Parr.
Cryzyra Chaneco
Lmao, but they just made a joke. I'm Filipino too, and I understand what karma means.
The Sun is not a regular sized star? MY WHOLE LIFE IS A LIE!!! (I still liked the Hunger Games and Spongebob references) :)
"You were probably taught that the Sun is a typical star. FALSE!"
THANK YOU. You are literally the first person I've heard besides my astronomy professor say that.
I'm a n00b and thought that... sup.
We are soooo lucky to be placed where we are in the galaxy; YET we take it all for granted. We monetize almost everything possible, murder innocents in the name of defense/resources, lock people up for smoking a harmless plant that provokes laughter- not violence, hold onto a book that supposedly speaks of God's rules and teachings but then you realize that all wars tend to start with difference in God(s)
*I.E.*
Guy1: Do you accept the Lord Jesus Christ as your Lord and savior?
Guy2: I really can't, it's not in my culture-
**Guy1 slits Guy2s throat**
I really hope we one day have a chance to prove ourselves but it can't happen with everyone stuck to a screen, learning ignorance in massive doses.
I at least take solace that there may be a world out there that is living in harmony.
Billions of stars in our galaxy alone- there has to a world without war... I hope... that would suck if there isn't a utopia planet out there.
This was an amazing video. So much information creatively presented.
Of course Earth is "perfect" for us, we were evolved to thrive on it. If there is life in other places in the universe who evolved to thrive in different conditions (in fact, such instances exist here on Earth), they would complain that the Earth is too hot or too cold for them.
+Bob Jones You're right. Those filthy humans that always think about themselves. What a selfish alien race.
+Bob Jones You're right. Those filthy humans that always think about themselves. What a selfish alien race.
+Bob Jones you dont have very much complex life forming in those volatile areas of earth. so its safe to assume that that if a planet was only all of those not so perfect areas, complex life would have a hard time forming.
+Olivér Tabbouch just a theory, how fucking dumb Are You. Tell me how it was disproven, and while you're at it give me proof of god and Jesus remember the bible isn't proof GOOO
+Olivér Tabbouch the bible was written by people, it could have been illusions or people could have made it up for fame, you can't say that every human tells the truth, can you
I hope we figure out if we're not alone in the universe before I die.
Me too!
Well, that's not a fast process.... But, just don't die tomorrow, k?
And I actually hope that there still will be humanity on earth when I die...
Дмитрий Дронов I'd say your odds are about 7 billion to one(or better!)
9Mystere9 well, we have 2 big kids playing...
well since the scientists in our generation has discovered more then ever in the past century alone, i'd definitely think we got a good chance of sci technology to find other organisms out there! :)
This episode just makes me appreciate life more.
I'm the only one in my family who finds science to be really enjoyable. I find it FASCINATING while my family is just like oh cool
me two
ikr?
Same here
Same with me
Me too 😃
Amazing video, SciSchow. Hank's presentation is at least half the greatness.
People every time: These places are inhabitable.
Life: Hold my beer.
Life can live everywhere, the question is where can it begin?
hey guys, love your show. the way you explain things is such a nice simple way, even throwing in some comedy (thank you Hank you always make me chuckle). Even my friend are picking up some of the stuff you talk about.
The theory that life can only exist on a rocky planet with a perfect amount of water such as ours only assumes that all life must be similar to Earth's. This is kind of unreasonable because any life separate from ours would be alien and completely different and could live under its own unique conditions.
the only thing that keeps us as an intelligent species and all that is because we are highly adaptive but we cant say that for planets to have life they need to have water and land and air and something to breathe there's probably aliens that use deadly gasses like we breathe and they probably dont need water to live because every lifeform should be able to adapt or else our universe is very weird
Granted, life could be very different from what we know, but so far earth life is the only kind we know exists and how to identify. It makes sense to look for earth like life first, because the only conditions we currently KNOW life could form in would be earth like conditions. With that set of criteria, it makes sense to (at least for now) look for planets that are earth like.
