GJ 1214 is the name of the star (it's a red dwarf about 48 lightyears away from us) and "b" means, that it is the second object in this system. If there are more planets in this system, they would be named GJ 1214 b, GJ 1214 c, GJ 1214 d and so on. GJ 1214 has no traditional name, because that star is very small and is not visible for the naked eye. GJ stands for "Gliese & Jahreis", two astronomers who made the last edition of the "Catalogue of nearby stars". 1214 is the number of the star in this catalogue. Sorry for my bad english... ;-)
@@vision2g422 "GJ stands for "Gliese & Jahreis", two astronomers who made the last edition of the "Catalogue of nearby stars". 1214 is the number of the star in this catalogue. "
I'll try to keep this brief-ish. Exoplanets are named after their star followed by the letter b for the closest in, c for the next, etc. (Current record is a star with 8 planets, notated b-i.) As for the naming of stars, that is an annoying system depending on when and how they were discovered. Several dozen of the brightest stars have traditional names (e.g., Sirius, Vega, Rigel, Polaris), mostly from classical Latin, Greek, Arabic, or Persian. Then all these plus other brighter stars got named for their (Latin) constellation preceded by a Greek Letter (Alpha Centauri, Tau Ceti, Theta Scorpii, etc.). The letters were assigned in alphabetical order roughly from brightest to dimmest. To complete the catalog of "visible" stars (close to ten thousand), numbers are used after the Greek letters are used up. All this is just background context to the question asked in the video. Modern practice is to assign designations based on the project in which they were first noticed or recorded. In the 20th century, a series of catalogs was published by an astronomer named Gliese ("glee-za") and his collaborators. The first version had stars named Gliese 1061, etc. For the first extension, he named them GI 1 - GI 915. (Reason for "I" unclear.) Then on the next one he had help from someone named Jahreiss, so those stars got named GJ 1000, etc. Which explains exoplanet "GJ 1214 b" (@ 47 ly). Then there was the Kepler mission, which was the first satellite designed specifically to search for exoplanets. Eventually a few thousand were found. One of the earliest was Kepler 16 b (245 ly). Around the same time a satellite named CoRoT was launched by France/ESA with a similar mission, and apparently found CoRoT 7 b (520 ly), among others. An earlier catalog of some 225 thousand stars was published by astronomer Henry Draper. Hence the later serendipitous discovery of HD 189733 b (63 ly). As for Titan, well Saturn is the Roman counterpart of Chronos, who was himself a Titan, so I can't explain it; but it's 16-17 light days from the Sun. Personally, I'm hoping for critters in the planet-wide watery ocean of Jupiter's moon Europa (about half as far away).
As someone who lives in Oklahoma, Tornadoes are incredibly scary to my friends who live in other states. Most people I know don't get freaked out by them though. I have slept through a few of them. Just depends on the person, but they can be very devastating when you go up to an F3-5.
Usually whoever first publishes about a given celestial body is granted naming rights, but there are far too many object to give anthropomorphic names and they uses the systemic names using letters and numbers that indicate where the object is, where and usually when it was discovered. These are sometimes referred to as catalog names because an ordered listing of these bodies is available.
If we're not sure what is the deepest point in our oceans, even though we live here and explore it.... I'm not convinced there's any accuracy to telling me someone knows the depth of one on another planet? ;-) Always enjoy your episodes and watch them right away. Thanks!!
@@NoProtocol Many people "understandably" follow this line of thinking with a misguided application of (some sort) Occam's razor... For example studying something very far away is presumably harder then if it were very close right? You might be interested in knowing that helium was discovered on the sun BEFORE it was discovered on earth!!! Spectroscopy in the 1800's discovered something 10's of millions of miles away that is VERY abundant here on earth with greater ease! I don't want to ramble on for too long about atmospheric composition in relation to planetary geological formation, but needless to say scientists have a firmer grasp then one would "conventionally" think possible simply "looking at distant planets!
00:43 “Never seen it.” I now selfishly want her to react to the de-specialized Star Wars movie. She could watch it from a historical perspective, because it truly is a piece of cinematic history. She would certainly have to suspend all disbelief in regard to physics, but it’s arguable (as is anything related to the Star Wars universe) that we don’t have to hold that galaxy far, far away to the constraints of our galaxy’s physics.
While I forget the title now there's a youtube video around here where someone took the time to independently verify an exoplanet discovery using a dlsr camera, telescope, and a home built rig to keep the scope on target while taking readings. Using that they were able to confirm the period of dimming when the object (exoplanet) passed in front of the star they were watching. It was neat stuff.
Reminds me of something I constantly think about. We look at planets and say that life isn't possible because of weather, size, whatever. I wonder if there are civilizations that are looking at us saying, "Life can't be on that planet. Look at all the water. It just falls from the sky. And all those storms. No one can survive there." Just because Terrans (earthlings) can't live there, doesn't mean someone else can't.
I agree with you about tornadoes. When I was younger I devoured anything I could get on meteorology, especially storms. I even have a couple of courses from The Great Courses, one on general meteorology and one on extreme weather. Very interesting. But it's even more frightening to consider that an EF5 tornado (301 mph winds) doesn't even compare to those winds on the planet HD198733-b. Tornadoes are why I wouldn't live in the middle of the country. But then, the mid-south is another tornado-prone area these days (I'm from Nashville) and I'd be leery of moving back there. I used to have some interest in astronomy; this video makes me think of getting back into it perhaps. Thank you.
Lol I just watched this video the other day and was about to recommend it, you read my mind. I just finished the The stranger and the Yale Financials Markets course, thanks for the recommendations. Great reaction as always. Take care and have a great weekend.
