“I like powdered custard,” is about the most British answer to the question “What’s the largest ocean in the solar system?” Edit: I definitely didn’t mean to write “powered custard,” but that really does sound awesome!
Fun fact: my mother had Clyde Tombaugh as a college professor at New Mexico State University, and he was one of the most fun professors she ever had, sadly she never kept the notes.
I still have every note I ever took for all of my college classes. All handouts, syllabi, and textbooks too, and I have referred to them from time to time in my life, though by now they're all outdated by decades.
@Viktor Birkeland All you've given there is your opinion of who's funny, and a terrible analogy! It's in no way persuasive, and it just paints you as a bit of a humorless dolt! Of course, that just my opinion too. But I'd say I'm closer to the truth than you.
@Viktor Birkeland @Viktor Birkeland @Viktor Birkeland @Viktor Birkeland Yes, opinion. It's okay to have one. But I don't think it's as broad as you seem to think. I don't think everything you say is your opinion. If you leapt to your feet, mid meal and cried, "help me I'm choking!" I doubt you'd find any comfort, if I were to reply; "well, don't worry that's just your opinion.!" Also, I was puzzled by your ironic wobbliness around absolutes. - "I don't speak the truth, in no way." - Is that statement then untrue? Or if it is true, that you do not speak any truths, is that itself then not a truth? You see the bind! What tickles you one day, may not another. But to say that Rich Hall is not funny to you, because he's not funny at all is just nonsense. And evidenced to by all the laughter surrounding his humor on the show. He is particularly funny on QI, though I wouldn't be drawn to his stand-up... as a whole! Someone is not funny because you laugh at them. You laugh at them because you think they're funny. It's all transactional. - And I've seen the interview from which you quote, and it is a good observation of cultural differences. But that's more an overarching trend, and less the individual. There is no doubt that things are humoress. But of course, you may wrestle with personal doubts, as to where you find that humor. Try not to kill things off with absolutes. Let them off! At least then, there's a change they may come back and surprise you. -- Anyway, forgive the wordy response. I considered ending with a compliment, towards something about you I observed in you writing. But I doubt you could agree with me, given your aversion to truth! o.O
@@kidneystone53 Cruithne isn't a moon, it just happens to be in roughly the same orbit as the Earth and also has an orbital period of roughly an Earth year.
Indeed. We miss his wonderful singing voice ;( I was lucky enough to go to the special I'm Sorry I Haven't A Clue show in Oxford at the beginning of this year that had been planned to be a fund-raiser for him, but turned into a celebration of his work after he passed away. They had a bucket collection that was specifically designed so that all the funds would go to charities that would piss-off the Daily Mail. "It's what he would've wanted" was Jack Dee's announcement!
Hearing my city pop up in a video about planets by an overseas television show is unsettling enough without having Fry and Davies make attempts to pronounce it
Benjamin Brooks I find Stephan's range of comedy and knowledge to be unbeatable. Far often than not, Sandi tends to get annoyed too easily or goes down into vulgarity (either subtle or blatant)
@@Grimlock1979 True... also if I recall correctly, Charon more or less rotates around Pluto at about the same speed as Pluto spins. Personally I do like to consider Pluto a planet, even though it's no longer classified as one.
Watching the clip of Alan getting mocked for thinking that humams will be able to leave Earth is so surreal now, considering that there are now legitimate endeavors to colonize the moon and Mars.
Robin Brennan i think if they filmed that same episode today; people wouldn’t laugh as much, if not laugh at all because colonizing Mars is an ever growing possibility
@@simonextra9689 While I believe that it may be possible one very distant day, I do not believe that it is something we will see in our lifetime. I would like to be wrong on this.
I feel that they weren't laughing so much at the idea of colonising Mars, and more at the way Alan worded it, to sound as though everyone present in that room would be living on Mars.