The thing is, though, we aren't looking for life, we're looking for habitable planets, which we can live on. 2 quite different sets of criteria.
QuantumSeanyGlass
here's a question then... if we are not looking for life and are just looking for habitable planets how are we going to get our food? i dont know about you but i would atleast find a planet with life and then find out if the lifeforms is edible then see if its a habitable planet because i dont think it will be that easy to transport food if we already have food problems still today so we either need quick transports or we need a very small population on the planet and let them live as cannibals
True life on another planet could have adapted to only live in water or to use some other type of gas besides oxygen to survive. But even finding planets like that can be difficult. Even the most simple and robust forms of life we have found could not survive the high levels of radiations found in most of the universe. Not to mention constant meteor strikes and temperature changes would make it impossible for life to evolve any further than single celled organisms.
I always love this stuff. I follow the planet discoveries with more interest than the general news.
Hank, I adore you.
These are the best science/space-related videos I have ever come across, aside from Vsauce's.
Thank you so much for making my days better by giving me mini doses of science-filled information.
I think you're my favourite UA-camr.
One of the best episodes of scishow ever! Funny & jam-packed with interesting!
Like Panem, or Michigan.. Haha
Maybe this video could make some people understand how precious and unique Earth is.
Agreed, I really like earth.
Great episode!
Can Hank (or someone) explain how radiation is emitted from black holes when other forms of electromagnet radiation (e.g. visible light) can't escape beyond event horizon?
The radiation doesn't come from the black hole itself but from the matter which falls into it that gets accelerated to close to the speed of light as it spirals towards the black hole. I'm not sure about the exact mechanics but the important part to understand is that the radiation doesn't come from inside the event horizon (or apparent horizon.)
Do not question the black hole, sir. It defies logic.
The pull of the black hole is so radical that the stuff that spins just before the event horizon sometimes is tossed out at great speed. It's gravitational influence doesn't begin at the event horizon, but much earlier than that.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong in that xD
It's called "Hawking Radiation". Black holes emit a type of perfect black body radiation due to odd quantum effects.
krishan bansal Black holes do emit hawking radiation but that is extremely faint and not the cause behind quasars.
Hank is one of the most entertaining science-internet-tainers ever
Why would we discount water worlds from the possibility of civilization? That's... That's geocentric! :P
Seriously though, odds are that if we find life, it won't be life as we know it.
And why not?
There is one main reason people don't consider water worlds capable of harbouring civilization (not life, civilization, life is more than welcome there).
It is really, like REALLY hard to make tools underwater. Not only is it an amazingly destructive and makes construction many times harder than on the good old solid ground. It also has a nasty tendency of making it nigh impossible to forge anything. You know how smiths toss those red hot iron bars into a bucket of water right after working with them? Now imagine the bucket of water is CONSTANTLY SURROUNDING YOU.
Maybe some form of sci-fi organic-tech based civilisation might arise from oceans. But as far as we can tell. If anything intelligent ever grew up in the oceans, they would not have tools and probably would have stable housing. They wouldn't have writing and thus they wouldn't have civilization.
You make valid points, but I was thinking more in terms of supporting alien life than being habitable by humans...
thejerrymobile I wasn't talking about humans.
MadeinHell2 I hadn't seen your comment. In response to your comment, it is an interesting rationale. It only proves that the possibility of forging would not be considered by any advanced hypothetical lifeforms. Given that we don't really have any evidence to go on here, I don't really have a counterargument beyond that.
Wow, this was a really interesting video.
Nothing like a space video to make you feel truly special and insignificant at the exact same time.
but what if that keplar planet has fishies?
crabsnake for lunch?
@@goodcolimgpu10
Yea because drastically manipulating and hunting new species to near extinction has worked out well for us.
Because one luncheon puts an entire species at the brink of extinction
Fishies!!!