When I studied astronomy in college in the 1980s the best information available suggested the expansion of the Universe was slowing down. Now, less than 50 years later, the best available information suggests the Universe is expanding at an ever increasing rate.
regarding the "deepest point in the ocean" part i do agree with your logic that if we have only "mapped" a small part of the ocean floor we have no idea what would be the deepest, however there is some mathematical and scientific basis for this assumption. in 1950 Marie Tharp produced the first map of the Atlantic ocean floor with a focus on the subsea fault lines, this finally proved theories of continental drift and later was instrumental in developing our modern understanding of plate tectonics. this lead to many such mapping efforts focusing on fault lines. so basically although we have only mapped a small part of the ocean that effort has been largely focused on the massive rifts left in the ocean floor from active plate tectonics which would logically be deeper then areas with no active fault lines. so while it is possible there is some deeper part we have somehow missed until we can map the entirety in inch by inch detail, its reasonable and probable to assume that the deepest point would be in one of several specific regions where the geology would most likely allow for it. still that's why science always qualifies the statement with the word "known" but its not as wild a guess as you may assume at first. this is of course a very brief simplified version of a poor explanation, but the point im trying to get across is that scientific facts always have a long and fascinating history of exactly how scientific communities came to their conclusions. if more people understood the reasoning and process behind establishing scientific fact people would be far less likely to dismiss them so quickly.
GJ is the telescope who discovers the system. The first one of the telescope is the 1, the planet on the video is the 1214th. The star it's GJ1214A, the nearest planet is GJ1214B, the second nearest gets the C, etc.
The scientific nomenclature for the designations of exoplanets usually consists of two elements: (1) a proper noun or abbreviation, sometimes with associated numbers, followed by (2) a lowercase letter.For example, 51 Pegasi b is an exoplanet around the star 51 Pegasi in the constellation Pegasus. The star received this particular catalogue designation by English astronomer John Flamsteed in his star atlas. Another common star catalogue used for exoplanet names is the GJ catalogue of German astronomers Wilhelm Gliese and Hartmut Jahreiß (Gliese & Jahreiß, 1991). An example is the exoplanet GJ 1214 b, which orbits a host star that is the 1214th entry in this star catalogue. Still other exoplanets are named after the Henry Draper (HD) and Hipparchos (HIP) catalogues, and some are named for their star’s common name, as in the case of Fomalhaut b. Some exoplanet designations often stem from the instrument that discovered them, such as the Kepler planets (named for the NASA Kepler space telescope; e.g., Kepler-186f) and the CoRoT planets (named for the French Space Agency's (CNES) and the European Space Agency's (ESA) spacecraft, Convection Rotation and planetary Transits; e.g., CoRoT-7b). The number in each planet designation refers to the order of the extrasolar system's detection or identification in the instrument's data. heres a link to the full artical if you care to read it www.iau.org/public/themes/naming_exoplanets/#:~:text=The%20letter%20indicates%20the%20order,%2C%20d%3B%20and%20so%20on.
Gravity, temperature, atmosphere, type of star (sun), distance from star, chemical makeup, etc, are the main variables that determine the possibility of life. That's why so many say that life is rare. Things must be almost perfect.
Very interesting. I share your fascination with the ocean. Grew up not a mile from it so we could hear the waves crashing at night. I don't think I could live inland, I'd miss it too much. Growing up we would dream and talk about it - imagine if the ocean would recede completely for just one day so we could go out exploring its depths - what we might find! U-boats from WW2, wrecks of the Spanish armada, maybe even viking longships or long lost treasures or ancient villages/towns reclaimed by the sea. These videos, on space in particular, always make me think of the age of exploration and crossing the oceans. Fascinating - lovely to feel that thrill of the imagination being stirred. I have no book recommendations on this one - the imagination should suffice this time.
Yeah, it's mostly guesswork. The two main ways of detecting planets are the "wobble" of the star, which gives you mass, and transit - when we're lucky with the angle and the planet passes in front of the star - which gives you size. Now, if you have both, you can calculate density - from which you can guess what the planet is made of. Gas, rock, or something in between like water. With the James Webb though, we are able to get accurate spectroscopic analysis of a planet's atmosphere during transit - basically we can tell what it's made of. Which is HUGE. If there's a lot of oxygen, there's a real good chance that there's life.
For anyone curious to learn more about Earth's ecology, especially the oceans, I can recommend David Suzuki's work. His way of communicating about the natural environment is earnest, erudite, and poetic, similar to the manner in which Carl Sagan spoke about space and cosmology. He's in his 80s now and still engages with the public through his foundation (David Suzuki Foundation), books, and documentaries. He's a personal hero for his decades of environmental education and advocacy.
Hey :) It´s always nice to hear your thoughts here on UA-cam^^ You said you wonder how life could look like on other planets... I just recently saw a really interesting Video about that, called Life Beyond: The museum of life. It is like a 3 part series of 30 minute Videos, so maybe not reaction material, but still very interesting to see
@Krarch Great recommendation! Very much worth commenting on and discussing. I happen to think they're a little conservative in what they imagine, but they probably wanted to err on the side of realism in order not to get tagged as exclusively science fiction. ---No reason our splendid guide here couldn't fast forward to the most interesting parts of each video.