Alan expressed it poorly. What Channel 5 was attempting to get through to him was that when the Sun finally runs out of fuel for nuclear fusion (estimated time of arrival: 5 billion years from now), then it'll expand, as it becomes a Red Giant. It's not quite known how far the Sun will expand into the Solar System exactly - too many variables involved to be that precise - but Mercury will definitely be consumed by the expanding Sun, and Venus almost certainly. It might make it out as far as the Earth and eat our planet too. But, you know, even if the expansion doesn't quite reach out to Earth's orbit, then the planet will be right next to a newly-expanded Red Giant and will be absolutely inhospitable to life. The seas and the atmosphere would boil off, leaving Earth somewhat like Mercury is - a barren rock that's some 400C in the day and approaching Absolute Zero by night. Indeed, the only thing that could handle such a wide range of temperatures is a barren rock. So the notion is that if humans haven't left this planet in 5 billion years' time, then we'll be forced to leave by the expanding Sun. To be honest, Mars is probably still too close to this larger Sun as well, but at least you're moving outwards to a safe distance. And beyond that is the asteroid belt and then Jupiter and then Saturn - gas giants that the video covers as being impossible to live upon - so places to live quickly run out after Mars. Though, this "thought experiment" is a bit moot, upon closer inspection. I mean, we're talking about 5 billion years from now. And it's been 5 billion years-ish from the beginnings of the Solar System to today. About as much time left, as has already passed. This is a ridiculously long time and the idea that humanity would still be humanity in 5 billion years' time is frankly impossible. If we haven't long since gone "trans-human" with advanced technologies by our own steam, then evolution by natural selection will have warped what used to be us into something completely unrecognisable by then, anyway. Again, we're talking about a stretch of time - "deep future" - that's as deep as the "deep history" that got the Solar System to this point in the first place. The whole story of evolution up this point repeated again, but starting at this point in the vast journey, not at the very beginnings of life itself. And if you consider technological advance over the last century - and the fact that it naturally picks up pace over time too - then it's already completely unimaginable to contemplate what advanced technologies humanity would have a 100 years from now. So imagine technology 5 billion years into the future? Probably not just "indistinguishable from magic" but likely closer to "indistinguishable from omnipotence". So "stellar engineers" could, by that point, probably just pop over to the Sun and "fix" it, so that it doesn't expand in the first place. Or, you know, everyone (who aren't "humanity" anymore) lives on the inside of a Dyson Sphere that's been placed at exactly the right distance from the expanded Red Giant (and the stellar engineers just keep it like that forever more). If you don't know what a Dyson Sphere is, then look it up to realise how ridiculous a "tall order" that is - but, hey, 5 billion years' worth of technological progress? Child's play to the trans-human race. Or, you know, we possibly vote for an Orange Man who launches a nuclear war, just because he's exactly that stupid, that wipes out all life on the planet next week, because folks still believe in religious fairy tales and can't get over the fact that some human beings look a bit different to them, and they want a tax cut to be able to afford the extortionate healthcare that wouldn't be so extortionate, if they weren't so obsessed with tax cuts in the first place. One or the other. Chaos is, unfortunately, intrinsically unpredictable. So you never can tell.
There are three criteria for determining a planet in our lovely Solar System: 1) It orbits the Sun 🌞. 2) Its mass is such that it has formed into a round-ish shape. 3) It has cleared its neighbourhood/local area of other objects. Pluto was reclassified because it hasn't cleared its neighbourhood of other objects.
Nx Doyle but it was reclassified as a dwarf planet, so still a planet. Just not a very large one. In fact that will be my argument from now on, cause in this day an age people are constantly afraid of saying something that might be offensive. So if people argue that being a dwarf means that it’s not a planet... does that apply to other dwarfs too? I’ll just toss that one out there for you to think about ;)
I do enjoy being a nitpicker sometimes. Stephen said that there are four rocky planets and four gas giants. How delightfully old school he is. In recent decades astronomers have come to understand that there are only two gas giants - Jupiter and Saturn, and are quite different to Uranus and Neptune which are now classed as ice giants.
According to the current writings from Nasa the ice giants are a form of gas giant. The report I read was dated Feb 2019, so I guess things may have changed, although the NASA website has them as Gas Giants but this is a much more simplistic (made for public consumption) source than the research paper I read.