@@alecnolastname4362 Do you know what a crabsnake is? XD
I wish this guy was my science teacher
Hey, De-Von Ambitious I wish you would shut up.
Hirod Nazari Chill out a was joking with the woman not you.
I don't want to be caught dead anywhere, because then I'd be dead.
Why isn't this in Scishow Space?
Thumbs up! They make the channel and then don't post this video there? Perhaps they should explain if they plan to move all these videos at some point or whatever.
I don't follow scishow space so I like some space on my regular scishow
If you read the description it says this is the last space video on this channel and from here forward space related videos will be on the other channel :)
Charlotte Fryer
...aw I'm disappointed. >:
Charlotte Fryer You'd think they'd take this opportunity to promote the new channel one last time.
Space excitment is TERRIBLE needs to be on a t shirt
With some deadly x-ray burst burning the letters down.
This was one of the most succinct, organized, funny, and witty videos I've seen from SciShow. Highly informative and very entertaining!
I wonder who our father star was.
What old star sacrificed it's own solar system to give birth to a life bearing planet.
+ZX Spectrum Gives you chills that he tore his planets and himself inside out, and its his remains that we eat, shit, bleed and spit.
could explain rogue planets
Helios
girls are about 26,000 light years away from my central bulge too...
But are you into big black holes?
BrusqueButTrue He definitely has at least one.
+Sotiris Krol You could say it's pretty 'holy'
Channel is awesome, thank you guys for putting all of this info out for all of us
"Like Panem... Or, Michigan." As a resident of Detroit, I can confirm this analogy.
Is there some reason why this isn't on SciShow Space?
I wondered that too, because I only saw the title in my inbox. Maybe they filmed it before SciShow Space launched, but why not release it on that channel?
Hank had the best educational personality on UA-cam
why wasn't this on SciShowSpace?
I kind of thought SciShowSpace was made for these types of videos.
JellybellyWaffles exactly
Let the conspiracy begin!!!
"This will be the last video covering a space related topic on this channel!"
Which is immediately followed by a link to scishowspace.
or so says the Description.
People never read... Thats why UA-cam is so popular! (Im also people)
Isn't there a possibility that life elsewhere could be different in terms of what it needs to form and survive? Like we need oxygen, carbon, water, sunlight, etc. But life elsewhere in the universe could need only some or none of those things and could be completely different than we think.
Yes, but since we know how our sort of life works, we roughly know what hints to look for on other planets. Sure, there could be completely different forms of life out there, but would we really recognize it as such? I think that's how it works, I could be completely wrong.
We can't really know that, there are theories that there could maybe be life based on things like silicium or other close elements,
But for what we know, those have lots of inconvenients compared to carbon, and we can't say for sure that it can exist.
And I think it is worth mentionning that it is a lot more easier to look for something you know exists here and works, than something you don't know anything about :p
I dunno why oxygen, carbon and sunlight is so important (well, sunlight provides energy, of course. And you need energy to be alive), but water is a universal solvant. It's a unique element, in that it allows for many chemical reactions to take place, which don't happen in other substances, which is why water is a great place to look for life.
EDIT: Water is also a very simple molecule, only requiring two hydrogen atoms (most of the matter in the universe is hydrogen) and 1 oxygen. And I remembered why carbon is good: It reacts very well with lots of different elements, giving it a significant advantage over other elements.
The person who could discover an alternate evolution pathway would win an award named after them. Like Alfred Nobel.
Samuel Gabites Alfred Nobel didn't win some competition to have the Nobel prizes named after him. He was disgusted with what he did with his life, and with what people though of him (which he learned from an accidental early obituary post). He left most of his estate to CREATE the Nobel prizes.
So nice to hear smart happy people who are passionate about the world, life, and everything!
isnt this more material for SciShowSpace?
Was just thinking the same thing
Sometimes UA-cam channels create a video weeks in advance, and upload it as a private video. Then, they make the video public when it is scheduled to be released. I am not entirely sure, but that could be what happened here.
its better this way :)
I loved how you said false xD
Makes me appreciate how all of these series of events allowed us to live.