@@johnstrawb3521 Eey, I just now saw that somebody actually replied here^^ I too think that they bind themselves on on their assumptions, but I think they are quite well chosen :) Also, even with their self-limitations there, they went really far on the possibilities of life that are offered following them! Nice to hear that you also enjoyed that little documentary 🙃
As for naming the planets it is probably named after the star it orbits, like the star is called “GJ1214” and it is the second planet from the star so it is planet “B”. As for why the star would be named that it was probably discovered during some mission or research project that found lots of stars so they just assign it a number, like the first planet spoken about in the video was one of the planets discovered by the Kepler mission, so it is named Kepler plus a number afterwards. I just looked it up, the “GJ” is short for “Gleise” somehow and it is just assigned a number and it is just an exoplanet of Gleise 1214. I couldn’t find any information on why it is named Gleise though but there are a group of stars all named Gleise plus a number.
4:51 I believe all those pictures we see of other Exoplanets outside out Solar System are artist renditions interpreting the visual data analyzed by Astrophysicists and not actual photographs of the Planets taken by a telescope! The clearest real image of a Exoplanet was taken last September by the James Webb Telescope and it still looks like a messy blob! 😀
Hi. I just watched your Eddie Izzard/Stonehenge vid and I have an interesting literary connection for you (worth a vid of it's own). It's a poem, looking at British history with Wiltshire as its lens, performed by Nick Harper from his album 'Treasure Island'. There are a couple of UA-cam versions, but the live one at Devils Den Rocks is perhaps most fitting. Obviously I recommend then listening to more of Nick Harper's music. Hope you like it.....D
So normally planets are named by the star they orbit and the satellite/telescope that discovered them. We named constellations after Greek characters in mythos and our planets after Roman gods.. those are the basics of naming
We have a pretty good handle on the ROUGH picture of how our ocean floor is generally shaped. What we DON'T have is fine detailed maps of the ocean floor except in very limited areas, and most of those maps are highly guarded secrets of one national navy or another. In the public domain, most of the available sea floor maps accuracy is about 328 feet (100 meters). The best land maps we have right now has about 15 cm accuracy and there's now efforts to make a 10cm global map. I wouldn't be surprised if some governments might have secret capabilities to create or already have terrestrial maps with higher resolutions but of course that is publicly unknown and unacknowledged.
GJ stands for Gliese Jahreiss Objects which is a study of objects within 23 Parsecs of our sun. I want to say that this survey was first done in the late 1950’s, and has be revised several times since then.
The challenger deep was the deepest part of the ocean but I think they found an even deeper spot also located in the Mariana trench. I'm sure they will find even deeper places than this eventually, like you stated they have only mapped a small area of our ocean floors.
I know you don't like sci-fi and I mentioned it before but you read The Three body problem. It is sci-fi but it will leave you with serious philosophical and existential thoughts
I'd give rhis a B+. There was a lot of speculation, and he did a good job communicating that. There is still so much for us to learn about our universe.
I know it isn't in your particular set of interests (being a scifi novel), but a book I can reommend that takes an interesting stab at planetary ecology is Children of Time; ecology is just a pheripheral concept to the whole, but it's still a good book. An additional queston this video left me with is, how the heck are there "fossil fuels" (around 300x the oil reserves than that of the entire Earth) on Titan? Is it evidence of plant life once thriving on Titan? I heard some hydrocarbons can form with the right ingredients around and a lot of pressure, but in such great amounts, and on a small moon? Hard to get my head around.
Most people have witness seeing multiple shadows for one person or object, because every sport stadium had 4 sources of light, one on every corner, so if you watch any soccer night games you'll see that every person on the pitch has 4 shadows. And that's just to start with.
I'm no physicist, but I suspect that a planet's composition is determined in a similar manner to stars with spectral absorption & emissions lines that can be decomposed into signatures that represent the most likely chemical compositions. They probably also have to take into account for relative change in distance and red shifting too. ...idk maybe black body radiation or solar geometry for insights about the planet's temperature? ...Now I want to go look it up too. Interesting video! Edit: The youtube algorithm must have been listening, it just recommended the following which talks about an approach to determining exoplanet composition. "C3 Absorption, Line, Emission and Continuous Spectra [SL IB Chemistry]" by Richard Thornley
That all water planet reminds me of the movie interstellar where the planet was mostly water and it experienced tsunamis swells as high as the Empire State Building every hour
regarding the information of distant planets, i will try to keep this comment shorter than my former essay on the depth of the ocean and simply say, most of what we know about these planets comes from a process called "astronomical spectroscopy" which involves studying the light of other stars as a planet passes in front of them, by studying this light we can determine the chemical composition of the atmosphere the light passed through, this can give us all kinds of information from how much oxygen is in a planets atmosphere or even if there are compounds and pollutants that would be indicative of the presence of plants or animals or even heavy industry, combined with things like the size, temperate and distance of the planet from its sun we can deduce much about the conditions on its surface. although as you suggested there is always a margin for error and some basic assumptions have to be made that may not always hold true for every planet, such as its mineral composition etc, we can only make assumptions based on our current understanding, sadly until we get a probe close enough for other methods of data collection we can never say for sure, but the more planets and stars we study the more our understanding grows and the more accurate our predictions should become.
Hey, How are you doing, Love your content... Can I suggest this one ... "Gorge Carlin national press" It doesn't have any uncomfortable language.. just smart remarks
I think there are type 2 civilizations that live on the ocean's floor which is much deeper than the Mariana trench probably by hundreds if not thousands of miles
1:50 the sad reality about interstellar astrophysics is that nearly 100% of the conjectures get turn to contact haven’t been proven, if not, are merely downright untrue
Naming convention for the the planet is really easy tbh and shouldn't keep anyone up. It's the first planet discovered around the Star 'Gliese 1214' so it gets the -b suffix (A goes to the star).... that's literally it. The J only stands for the other scientist that designed the naming convention with Wilhelm Gliese (Hartmut Jahreiß)
The names are generally just the names of the stars and the order of the planets discovery. So planet xb would be the first planet discovered around star x Some stars have old names because they are bright and visible from earth, but most have catalog names from surveys conducted on the sky by astronomical telescopes, and that's why most star names are a mix of letters and numbers
Also the methane rain droplets on titan fall slow enough due to liquid methane being almost half the density of water and weaker gravity that anyone standing on the surface could dodge the droplets.