Jonathan Thorpe Because they were classed as gas giants for a century, and the understanding that they are not is less than 20 years old, we are in a transition period. Also they do have thick enough atmosphere’s for some people to feel justified in continuing to use classifications that they learned as kids. However, it should be noted that their atmosphere’s do not extend more than 10 to 20 percent of their diameter. Like the Earth, and unlike Jupiter and Saturn, the largest part of the planet’s interior is an extensive mantle, although, unlike the Earth’s fluid rock, in the case of Neptune and Uranus, their mantle consists of fluid ices. Pluto’s demotion as a planet is similar in that while it is not classified as a planet, it is still easy to find references that still call it a planet. Likewise Ceres was reclassified as a dwarf planet, but people still refer to it as an asteroid, and because it resides within the asteroid belt, there is some justification in that. In the case of Uranus and Neptune, there is less reason to cling to tradition, as the study of exoplanets has revealed that these mid-sized planets are possibly the most common class of planet and exist within a certain restricted size range that suggests their origin and growth during the formative stages of a solar system is quite different to that experienced by gas giants. If so, then a classification system that clearly isolates them from gas giants like Saturn and Jupiter is more than just a simple matter of their interior composition. It seems that there are 5 distinct classes of planets - rocky terrestrials, super-Earths (of which there are zero known in our solar system), gas giants, Neptunes (which we have 2 of in our solar system both of which are largely slushy ices with ice/rock cores. Unfortunately we do not know the composition of exoplanet Neptune sized objects so we don’t know if the ice giant model is typical). The fifth class is dwarf planets which our solar system seems to have large numbers, but none have been discovered yet around other stars. As we cannot resolve objects that small yet, the absence of discovery is presumed to say nothing about their abundance (or possible lack of it) elsewhere.
Jonathan Thorpe I get my information from the same sources as NASA does, research papers. My main sources of information are reported in journals such as Nature, and science news such as Phys.Org and in current encyclopedias. As Wikipedia states, “Neptune, like Uranus, is an ice giant, a subclass of giant planet, because they are smaller and have higher concentrations of volatiles than Jupiter and Saturn.” Don’t be such a smart a**. Note that is says “subset of giant planet” not “subset of gas giant.” Perhaps you should do more research rather than being a smart a**.
Actually pluto passes every single qualification for being a planet except for 1. It hasn't cleared its orbit of debris And no, most asteroids would not qualify as planets, even minor ones, because they dont have enough mass to pull themselves into spheres under their own gravity.
Actually, two of the three criteria that the IAU came up with are crap. One says that a planet has to orbit the Sun. Not just a star, but our star. That means that by definition, none of the exoplanets is a planet. The other is the "cleared its neighborhood". How cleared is "cleared"? The IAU doesn't say. How big is a planet's "neighborhood"? Again, the IAU doesn't say.
@@almostfm The IAU refers specifically to the sun, because the criteria you're referring to are specifically for what qualifies a celestial body as a planet *of the solar system*. Exoplanets, by definition, are not planets of the solar system. Now, how big is a planet's neighbourhood? Their neighbourhood is their orbital path. More accurately, an area around their orbital path which, if anything else was within that area, it would succumb quite heavily to gravitational forces from the celestial body in question, or vise versa. "Cleared its neighbourhood" is not hard to understand. It's simple. "Is the celestial body the dominant gravitational influence within its orbital path?" It not only asks if its the most massive object within its neighbourhood, but also if the combined mass of everything in its neighbourhood doesn't outweigh it. This doesn't take natural satellites into account, so Charon being quite large isn't the reason Pluto is a dwarf planet. A significant portion of Pluto's orbital path, however, is within the Kuiper belt. Its neighbourhood is shared by millions and millions of asteroids, as well as other dwarf planets of similar size and mass. If a planet of comparable mass to Earth were to replace Pluto, the Kuiper belt would eventually disappear, or at least the inner edges of it would be cut back quite a ways. Much of it would be ejected. A ton of it would collide with the planet. Some of it might even become moons of the planet. It might take a few dozen orbits, which would take thousands of years, and it would still be classed a dwarf planet until its neighbourhood was clear, but the point is, it could clear its neighbourhood. Pluto is not massive enough to ever clear its neighbourhood. At least, not within any reasonable amount of time. It's been around for 4-ish billion years, and the Kuiper belt is not showing any sign of damage. Meanwhile, the 8 planets aren't being shrouded by the asteroid belt, because they had no trouble cutting it down to size.