Scischow! Hank! how about an episode about post traumatic stress disorder? Also, you still haven't done one about lysergic acid!
In space?
***** YES!
I don't know why the intro reminds me of Kim possible
What's it? Sounds familiar though
Oh, it does! Now that you mention it. The notes are similar to her "Kimmunicator" ringtone--not quite the same, but close. That's probably what's doing it. :)
This was so cool! thanks for sharing your knowledge!!!
Bro, you don't understand. I need my cheetahs and sunflowers. I NEED THEM. O.O
Jaguars and moonflowers are better.
I would love an update video!! :)
AnyOtherNamePlease yup
These episodes need to be wayyyy longer
Someone make 2:21 into a gif
TheBhuvan002 On it.
s30.postimg.org/m8cksnf4v/False.gif
MisaelKpo ReRocho It's beautiful. :)
MisaelKpo ReRocho
Nicely done!
TheBhuvan002 gif is dead
Keplar 62E must have some fucking scary alien sea monsters if the whole planet is water.... yiiikes
alien megladons n shiit FKK DAAAT
imagine it-_-
zammmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmM
Poppin Gatz I think that's the playing it at subnautica is based off of
Fascinating and awesome as always Hank - thank you!
Imagine if we went to Kepler-62E and found Admiral Ackbar.
That's funny!
dont go... IT'S A TRAP
>Expected video on the likelihood of planets being inhabitable (preferably with a mention of Drake's Equation)
>Received video on the likelihood of PLANETS FORMING AT ALL PERIOD
ebkdan I mean no disrespect. The all caps is to be imagined being spoken with the awe of someone who has had his mind blown, because that's what this video did. I had no clue that planetary formation was such a sensitive process.
This is quite possibly the best UA-cam channel.
We could make Atlantis in Kepler-62E, and make a FF7-like colony there.
By FF7, I meant that one place down underwater, where you played the submarine game.
This should've been on the space channel....
I love SciShow. Thanks so much for everything you're teaching me.
hey shouldn't this have been on the SciShow Space channel ?
I was taught the sun was an average star :(
The Sun is of an average size :) .. Not too big, or too small. However there are A LOT more small (red dwarf) stars than there are averaged sized or giant stars out there in the known universe :)
It is, size-wise. I mean, on the spectrum of the smallest star to the biggest star, our sun ends up somewhere towards the middle. But it's not average if you take into account how many stars are smaller and larger than ours, as Hank stated.
Youre pretty.
Welcome to the difference of average vs. mean ;)
This sci show episode was awesome!!! Please do more like this!
As informative (and fun!) as this video was, I'm very sceptical about concrete claims of things that we don't yet know. Certainly the claims of what would constitute a nice 'neighbourhood' in space apply to life _as we know it_, but if history as taught us anything (even on this lonely planet), is that life is diverse and unpredictable.
What if there were other forms of life than [earth] DNA based life? What if there was life that thrived in those hellish conditions mentioned? What if our time-scale of what constitutes a successful eco-system is wildly different than what potentially exists? What if our spatial scale of what a living-creature is, is infinitesimal?
Not only would these questions make for a very interesting science fiction story, they also remind us to stop assuming that Earth holds a monopoly on life in the universe. As such, as we search the cosmos for neighbours, we should not restrict ourselves to looking for mirrors.
I'm not criticizing what we are doing in searching for life, and assessing the likelihood of its existence in various regions. Not by a long shot: I earnestly and enthusiastically support the impressive endeavours that are currently being undertaken.
My argument is simply that it should be clear that we are looking for "life as we know it," considering we know next to nothing about what life may be in the universe.
Indeed, while I think your speculation is interesting and there may be other 'forms' of life that aren't based on DNA (for example 'life' based on pure energy in certain sci-fi films), you have to consider the evidence of the knowledge based on what we do know.