Whats crazy is that almost all of the planets mentioned in this video are near identical to the planets used in the Ben 10 Series in terms of description, so maybe Dwayne McDuffie or Man of Action took inspiration from these planets.
0:25 as if nobody on earth played any sports with flood lights?! Even amateurs have these, I‘m totally used to seeing my mates on the football (not American handegg) pitch with 4 shadows
I'm trying so hard to remember where I heard this, but I can't: Naming in science is usually either by how something is categorized or it's named after something on Earth, often people, often celebrities. A common issue in biological naming is that an animal will be discovered and named and later it's determined that the name is technically inaccurate, but it's not allowed to be changed, thus you get some animals who's Latin names make no sense.
I know this is off topic but you mentioned you were interested in the Roman Empire..... there's a series called Rome: rise and fall of an Empire. I think you will enjoy that.
In a double or multiple star system (wich most star systems are btw) the stars are still far away from eachother. So you actually wouldn't see two suns in the sky, but one sun and a pretty bright dot.
Gj 1214b is 40 ly away. A lot of the planets and stars are named after the telescope and or how they were discovered. The reason why a lot of the planets have b at the end of their name is because these are the first planets discovered around the star. If a second planet was discovered it would be named c and so on. Instead of kepler 16b, it is named kepler 16 (ab) b because it orbits two stars instead of one. If a planet is orbiting the lesser star than it will start of as Bb , Bc for example
Speed of sound through Earth's atmosphere is a better way to say it. The speed of sound isn't fixed and varies with the medium its travelling through. If compared to space, sound is infinitely faster.
Just so you know, if you ever diversify into film reactions, first-time viewings of the Star Wars series are very popular, and a good way to jump start subscriber counts for long-form (heavily edited) reactions.
I wish to point out that no one really knows how a planet that is 60 light years from us really looks like. We have only guesses based on what we know of it's mineral composition through spectroskopy(?) or other method.
most of the names with seemingly random numbers and letters is just a naming convention, when there are billions upon billions the simplest way to name them and identify them is like that. im pretty sure you can pay for renaming some stars and other celestial bodies to something you want, too.
I’ve also often wondered how they can be so accurate on their measurements etc of far off planets. They use such exact measurement statements, and as the presenter of this video said at the beginning we’re not 100% sure if the deepest part of our own oceans yet they’re stating winds of 950km in that planet 89 light years away, and 100km deep ocean on that one 56 light years away, temperatures of -321 degrees on the other one etc etc … I don’t really get that tbh. A lot of imagination there
GJ 1214 is the name of the star (it's a red dwarf about 48 lightyears away from us) and "b" means, that it is the second object in this system. If there are more planets in this system, they would be named GJ 1214 b, GJ 1214 c, GJ 1214 d and so on.
GJ 1214 has no traditional name, because that star is very small and is not visible for the naked eye.
GJ stands for "Gliese & Jahreis", two astronomers who made the last edition of the "Catalogue of nearby stars". 1214 is the number of the star in this catalogue.
Sorry for my bad english... ;-)
I trust you.
@@vision2g422 litteraly in the comment
@@battlefuta9953 does literally mean something different where you're from?
@@vision2g422 "GJ stands for "Gliese & Jahreis", two astronomers who made the last edition of the "Catalogue of nearby stars". 1214 is the number of the star in this catalogue. "
@@vision2g422 GJ 1214 is technically just some sort of an ID marker. It's not really a name. "Sirius" or "Rigel" are true names.
At 10,935 meters or 35,876 feet, the deepest part of the ocean is called the Challenger Deep, located beneath the Mariana Trench :)
How astronomers name stars: “hey what if we just slammed our head on a keyboard?” Cp7b89.-d
😂😂😂😅
Lmao fr!
Kepler-37B
GJ1214B
COROT-7B
Love that you don't have a long intro. Straight to the point. Such a breath of fresh air. Not to mention probably the best smile on UA-cam 😊.
You can also go outside with 2 different streetlights. When I walk my dogs at night sometimes I have 4 shadows.
I'll try to keep this brief-ish. Exoplanets are named after their star followed by the letter b for the closest in, c for the next, etc. (Current record is a star with 8 planets, notated b-i.) As for the naming of stars, that is an annoying system depending on when and how they were discovered.
Several dozen of the brightest stars have traditional names (e.g., Sirius, Vega, Rigel, Polaris), mostly from classical Latin, Greek, Arabic, or Persian. Then all these plus other brighter stars got named for their (Latin) constellation preceded by a Greek Letter (Alpha Centauri, Tau Ceti, Theta Scorpii, etc.). The letters were assigned in alphabetical order roughly from brightest to dimmest. To complete the catalog of "visible" stars (close to ten thousand), numbers are used after the Greek letters are used up. All this is just background context to the question asked in the video.
Modern practice is to assign designations based on the project in which they were first noticed or recorded. In the 20th century, a series of catalogs was published by an astronomer named Gliese ("glee-za") and his collaborators. The first version had stars named Gliese 1061, etc. For the first extension, he named them GI 1 - GI 915. (Reason for "I" unclear.) Then on the next one he had help from someone named Jahreiss, so those stars got named GJ 1000, etc. Which explains exoplanet "GJ 1214 b" (@ 47 ly).