@@PyroOfZen How many times, since the planets formed, has Pluto circled the sun? Earth has swept its orbit some 4.5 billion times compared to Pluto's 18 million or so, less than .5% the opportunity Earth has had to sweep its neighborhood, which is also a hell of a lot smaller than Pluto's. For a group of scientists, the IAU have allowed their criteria to be extremely biased against any smaller planet in a more distant orbit. Put a naval officer in charge of a dinghy and the boat will sail well. Put a toddler in charge of a battleship and it won't. Give the kid a chance to grow up and learn the ropes, and don't congratulate the inner planets whose orbits were mostly cleared by Jupiter.
9:15 "By no criterion on which planets are judged, could Pluto be said to be a planet." *makes the klaxon noise* Actually, Pluto fits two of the three criteria to be a planet. So up yer Khyber, Stephen.
I'm an American and I just don't find him that funny, I've given him a fair chance I think, and it may be because he's surrounded by such comedy greats that his style can't really flourish, but I just can't get into him
@@jeroen92 yeah I guess that mite be it. I'm not really a fan of any Americans on QI, though I stopped watching after Stephen left. The only other American that comes to mind is that black fella (I'm assuming he's American). He's just not funny in the least
A question for any Astronomers or Physicists. The red spot on Jupiter is, from what I've been taught and read about, A raging storm thats been going for as long as we've been able to observe it. My question is, Does anyone have any idea when this storm will blow itself out? Or are the conditions on Jupiter just so, it will just keep on raging?
The Great Red Spot has been observed since 5 September 1831. By 1879 over 60 observations were recorded. After it came into prominence in 1879, it has been under continuous observation. The reason the storm has continued to exist for centuries is that there is no planetary surface (only a liquid core of hydrogen) to provide friction; circulating gas eddies persist for a very long time in the atmosphere because there is nothing to oppose their angular momentum. In the 21st century, the Great Red Spot was seen to be shrinking in size. At the start of 2004, it had approximately half the longitudinal extent it had had a century ago, when it reached a size of 40,000 km (25,000 mi), about three times the diameter of Earth. At the present rate of reduction, it would become circular by 2040. It is not known how long the spot will last, or whether the change is a result of normal fluctuations. In 2019, the Great Red Spot began "flaking" at its edge, with fragments of the storm breaking off and dissipating. The shrinking and "flaking" fueled concern from some astronomers that the Great Red Spot could dissipate within 20 years. However, other astronomers believe that the apparent size of the Great Red Spot reflects its cloud coverage and not the size of the actual, underlying vortex, and they also believe that the flaking events can be explained by interactions with other cyclones or anticyclones, including incomplete absorptions of smaller systems; if this is the case, this would mean that the Great Red Spot is not in danger of dissipating.
At the time Alan Davies said that Pluto was a planet he was in fact correct. Although many astronomers were saying that it was only a minor planet at most it was still officially classified as a planet so Alan should not have been penalised for his answer. It wasn't until a few years later that it was officially reclassified as a minor planet.
There are still 9. It would of been 10 if they allowed Pluto. There are 2 or 3 agencies looking for our 9th planet. They say that things happen in our solar system that can only happen if there is a 9th planet on a huge orbit that is currently outside our observation but strong evidence say that it exists.
~7:29 once they figure out how to keep Jupiter from crushing any probe that dares to brave its atmosphere, they need to fit it with one of those 360 degree video cameras
Nice reference to F Scott Fitzgerald’s “Diamond as Big as the Ritz” Konstantin Batygin and Michael E. Brown argue the existence of a ninth planet beyond the dwarf planet called Pluto.
He’s probably right - over the next billion years, an increase in solar activity will make the surface of the earth uninhabitable, but Mars will warm up, giving it at least the potential for human habitation (if we can overcome issues like not having a Van Allen belt).
@@rojh9351 We’ll be on Mars a lot sooner than a billion years lol. In a billion years we’ll probably either have discovered faster than light travel, or gone extinct. Getting swallowed by the sun is not something we’ll have to worry about.
@@MerkhVision I don’t think anything I wrote a year ago precludes us from going to Mars before then, I just meant that it’s a likely place for humanity’s descendants to still be able to live within the solar system after the Earth is no longer habitable.
8:00 the surface of Venus is not hot enough to melt aluminium. It's about 460 degrees C at the surface, and doesn't vary much due to the thick atmosphere. Aluminium melts at about 660 degrees C. However, lead would melt on Venus, its melting point being about 327 degrees C, as would zinc with its melting point of about 419 degrees C.