Life works because carbon is a very versatile material, having four available electron positions (Hank actually does a video about carbon in regards to life on scishow). This allows for many configurations that are essential to life as we know it, although I have heard speculation that maybe life could be silicon based because of its similar valence of four.
That aside though, you have to consider temperature as well. We have forms of life on earth that are adapted to very cold temperatures and very hot temperatures (or moderate temperatures like most macro-oranisms) but evidence suggests that they can't be adapted to both. Planets with wildly fluctuating temperatures probably would not be able to support life based on this.
Lastly, you should take into consideration temperature limits in regards to chemical bonds. Even if something was not dna based, it would still have to deal with radiation and extreme heat breaking down the structure of their bodies. Okay maybe I got carried away and keep in mind I am also just speculating myself, but I think scientifically speaking 23 need to do research based on evidence of things we know instead of things we cannot yet fathom, and maybe later down the road perhaps other possibilities may be understandable.
"...remind us to stop assuming that Earth holds a monopoly on life in the universe." I'd just like to note that I don't know *anyone* who holds that assumption and I've never heard it expressed. I'm sure they exist but most people I know (myself included) actually assume the opposite based on the sheer enormity of the universe.
Colin Prevatt There is a possibility that a life form based on Dark Matter could exist (it does make up more of the universe then normal matter). As Dark Matter doesn't seem to be affected by normal matter things like radiation might not be a concern for Dark Matter based life forms. Aside from that I pretty much agree with your comment.
"Certainly the claims of what would constitute a nice 'neighbourhood' in space apply to life as we know it, but if history as taught us anything (even on this lonely planet), is that life is diverse and unpredictable." People who do this shit for life are aware of this, and i doubt you are aware of how dangerous the universe is for life, fortunately the universe is HUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUGE so life elsewhere than our solar system is very very very likely
I actually planned on making a game where you can fight natural disasters with a legendary katana containing the soul of an angel. There was a demon living in a black hole stirring up this trouble, but now i'm going to have him eventually upgrade it to a Quasar. That's gonna have a shitton of HP.
You should reference the meme 'Shoop dah Woop' for the demon; it doesn't have to be his name but if he is a quasar, i would be a humorous reference. :3
He's an actual, though little known demon, named Malphas. Fucking with nature is kinda his shtick.
That Michigan joke was hilarious!
This brings up a new question. so the moon is tidaly locked but it is moving away from the earth ever so slowley. how far out must it be to get tidaly unlocked?
also if the moon wobbles back n forth a bit, which I herd it does, how far away would it get before it's tidal lock wouldn't pull the wobble back the other direction, and it starts rotating slowly, or what I imagine to be slowly
Grinsekatze Cheshire I am realy sry to inform you that moon is never going to get tidaly unlocked it will just one day float away leaving us 4 ever. Its the same thing with the every moon of every planet, if its spinning too fast it will float away but if its moving too slow it will crash in the planet.
Anthony Rezic The moon is wobbeling so if it looses its grip to earth it will start to spinn Im sure of that. or can you name an object alone in space that is not spinning?
that's what i'm thinkin, and since we know it's slowly moving away, this is going to happen right? the only question is will it start spinning while still in orbit
I'm somewhat disappointed that the other candidates weren't mentioned.
Keep the space and physics stuff coming baby ;)
Could a tidally locked planet have a small habitable zone between the hot and cold sides?
Yes, in fact scientists have discovered a planet like that which could hold life
In fact, it's Proxima-b - a tidal-locked planet orbiting close to the red dwarf Proxima Centauri mentioned in this very video.
It is extremely close to us, as well. :)
It would depend on how u define habitable. Sure microbes could live there, but that isn't very useful to us. Odds are that any such area on such a planet would be a never-ending mega storm as they mentioned, as the cold atmosphere at the edge of the dark side met the superheated atmosphere of the hot side. It would be fanatic to study from orbit, but I wouldn't actually want to go there.