Then there was the Kepler mission, which was the first satellite designed specifically to search for exoplanets. Eventually a few thousand were found. One of the earliest was Kepler 16 b (245 ly).
Around the same time a satellite named CoRoT was launched by France/ESA with a similar mission, and apparently found CoRoT 7 b (520 ly), among others.
An earlier catalog of some 225 thousand stars was published by astronomer Henry Draper. Hence the later serendipitous discovery of HD 189733 b (63 ly).
As for Titan, well Saturn is the Roman counterpart of Chronos, who was himself a Titan, so I can't explain it; but it's 16-17 light days from the Sun. Personally, I'm hoping for critters in the planet-wide watery ocean of Jupiter's moon Europa (about half as far away).
As an amateur astrophotographer I find these video topics fascinating.
As someone who lives in Oklahoma, Tornadoes are incredibly scary to my friends who live in other states. Most people I know don't get freaked out by them though. I have slept through a few of them. Just depends on the person, but they can be very devastating when you go up to an F3-5.
Usually whoever first publishes about a given celestial body is granted naming rights, but there are far too many object to give anthropomorphic names and they uses the systemic names using letters and numbers that indicate where the object is, where and usually when it was discovered. These are sometimes referred to as catalog names because an ordered listing of these bodies is available.
If we're not sure what is the deepest point in our oceans, even though we live here and explore it.... I'm not convinced there's any accuracy to telling me someone knows the depth of one on another planet? ;-) Always enjoy your episodes and watch them right away. Thanks!!
I follow this line of thinking
And that’s so nice to read, thanks Ranger-1 (:
Well... we can't even tell how the weather will be in a few days and we *think* we know what it's like on a planet light years away? I don't think so.
@@NoProtocol Many people "understandably" follow this line of thinking with a misguided application of (some sort) Occam's razor... For example studying something very far away is presumably harder then if it were very close right? You might be interested in knowing that helium was discovered on the sun BEFORE it was discovered on earth!!! Spectroscopy in the 1800's discovered something 10's of millions of miles away that is VERY abundant here on earth with greater ease!
I don't want to ramble on for too long about atmospheric composition in relation to planetary geological formation, but needless to say scientists have a firmer grasp then one would "conventionally" think possible simply "looking at distant planets!
@@Fuerwahrhalunke there is a big difference between predicting and observing.
They didn’t say they knew the depth accurately just that it was 100s of Kilometers deep.
00:43 “Never seen it.”
I now selfishly want her to react to the de-specialized Star Wars movie. She could watch it from a historical perspective, because it truly is a piece of cinematic history. She would certainly have to suspend all disbelief in regard to physics, but it’s arguable (as is anything related to the Star Wars universe) that we don’t have to hold that galaxy far, far away to the constraints of our galaxy’s physics.
i gasped when you said "never seen it" ..
While I forget the title now there's a youtube video around here where someone took the time to independently verify an exoplanet discovery using a dlsr camera, telescope, and a home built rig to keep the scope on target while taking readings. Using that they were able to confirm the period of dimming when the object (exoplanet) passed in front of the star they were watching. It was neat stuff.
Crazy, but true: "How to Detect an Exoplanet With a DSLR" - UA-cam
Reminds me of something I constantly think about. We look at planets and say that life isn't possible because of weather, size, whatever. I wonder if there are civilizations that are looking at us saying, "Life can't be on that planet. Look at all the water. It just falls from the sky. And all those storms. No one can survive there." Just because Terrans (earthlings) can't live there, doesn't mean someone else can't.
It all starts with the simplest of bacteria.
Once that's possible, thousands of years later surface species can exist.
I agree with you about tornadoes. When I was younger I devoured anything I could get on meteorology, especially storms. I even have a couple of courses from The Great Courses, one on general meteorology and one on extreme weather. Very interesting. But it's even more frightening to consider that an EF5 tornado (301 mph winds) doesn't even compare to those winds on the planet HD198733-b. Tornadoes are why I wouldn't live in the middle of the country. But then, the mid-south is another tornado-prone area these days (I'm from Nashville) and I'd be leery of moving back there. I used to have some interest in astronomy; this video makes me think of getting back into it perhaps. Thank you.
Lol I just watched this video the other day and was about to recommend it, you read my mind. I just finished the The stranger and the Yale Financials Markets course, thanks for the recommendations. Great reaction as always. Take care and have a great weekend.
That’s so awesome that you took the course!
When I studied astronomy in college in the 1980s the best information available suggested the expansion of the Universe was slowing down. Now, less than 50 years later, the best available information suggests the Universe is expanding at an ever increasing rate.
regarding the "deepest point in the ocean" part i do agree with your logic that if we have only "mapped" a small part of the ocean floor we have no idea what would be the deepest, however there is some mathematical and scientific basis for this assumption.
in 1950 Marie Tharp produced the first map of the Atlantic ocean floor with a focus on the subsea fault lines, this finally proved theories of continental drift and later was instrumental in developing our modern understanding of plate tectonics. this lead to many such mapping efforts focusing on fault lines.
so basically although we have only mapped a small part of the ocean that effort has been largely focused on the massive rifts left in the ocean floor from active plate tectonics which would logically be deeper then areas with no active fault lines. so while it is possible there is some deeper part we have somehow missed until we can map the entirety in inch by inch detail, its reasonable and probable to assume that the deepest point would be in one of several specific regions where the geology would most likely allow for it. still that's why science always qualifies the statement with the word "known" but its not as wild a guess as you may assume at first.
this is of course a very brief simplified version of a poor explanation, but the point im trying to get across is that scientific facts always have a long and fascinating history of exactly how scientific communities came to their conclusions. if more people understood the reasoning and process behind establishing scientific fact people would be far less likely to dismiss them so quickly.