@@froggy187888 You need pretty extreme pressures to appreciably change the melting point of metals. In any case, higher pressure would simply raise the melting point even more. Aluminium definitely will not melt in the ambient conditions on the surface of Venus.
Alan's role in QI seems to be akin to Pooh Bear. Not "book smart", but with an innate sense that initially seems comical but has an almost Taoist wisdom when considered more deeply.
3:20--Alan may not be far wrong. As the sun evolves from a yellow star to a red giant, earth's water will boil away, the planet will become uninhabitable and, as the "red giant" expands outward, the innermost planets will be obliterated, (which will happen, eventually, to Mars and probably outward past the asteroid belt toward Jupiteras well. Carl Sagan, the exo-biologist who produced the gold anodized disc on the Voyagers of the 1970s, and who wrote Dragons of Eden, Broca's Brain, the Cosmos series, the novel Contact and whose protégé has upgraded the Cosmos series to incorporate newer findings and information, expounded upon this possibility.
Doesn't Uranus spin almost 90 degrees on it's side, making day 42 years? Or does the planet rotation define it regardless of the sun's position in the sky?
I can’t recall a single time that Phil Jupitus has ever made me crack a smile, let alone laugh. In fact it’s quite the opposite... he stops me from laughing.
Allen is actually right about Mars. When the sun eventually expands into a red giant Earth will be consumed, but Mars will be in the new goldilocks zone... until the sun then explodes into a planetary nova a few million years latter. Then we best be gone from the Sol system proper.
I don't think humans will have to worry about that. Much sooner than most humans expect, they will already be an intergalactic race. They need to change a bit first, but it certainly won't be billions of years away.
@@CaptHayfever Reptilian overlord disguised as a human called "Diana Cavendish." Retract your comment before she sees it and has to eradicate the witnesses.
I'm not so sure about that. Even so, it won't bring back Mars's magnetic field, and without that, there can be no atmosphere. So humans (or whatever we evolve into, or whatever takes over from us) would still be pretty screwed.
It’s possible that it will become nine planets again because later in the series we learned that our moon might be considered a planet in a binary system with the Earth.
The way Alan pronounced Charleston is a remarkable facsimile to how it would sound if it were said by a 'Cajun of the bayou. Not quite the right State, but pretty close.
The Pluto stuff was a bit sloppy. The IAU declassified it (presumably shortly before that episode), but it was a controversial decision, because it does actually meet 2 of the 3 criteria for a planet, and the 3rd (clearing its vicinity) is ill-defined.
It's pretty well defined and Pluto very clearly fails it. If Pluto had actually cleared its vicinity, then the Kuiper Belt wouldn't exist. The Kuiper Belt is literally hundreds of times larger and has hundreds of times the number of objects as the Asteroid Belt. Not only that, Pluto is smaller than Ceres. By literally every measure, Ceres has more claim to be a planet than Pluto does, but even Ceres fails so Pluto *DEFINITELY* fails.
I think the last nail in Pluto's coffin is that its orbit is not in the same plain as the other planets'. And yes, it is not logical to pick Pluto as a planet while there are many similar bodies in the outer solar system.
1:34 David is right. A lot of people here in Australia are pissed off at the English for re-naming most places here after their counties, cities, towns and people.
There are three errors In the first clip, which is easily the most I've ever picked up from an episode of QI. Stephen, uncharacteristically, says June 1969 in reference to the Apollo 11 mission, which took place entirely in July. He goes on to pronounce Houston as he did in his 50 States series, namely as "HOO-stuhn" as opposed to "HYOO-stuhn". But that's no biggie, because Houstonians themselves pronounce it "YOOZ-tuhn". Then again they also pronounce oil as awl and some say dishwarsher. As for Martian crater nomenclature, it may be that certain-sized craters have to be named after towns with sub-100,000 populations, but not overall. For example, the Opportunity rover spent quite a bit of time at Endeavour crater, named after the bark used by James Cook on his first voyage to map the transit of Venus across the Sun. On the way back, Cook charted the east coast of Australia. All the points around the edge of the Endeavour crater are named after the places named by Cook during his exploration and mapping.