Also, one variable that has a large effect on the "habitable zone" of a planet is how hot the planet is when it forms. A hotter planet can be habitable farther out while uninhabitable when closer in. A cooler planet with otherwise similar make up would be uninhabitable further out, but habitable closer in
arxiv.org/pdf/1405.1025.pdf
"Life, if it manages to struggle along on such a planet, will be very hard or perhaps be
underground. More likely a circular belt between the two sides - a sort of “twilight zone” -
could be the place for life to evolve and flourish. In this dusk band around the planet, where star
will be permanently hanging very low near the horizon or perhaps the stellar disc partially
peeking above the horizon, with an ever-colourful red, yellow sky due to scattered light, the
temperatures would be more moderate, right in between the hot and cold sides. However the
heat on one side would cause the air to rise, creating a low pressure system, while the cold on
the other side would cause the air to sink, creating a high pressure system. This would cause the
planet to experience a constant and violent circulation of air, or, essentially a planet-wide
hurricane. The constant air circulation would actually circulate the temperatures extensively and
extremes in temperature would mitigate. Water cycles with huge rivers crossing from cold to
hot side might make living there possible. "
God, my science class is apparently very misinformed.
Awesome episode. Keep up the great work team Scishow.
I have a question. How do we have pictures of the milky way? I know that sounds stupid but I know that none of our satellites haven't gotten out far enough to turn around and take a picture and they won't for a loooooong time. Are all the pictures we see of the milky way really just computer generated pictures of what we think it looks like?
it could be ,as one possibility,a combination of images from different angles of satellites/telescopes combined into unified shot of galaxy.one of possible ways...
I think the pictures of the Milky Way are actually based off of pictures of the Andromeda Galaxy, since they're both spiral galaxies. How they know how many arms out galaxy has, I have no idea.
It's a computer-generated artist's representation. It's definitely not a composite of pictures... the distance from the galaxy you would have to be to get a picture like that is immense, and all of our telescopes orbit Earth. our only "real" pictures are from within the galaxy.
littletortillaboy6 ofc its computer generated,but distances and compilations are in legit ones accurate,is what i tried to say
Michael Figueroa We can measure the distance to stars using a variety of techniques (imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/ask_astro/answers/970415c.html), and this lets us build an actual map of the Milky Way. When we plot the location of all the stars, we see that they are structured into giant arms!
Kepler 62-E is Kamino. Duh.
yes ^^^^
I swear this channel had only 350,000 subscribers a year and a half ago...Only the best can reel in that many people.
"Like, a THOUSAND TIMES more energy than ALL THE STARS IN THE GALAXY... COMBINED!!"
One term missed here is the Goldilocks Zone, a specific distance from a specific type of star that in theory allows a planet to be just the right conditions for life to form.
The description of, not to warm, not too cold, not too big, not too small - most people get the referance; main point, it's an extremely specific set of conditions that even our own planet isn't quite settled.
The life of the earth has gone though a ridiculous number of changes, volcanos causing earth to actually become inhabitable for a while with the mixture of acid rain and sulphurous clouds both blocking out the sun and reducing the oxygen level to practically nothing - this was repeated almost exactly with the meteor that killed the dinosaurs; essentially a galactic reset button.
Next we have the ice age, not inhabitable, but in terms of how much it changed the earth it ranks pretty high.
What I am getting at is this.
A planet we look at now that could potentially support life but doesn't, either has, or it might at some point; and it could be the most seemingly insignificant change that could cause life to form.
Knowing how much luck was involved in the evolution of life on earth is the main reason I get so annoyed by any form of conflict, be it a war or just an arguement over something like sport for example.
Read the wording again... lol
Inhabitable means it doesn't support life, I said it's not inhabitable - sort of a double negative.
The ice age was a habitable climate, but it was harsh; on the land as well which was my main point.