GJ is the telescope who discovers the system. The first one of the telescope is the 1, the planet on the video is the 1214th. The star it's GJ1214A, the nearest planet is GJ1214B, the second nearest gets the C, etc.
Your shadow is never lonely, it's always with you.
Just loving this channel and your thirst for knowledge 💚
Never seen Star Wars?? You need to watch it. You ever do movie reactions?? Love your content.
"Tornado's are alarming" I think I might need that on a shirt
I wasn't enjoying my Saturday. Then No Protocol uploaded a video, and now my day is nuch better!
Have a great weekend Joe!
Yes, I share your skepticism of the certainty with which they presented the conditions on planets many many light years away.
I absolutely love your content, innocent wholesome reactions on entertaining highly educational subject that you also know a lot about 👌
The scientific nomenclature for the designations of exoplanets usually consists of two elements: (1) a proper noun or abbreviation, sometimes with associated numbers, followed by (2) a lowercase letter.For example, 51 Pegasi b is an exoplanet around the star 51 Pegasi in the constellation Pegasus. The star received this particular catalogue designation by English astronomer John Flamsteed in his star atlas. Another common star catalogue used for exoplanet names is the GJ catalogue of German astronomers Wilhelm Gliese and Hartmut Jahreiß (Gliese & Jahreiß, 1991). An example is the exoplanet GJ 1214 b, which orbits a host star that is the 1214th entry in this star catalogue. Still other exoplanets are named after the Henry Draper (HD) and Hipparchos (HIP) catalogues, and some are named for their star’s common name, as in the case of Fomalhaut b.
Some exoplanet designations often stem from the instrument that discovered them, such as the Kepler planets (named for the NASA Kepler space telescope; e.g., Kepler-186f) and the CoRoT planets (named for the French Space Agency's (CNES) and the European Space Agency's (ESA) spacecraft, Convection Rotation and planetary Transits; e.g., CoRoT-7b). The number in each planet designation refers to the order of the extrasolar system's detection or identification in the instrument's data.
heres a link to the full artical if you care to read it
www.iau.org/public/themes/naming_exoplanets/#:~:text=The%20letter%20indicates%20the%20order,%2C%20d%3B%20and%20so%20on.
If you haven't already, I highly reccomend MelodySheep. Lotsa space stuff.
Gravity, temperature, atmosphere, type of star (sun), distance from star, chemical makeup, etc, are the main variables that determine the possibility of life. That's why so many say that life is rare. Things must be almost perfect.
Very interesting. I share your fascination with the ocean. Grew up not a mile from it so we could hear the waves crashing at night. I don't think I could live inland, I'd miss it too much. Growing up we would dream and talk about it - imagine if the ocean would recede completely for just one day so we could go out exploring its depths - what we might find! U-boats from WW2, wrecks of the Spanish armada, maybe even viking longships or long lost treasures or ancient villages/towns reclaimed by the sea. These videos, on space in particular, always make me think of the age of exploration and crossing the oceans. Fascinating - lovely to feel that thrill of the imagination being stirred. I have no book recommendations on this one - the imagination should suffice this time.
A scary part is: if earth's crust was a bit more flat, there wouldn't be any land.
“Tornados are alarming” true 😂 sounds like that needs to be your next reaction video!
Great format, keep up the good work
The concept of, scratch that the very idea of other worldly logic and science is one of the most fascinating mysteries in the universe.
9:00 We would analyze the light being reflected from the planet (Spectrography), and see what compounds it contains.
Yeah, it's mostly guesswork. The two main ways of detecting planets are the "wobble" of the star, which gives you mass, and transit - when we're lucky with the angle and the planet passes in front of the star - which gives you size.
Now, if you have both, you can calculate density - from which you can guess what the planet is made of. Gas, rock, or something in between like water.
With the James Webb though, we are able to get accurate spectroscopic analysis of a planet's atmosphere during transit - basically we can tell what it's made of. Which is HUGE. If there's a lot of oxygen, there's a real good chance that there's life.
In the 80's I "flapped around the moon like a bird" all the time.
For anyone curious to learn more about Earth's ecology, especially the oceans, I can recommend David Suzuki's work. His way of communicating about the natural environment is earnest, erudite, and poetic, similar to the manner in which Carl Sagan spoke about space and cosmology. He's in his 80s now and still engages with the public through his foundation (David Suzuki Foundation), books, and documentaries. He's a personal hero for his decades of environmental education and advocacy.
Hey :) It´s always nice to hear your thoughts here on UA-cam^^
You said you wonder how life could look like on other planets... I just recently saw a really interesting Video about that, called Life Beyond: The museum of life.
It is like a 3 part series of 30 minute Videos, so maybe not reaction material, but still very interesting to see
@Krarch Great recommendation! Very much worth commenting on and discussing.
I happen to think they're a little conservative in what they imagine, but they probably wanted to err on the side of realism in order not to get tagged as exclusively science fiction. ---No reason our splendid guide here couldn't fast forward to the most interesting parts of each video.
@@johnstrawb3521 Eey, I just now saw that somebody actually replied here^^ I too think that they bind themselves on on their assumptions, but I think they are quite well chosen :) Also, even with their self-limitations there, they went really far on the possibilities of life that are offered following them! Nice to hear that you also enjoyed that little documentary 🙃
Thank you @no protocol. I enjoy your reaction videos.