Yes, well, I don't think the French pronounce the name of their capital city as _pérris_ so Houston can be pronounced Throat Warbler Mangrove by Stephen for all I care.
It's still a discussion regarding planets, over whether or not this icy ball (practically a comet, without a highly elliptic orbit) is a full-fledged planet. (Which it isn't.) Plus, I guess it's delicious to drink the tears of the butthurt losers still upset about the demotion, as if it meant Pluto was any less special, or had disappeared altogether. 😆
Edie Wilde - It's not been "found", but heavily theorized to exist just no visual confirmation. Also, another theory as to the gravitational effect on the planets is a black hole that suddenly appeared the size of 6 earths (but the size of like a baseball iirc) and then dissipated. I'm extremely rusty on the latter but for the most part I think that's another solid theory
I believe there is debate about it having a solid metal core , but it would be tiny compared to the rest of Jupiter's mass. I think we are just not really sure because matter does funny things under that amount of pressure.
@@JanglesPrime999 :-) It's impossible for a body that size not to be continually eating asteroids etc. I have been trying to get my little head around cosmic magnetism, without much success. In theory for example the earths core is way too hot to be a magnet, ditto i guess for Jupiter. So i lean toward rotating metal in a solar current rather than 'natural' magnet (?). Yes i have read about 'metalic hydrogen' for example as a way to explain the enormous magnetism of the sun, but just as obviously it aint made just of gas. Tnx for your reply :-)
You don't need an Earth-like core to have a magnetic field. The sun has a magnetic field and it is made out of almost entirely hydrogen. Also, the rotating solid core of the Earth is not what creates our magnetic field. It's the convection of the molten outer core layer which creates the magnetic field. So it's perfectly reasonable for a gas giant to have a magnetic field. There is always more than one way to skin a cat, as they say.
@@TheBeeFactory Cheers :-) Yes I was quite taken by the convection theory, till I heard the alternate theory of spin in an electric field...(just like electric motors).( possibly accounting for the unexplained rotation speed of galaxies, without inventing dark something or other). There are also Quasars and Black holes which also must be giant magnets (?)
“I like powdered custard,” is about the most British answer to the question “What’s the largest ocean in the solar system?”
Edit: I definitely didn’t mean to write “powered custard,” but that really does sound awesome!
*Powdered. Damn auto correct eh 😄
Although I think powered custard does sound more exciting 😁
Jet powered custard
alan is slowly turning into QI grandad xD
"i been on a rollercoaster once. i never pissed myself!"
nuclear power custard its controversial but its almost an unlimited source
@@JarthenGreenmeadow Mmmmmm! Unlimited sauce! 😋
"You could get some serious bling from Jupiter"
-Stephen Fry
Just a matter of how
Not mentioned here is Ross Noble’s wish to “stand on a planet and throw an Ewok into a lake of farts.”
That was a moon not a planet! You've gotta way for the BEST OF MOONS compilation video for that one. 😆
it was tossing* an ewok, which was what made it so great
But dont we all wish that?
@@artlessdodger The moon is a planet.
oh thank god im not alone
It’s so sweet how much Alan makes Stephen laugh, especially in the C town part
Fun fact: my mother had Clyde Tombaugh as a college professor at New Mexico State University, and he was one of the most fun professors she ever had, sadly she never kept the notes.
Cool!😎👍
I still have every note I ever took for all of my college classes. All handouts, syllabi, and textbooks too, and I have referred to them from time to time in my life, though by now they're all outdated by decades.
"it's a tiny ball of ice!"
Alan: *stare intensifies*
“Is there a reststop between you and the end of this statement?”
Milliways!
We are one. Would you like to copulate?
Viktor Birkeland Yeah, you're not evidence for that.
@Viktor Birkeland All you've given there is your opinion of who's funny, and a terrible analogy! It's in no way persuasive, and it just paints you as a bit of a humorless dolt! Of course, that just my opinion too. But I'd say I'm closer to the truth than you.