This was a very informative video! I learned a lot of interesting stuff! Thanks :D
How would we get to any place similar to earth? Our space ships would take too long i think. (Unless we somehow have a colony just living and dying hanging out on the way(i like that idea))
Today's spacecraft would certainly take a very, very long time!! But in the far future who know what we may invent! There have been ideas of space colonies on giant revolving (to produce a simulation of Earth's gravity) spacecraft that could journey to another star. But of course, we have a long way to go with technology to achieve this!! It's really interesting though :D
one possible good bet. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcubierre_drive
that way of travel that you mentioned exists and are call "Generational Vessels" (or something along those lines) it basically means a ship large and advance enough to produce a "natural" habitat for its population while being self sustained on thing like food and fuel, it also means, as the name suggests, that it will be generations until it gets to its objective. consider that to go from earth to pluto takes 27 earth years, so yeah. in other words it means that the first colonists that set to space would not arrive to their destination, but their childrens childrens childrens childrens would. by current level of tecnologhy the other douable possibility is cryo-sleep
Solar-sails, ion drives, ridding nuclear explosions could all do the job with our current level of technology, but they would all take something like 100 years.
Once we can reach near-relativistic speeds, it may only take us maybe fourty or fifty years to reach an earthlike planet.
I bet Sebastian the crab is sat up there laughing at us .
Great informative knowledge of some aspects on how our universe works.
Earth is so perfect compared to the rest of the universe. But we are still destroying ourselves and this planet...
Cheng Wong , you would say earth is perfect because thats the planet you were born, but if you look at people living and dying in harsh environments you wouldn't say that
aris oreta Have you watched the video? I'm referring to that.
Cheng Wong We may be destroying ourselves, but we can't do shit to the planet. Even if we manage to wipe out 95% of the species along with ourselves, it'll be like the 5th time that's happened in the last billion years. It'll recover. We'll just be gone.
Cheng Wong you mean perfect for us. I'd say the universe is pretty perfect everywhere, and that includes not being perfect for us in a vast many places.
heh - I'm just being a jack-hole :P
+jhosioja I love people like you that say "HA no were not" to those kinds of people it makes me laugh
I wanna play spore now.
I find it interesting that a video talking about our space neighborhood mentions Alpha centauri and we recently discovered a planetary system there which is one of the most interesting so far(and that at the time of the making of this video it wasnt discovered) earth-sized in habitable zone and all.
People, and cheetahs, and sunflowers... U HIGH M8?
wow he said it again...
why is this on scishow and not scishow space?
This one is the everything science channel still =) can include space
This episode is SO awesome. KEEP IT UP!
Kepler-62e
Supports life?
Traumatic Subnautica flashbacks.
Ah I just rewatched this vid and I love how some of the things are already outdated^^ scientists really are fast these days even though they usually don't get the funding they deserve...
You do the best SciShow,... Shows. Keep it ^
"Nice safe, supermasive blackhole". ALRIGHT
Moderation seems to be an universal truth of life :)
one of my favorite episodes of scishow is this one!
in our solar system alone there are 2 planets in the goldylocks zone
No
+Mahdiar Rahimzadeh yes, earth and Mars. Mars is on the very outer edge
Yeah, and Venus is just barely outside of it too. The Goldilocks zone is just a guideline anyway though, and there are plenty of variables to that could allow life to exists outside of that zone.
+YEAH actually there's 3 if you count uranals
Venus is almost in the habitable zone
This entire video just makes me think of religion. Or at least some sort of All Mighty. The level of perfection it takes for us to exist is crazy.
Perfection? The universe is trying to kill us (and almost managed it). We exist by shear will.
David Kelly if the universe really tried it's hardest to kill us we would be dead
David Kelly Lmao. You have got to be kidding me. Will? Sheer will??? LOL. We are so fucking insignificant we cant willingly do shit besides live our normal day to day lives. Replace the word "will" with "luck".
x2eXu50x There is no such thing as luck.
x2eXu50x It's just a matter of probability. Sooner or later, the right combination of conditions will simply occur. It seems unfathomable to us, but imagine the sheer number of planets in the universe.