Hey, thanks for watching (:
Video start: "Hi, ----"
Me: *pause* everyone knows such a well thought out intro foreshadows quality content.
*Sub*
Just imagine how strong a potential bipedal multicellular organisms would have to be to in order to have been created for those extreme planets
As for naming the planets it is probably named after the star it orbits, like the star is called “GJ1214” and it is the second planet from the star so it is planet “B”. As for why the star would be named that it was probably discovered during some mission or research project that found lots of stars so they just assign it a number, like the first planet spoken about in the video was one of the planets discovered by the Kepler mission, so it is named Kepler plus a number afterwards.
I just looked it up, the “GJ” is short for “Gleise” somehow and it is just assigned a number and it is just an exoplanet of Gleise 1214. I couldn’t find any information on why it is named Gleise though but there are a group of stars all named Gleise plus a number.
4:51 I believe all those pictures we see of other Exoplanets outside out Solar System are artist renditions interpreting the visual data analyzed by Astrophysicists and not actual photographs of the Planets taken by a telescope! The clearest real image of a Exoplanet was taken last September by the James Webb Telescope and it still looks like a messy blob! 😀
Hi. I just watched your Eddie Izzard/Stonehenge vid and I have an interesting literary connection for you (worth a vid of it's own). It's a poem, looking at British history with Wiltshire as its lens, performed by Nick Harper from his album 'Treasure Island'. There are a couple of UA-cam versions, but the live one at Devils Den Rocks is perhaps most fitting. Obviously I recommend then listening to more of Nick Harper's music. Hope you like it.....D
So normally planets are named by the star they orbit and the satellite/telescope that discovered them. We named constellations after Greek characters in mythos and our planets after Roman gods.. those are the basics of naming
We have a pretty good handle on the ROUGH picture of how our ocean floor is generally shaped. What we DON'T have is fine detailed maps of the ocean floor except in very limited areas, and most of those maps are highly guarded secrets of one national navy or another.
In the public domain, most of the available sea floor maps accuracy is about 328 feet (100 meters). The best land maps we have right now has about 15 cm accuracy and there's now efforts to make a 10cm global map.
I wouldn't be surprised if some governments might have secret capabilities to create or already have terrestrial maps with higher resolutions but of course that is publicly unknown and unacknowledged.
GJ stands for Gliese Jahreiss Objects which is a study of objects within 23 Parsecs of our sun. I want to say that this survey was first done in the late 1950’s, and has be revised several times since then.
The challenger deep was the deepest part of the ocean but I think they found an even deeper spot also located in the Mariana trench. I'm sure they will find even deeper places than this eventually, like you stated they have only mapped a small area of our ocean floors.
I like the pun: you don’t find yourself gravitated to Astronomy
I know you don't like sci-fi and I mentioned it before but you read The Three body problem. It is sci-fi but it will leave you with serious philosophical and existential thoughts
I'd give rhis a B+. There was a lot of speculation, and he did a good job communicating that. There is still so much for us to learn about our universe.
You: "never seen it"....
Me: SSTTTOOOOOOOOOPPPP!!!! don't hurt my feelings like this
lol
I like the idea of raining diamonds on Uranus , it also conjures up some pretty magical pictures in my mind
I know it isn't in your particular set of interests (being a scifi novel), but a book I can reommend that takes an interesting stab at planetary ecology is Children of Time; ecology is just a pheripheral concept to the whole, but it's still a good book.
An additional queston this video left me with is, how the heck are there "fossil fuels" (around 300x the oil reserves than that of the entire Earth) on Titan? Is it evidence of plant life once thriving on Titan? I heard some hydrocarbons can form with the right ingredients around and a lot of pressure, but in such great amounts, and on a small moon? Hard to get my head around.
Most people have witness seeing multiple shadows for one person or object, because every sport stadium had 4 sources of light, one on every corner, so if you watch any soccer night games you'll see that every person on the pitch has 4 shadows. And that's just to start with.
You've never seen Star Wars?!? You should definitely do a reaction video and watch it!
I can't imagine opening my umbrella to a shower of liquid magma rocks.
I'm no physicist, but I suspect that a planet's composition is determined in a similar manner to stars with spectral absorption & emissions lines that can be decomposed into signatures that represent the most likely chemical compositions. They probably also have to take into account for relative change in distance and red shifting too. ...idk maybe black body radiation or solar geometry for insights about the planet's temperature? ...Now I want to go look it up too. Interesting video!
Edit:
The youtube algorithm must have been listening, it just recommended the following which talks about an approach to determining exoplanet composition. "C3 Absorption, Line, Emission and Continuous Spectra [SL IB Chemistry]" by Richard Thornley
Watching space vids puts into perspective how fragile life is and how precious the Earth.
I would recommend the Honor Harrington series. I consider it the best Science Fiction series of all time.
That all water planet reminds me of the movie interstellar where the planet was mostly water and it experienced tsunamis swells as high as the Empire State Building every hour
I'm stuck on never saw star wars....
There are over 5000 discovered planets by now and new ones comes along fast. So codes instead of names for most of them seems sensible.
regarding the information of distant planets, i will try to keep this comment shorter than my former essay on the depth of the ocean and simply say, most of what we know about these planets comes from a process called "astronomical spectroscopy" which involves studying the light of other stars as a planet passes in front of them, by studying this light we can determine the chemical composition of the atmosphere the light passed through, this can give us all kinds of information from how much oxygen is in a planets atmosphere or even if there are compounds and pollutants that would be indicative of the presence of plants or animals or even heavy industry, combined with things like the size, temperate and distance of the planet from its sun we can deduce much about the conditions on its surface.
although as you suggested there is always a margin for error and some basic assumptions have to be made that may not always hold true for every planet, such as its mineral composition etc, we can only make assumptions based on our current understanding, sadly until we get a probe close enough for other methods of data collection we can never say for sure, but the more planets and stars we study the more our understanding grows and the more accurate our predictions should become.