@Viktor Birkeland @Viktor Birkeland @Viktor Birkeland @Viktor Birkeland Yes, opinion. It's okay to have one. But I don't think it's as broad as you seem to think. I don't think everything you say is your opinion. If you leapt to your feet, mid meal and cried, "help me I'm choking!" I doubt you'd find any comfort, if I were to reply; "well, don't worry that's just your opinion.!" Also, I was puzzled by your ironic wobbliness around absolutes. - "I don't speak the truth, in no way." - Is that statement then untrue? Or if it is true, that you do not speak any truths, is that itself then not a truth? You see the bind! What tickles you one day, may not another. But to say that Rich Hall is not funny to you, because he's not funny at all is just nonsense. And evidenced to by all the laughter surrounding his humor on the show. He is particularly funny on QI, though I wouldn't be drawn to his stand-up... as a whole! Someone is not funny because you laugh at them. You laugh at them because you think they're funny. It's all transactional. - And I've seen the interview from which you quote, and it is a good observation of cultural differences. But that's more an overarching trend, and less the individual. There is no doubt that things are humoress. But of course, you may wrestle with personal doubts, as to where you find that humor. Try not to kill things off with absolutes. Let them off! At least then, there's a change they may come back and surprise you. -- Anyway, forgive the wordy response. I considered ending with a compliment, towards something about you I observed in you writing. But I doubt you could agree with me, given your aversion to truth! o.O
The last time I was this early the Earth still had 2 moons.
Cruithne and The Moon...."Fly me to Cruithne and let me play amongst the stars"
Ah the good old days. Now we don't have any.
Ooh, breaking news, we've actually got infinite moons.
@@kidneystone53 Cruithne isn't a moon, it just happens to be in roughly the same orbit as the Earth and also has an orbital period of roughly an Earth year.
Alan Davies: "The earth has one moon which is made of cheese" 😂😂🧀
Just Vin Well played, sir! 🤣
Alan being mocked about humans living on Mars is brilliant
RIP Jeremy Hardy who we only get a brief glimpse of.
Indeed. We miss his wonderful singing voice ;(
I was lucky enough to go to the special I'm Sorry I Haven't A Clue show in Oxford at the beginning of this year that had been planned to be a fund-raiser for him, but turned into a celebration of his work after he passed away. They had a bucket collection that was specifically designed so that all the funds would go to charities that would piss-off the Daily Mail. "It's what he would've wanted" was Jack Dee's announcement!
Oh wow I live in regional Australia and never heard anything about his passing - bloody shame, seemed like a great bloke RIP JH
Jeremy was always a solid, enjoyable guest on this show.
R.I.P.
I’m going to graffiti “Cairns, sister city to a crater” on the welcome to cairns sign.
Nah it is the crater.
Godspeed.
That's almost a good tongue-twister.
Studio|Graham You can hang it on the big fish at Earlville.
Have you done it yet?
4:20 After the Brexit Great Britain will no longer be part of the Eucalyptus Union.
The Aussies don’t hate us THAT much, do they? Not as much as, say, the Scots?
@@CharlieQuartz -the Scots- the SNP
And they'll have no right to complain when there's nothing to clear up their chest cold.
I wouldn’t be surprised if some people voted Leave so we could put Pluto back on the list of planets.
Hearing my city pop up in a video about planets by an overseas television show is unsettling enough without having Fry and Davies make attempts to pronounce it
Sandi is good but I do miss Stephen. He should come back as a guest.
Benjamin Brooks Sandi is awful
Róisín Grant A man, perhaps?
@Róisín Grant John Cleese.
Benjamin Brooks I find Stephan's range of comedy and knowledge to be unbeatable. Far often than not, Sandi tends to get annoyed too easily or goes down into vulgarity (either subtle or blatant)
@@F1fan4eva Definitely trying to herd cats instead of dressing them up in nice clothes and throwing them a tea party.
5:30 the main difference between Sandi and Stephen
I love how exasperated she gets
Alan's face when he is told that Pluto is not a planet 🤣
“We’re sending Porridge to Mars!” Kills me everyone time
Calling Corby a town is a bit of a stretch, should use "shithole" the technical term
Well that's why they named a crater after it.
I'm sure the crater is a significantly nicer place to be
*Porridgehole.
Nice headstock...
Come over to Kettering then mate, see what a shithole really is.
When I'm suuuper old,
I wouldn't mind being stuck in an old folks home with Alan...
Cadeeeeeeth. He’s not wrong 😂😂
Minus five...