What! Our sun is larger than 90% of all known stars. You done blew my mind man.
But those 10% are literally massive
so...could there possibly be mermaids on Kepler?
I don't think intelligent life forms on the Waterworld would be impossible; via evolutionary adaptation but not in the forms of mermaids or thousands of Atlantis'...Atlantisses? Atlanti?
Atlantians? Donno but i could totally see a movie adaption or tv show about mermaids on Kepler....
It always amuses me when people believe that some higher power is the reason why the conditions for life are so fine tuned. Because it supports the idea that we were put here or planned.
The probability of life cropping up in various places in the universe according to scientists is pretty high. We are a result of the conditions being right in one place in the endless cosmos, we aren't special, we're just a positive result of the probability that states life could have cropped up on earth. We did, but that's simply by chance.
Ok i learnt well
+PyroWingzA.K.ASplinter I'm all for scientific skepticism as you are. Religious people state with certainty that there exists a higher intelligence. And just like that, atheists state with certainty that there is none. To that, I ask you, where is your conclusive scientific evidence?
Or do you think that just because you learned some math and physics in high school, you know everything? As a wise man once said, learning is but the mere progressive discovery of our ignorance. We cannot even observe clearly the whole of our galaxy, leave alone the universe. Even the most learned astronomers and physicists cannot claim to know about such major aspects of the universe with all certainty. And almost every single day, new discoveries are being made which make null and void our pre-conceived notions about the universe. And here you are claiming with all certainty that you know the answer to such a major question about the universe.
That is not rationality. That is not learning. That is presumption. Its idiocy. And funnily enough, its typically people who don't really have much to do with science that spout most of the atheist rhetoric most vocally (same applies to religious side too). These people don't really care about science. Not really. Although some just may. All observations have exceptions. These people with their baseless sanctimony, merely have an axe to grind. And science and math is used as an excuse for it.
+Gaurab Chatterjee Dude, people aren't saying with certainty there is no higher power, so there is no burden of proof to "disprove it", just as there is no need to disprove ghosts or fortune-telling. The onus is on the people who claim these things to be true to prove it so. In the absence of evidence for something's existence, the default should be that it does not exist. Not "oh well it's a wash because it can't be proven either way". I might add that this "higher intelligence" has in recent years been redefined in such a way that proving it does not exist is impossible btw; earlier conceptions of such things were able to be and have been proven to be false.
PS: I should put this more simply. You say atheists claim with certainty there is no "higher intelligence"- this is not true- though some atheists may also claim this, all one has to do to be in the atheist camp is not believe in any Gods. Not believing in something because there is no evidence for it is not the same thing as claiming beyond any doubt it's not true.
Mayro Dneir Do you claim or not that there is no higher power or intelligent design?
Gaurab Chatterjee You are presenting a false dichotomy. There is belief and there is what is true. Regarding truth, we have varying evidence on a given topic to suggest it is. Based on that evidence, people make a decision regarding what they believe.
In the case of God(s), atheists simply make the decision not to believe because they see no evidence to convince them. So no, it's not claiming there is definitely no God (though some may do so), it is only saying there is no or not sufficient evidence to make the decision to believe in it. I fall in this camp. Many others believe without evidence because of "faith"; that's fine too and I'm not here to shit on anyone's religion, but to claim Atheism is inherently dogmatic or unscientific is simply untrue. There may be some atheists like this but their dogmatism and fanaticism is not what puts them in the atheist camp, there not choosing to believe in God does.
As Bill Maher once said "Claiming atheism is a religion is like calling abstinence a sex position". I think that puts it quite nicely. Peace.
You guys over at SciShow are AWESOME.
Me and the milky way apparently have more in common than I originally thought. My black hole is also kept quite close to my bulge and posistionally is in between my two arms... who would've thunk?
That was quite funny.