Hey,
How are you doing,
Love your content...
Can I suggest this one ...
"Gorge Carlin national press"
It doesn't have any uncomfortable language.. just smart remarks
We need much more ocean exploration.
I think there are type 2 civilizations that live on the ocean's floor which is much deeper than the Mariana trench probably by hundreds if not thousands of miles
1:50 the sad reality about interstellar astrophysics is that nearly 100% of the conjectures get turn to contact haven’t been proven, if not, are merely downright untrue
I'm disappointed that raining diamonds didn't make the top 5. I don't particularly care about diamonds, but it's a fun thing to know we think exists.
Naming convention for the the planet is really easy tbh and shouldn't keep anyone up.
It's the first planet discovered around the Star 'Gliese 1214' so it gets the -b suffix (A goes to the star).... that's literally it. The J only stands for the other scientist that designed the naming convention with Wilhelm Gliese (Hartmut Jahreiß)
What mic do you use? It sounds great
The names are generally just the names of the stars and the order of the planets discovery.
So planet xb
would be the first planet discovered around star x
Some stars have old names because they are bright and visible from earth, but most have catalog names from surveys conducted on the sky by astronomical telescopes, and that's why most star names are a mix of letters and numbers
If we're all gonna keep coming back for these reactions, I really hope we eventually get a reaction to star wars
Also the methane rain droplets on titan fall slow enough due to liquid methane being almost half the density of water and weaker gravity that anyone standing on the surface could dodge the droplets.
Whats crazy is that almost all of the planets mentioned in this video are near identical to the planets used in the Ben 10 Series in terms of description, so maybe Dwayne McDuffie or Man of Action took inspiration from these planets.
woww i'm really early.
i love this channel.
Book recommendation: The First Men In The Moon, by HG Wells. It's just a fun read.
"Damn nature you scary" - aliens living on hell like planets, probably.
0:25 as if nobody on earth played any sports with flood lights?!
Even amateurs have these, I‘m totally used to seeing my mates on the football (not American handegg) pitch with 4 shadows
I'm trying so hard to remember where I heard this, but I can't:
Naming in science is usually either by how something is categorized or it's named after something on Earth, often people, often celebrities. A common issue in biological naming is that an animal will be discovered and named and later it's determined that the name is technically inaccurate, but it's not allowed to be changed, thus you get some animals who's Latin names make no sense.
I know this is off topic but you mentioned you were interested in the Roman Empire..... there's a series called Rome: rise and fall of an Empire. I think you will enjoy that.
Space is a beautiful place. Knowing how small Earth is, it's hard not to go stir crazy. Every other day I'm just ready to leave.
In a double or multiple star system (wich most star systems are btw) the stars are still far away from eachother. So you actually wouldn't see two suns in the sky, but one sun and a pretty bright dot.
I will once again recommend from the same channel - how 1 man survived 438 days at sea and what is the loudest sound ever heard. :)
It's called challenger Deep it was discovered in the 1960's by Don Walsh and Jack Picard
"More natural gas and oil in this 25% than all of earth" Welp boys looks like we're going to titan in a red, white and blue painted space ship.
Gj 1214b is 40 ly away. A lot of the planets and stars are named after the telescope and or how they were discovered. The reason why a lot of the planets have b at the end of their name is because these are the first planets discovered around the star. If a second planet was discovered it would be named c and so on. Instead of kepler 16b, it is named kepler 16 (ab) b because it orbits two stars instead of one. If a planet is orbiting the lesser star than it will start of as Bb , Bc for example
Here's one to ponder: Our entire universe exists within a super-massive black hole (which is the reason its continually expanding)
Looks like Titan needs Freedom and Democracy
Speed of sound through Earth's atmosphere is a better way to say it. The speed of sound isn't fixed and varies with the medium its travelling through.
If compared to space, sound is infinitely faster.
Just so you know, if you ever diversify into film reactions, first-time viewings of the Star Wars series are very popular, and a good way to jump start subscriber counts for long-form (heavily edited) reactions.
I wish to point out that no one really knows how a planet that is 60 light years from us really looks like. We have only guesses based on what we know of it's mineral composition through spectroskopy(?) or other method.
That first one is kind of bad because you can go to any place with multiple light sources and see multiple shadows such as a sports stadium
most of the names with seemingly random numbers and letters is just a naming convention, when there are billions upon billions the simplest way to name them and identify them is like that.
im pretty sure you can pay for renaming some stars and other celestial bodies to something you want, too.
When there is an eclipse we can have multiple shadows here on Earth.
"Never seen it"... seriously? Now I feel you need to do a star wars reaction series.
Notice the video title says these things 'can' happen. Apart from Titan we do not have the technology to see anything like this (yet).
I’ve also often wondered how they can be so accurate on their measurements etc of far off planets. They use such exact measurement statements, and as the presenter of this video said at the beginning we’re not 100% sure if the deepest part of our own oceans yet they’re stating winds of 950km in that planet 89 light years away, and 100km deep ocean on that one 56 light years away, temperatures of -321 degrees on the other one etc etc … I don’t really get that tbh. A lot of imagination there
Oh we gotta get you to watch star wars 😁