0:27 they can determine whether it is in the goldilocks zone
WAHHEY!!
At 7:00 Jupiter is entirely gas, shortly after there is neon rain and Diamonds the size of hotels.
"So how long would a fortnight be" lmao
About 2 weeks or 14 days 🤣
@@gavla-82 on Earth sure, but during the same span of time Jupiter would experience about 19 days, if I did my calculations correctly.
I'm surprised that it was never mentioned that Pluto's 'moon' Charon is also the same size as Pluto itself.
A little over half the size of Pluto actually. But they are more like a "pair of rocks" than a planet with a moon.
@@Grimlock1979 True... also if I recall correctly, Charon more or less rotates around Pluto at about the same speed as Pluto spins. Personally I do like to consider Pluto a planet, even though it's no longer classified as one.
@@coenisgreat They orbit eachother, technically.. Earth and the moon orbit eachother technically, also...
@@BobSmith-rs7tn Well technically they both orbit a point somewhere in between the two objects
The biggest ocean in the Solar System?
Almost straight away I screamed "EUROPA! THE MOON YOU SHALL NOT TOUCH!"
All of the worlds are yours, except Europa, attempt no landings there.
@@vivianfox5115 Where does that come from...? I've heard it before but can't remember where...
André Linoge - it’s from 2010: the year we make contact
@@vivianfox5115 Thank you. 🤗
@@sirandrelefaedelinoge Wasn't it '3001, the Final Odyssey' by Arthur C Clark?
Watching the clip of Alan getting mocked for thinking that humams will be able to leave Earth is so surreal now, considering that there are now legitimate endeavors to colonize the moon and Mars.
Still hasn't happened yet, so mock away.
Robin Brennan i think if they filmed that same episode today; people wouldn’t laugh as much, if not laugh at all because colonizing Mars is an ever growing possibility
@@simonextra9689 While I believe that it may be possible one very distant day, I do not believe that it is something we will see in our lifetime. I would like to be wrong on this.
I feel that they weren't laughing so much at the idea of colonising Mars, and more at the way Alan worded it, to sound as though everyone present in that room would be living on Mars.
Alan expressed it poorly.
What Channel 5 was attempting to get through to him was that when the Sun finally runs out of fuel for nuclear fusion (estimated time of arrival: 5 billion years from now), then it'll expand, as it becomes a Red Giant.
It's not quite known how far the Sun will expand into the Solar System exactly - too many variables involved to be that precise - but Mercury will definitely be consumed by the expanding Sun, and Venus almost certainly.
It might make it out as far as the Earth and eat our planet too.
But, you know, even if the expansion doesn't quite reach out to Earth's orbit, then the planet will be right next to a newly-expanded Red Giant and will be absolutely inhospitable to life.
The seas and the atmosphere would boil off, leaving Earth somewhat like Mercury is - a barren rock that's some 400C in the day and approaching Absolute Zero by night. Indeed, the only thing that could handle such a wide range of temperatures is a barren rock.
So the notion is that if humans haven't left this planet in 5 billion years' time, then we'll be forced to leave by the expanding Sun.
To be honest, Mars is probably still too close to this larger Sun as well, but at least you're moving outwards to a safe distance. And beyond that is the asteroid belt and then Jupiter and then Saturn - gas giants that the video covers as being impossible to live upon - so places to live quickly run out after Mars.
Though, this "thought experiment" is a bit moot, upon closer inspection.
I mean, we're talking about 5 billion years from now. And it's been 5 billion years-ish from the beginnings of the Solar System to today. About as much time left, as has already passed.
This is a ridiculously long time and the idea that humanity would still be humanity in 5 billion years' time is frankly impossible. If we haven't long since gone "trans-human" with advanced technologies by our own steam, then evolution by natural selection will have warped what used to be us into something completely unrecognisable by then, anyway.
Again, we're talking about a stretch of time - "deep future" - that's as deep as the "deep history" that got the Solar System to this point in the first place. The whole story of evolution up this point repeated again, but starting at this point in the vast journey, not at the very beginnings of life itself.
And if you consider technological advance over the last century - and the fact that it naturally picks up pace over time too - then it's already completely unimaginable to contemplate what advanced technologies humanity would have a 100 years from now.
So imagine technology 5 billion years into the future?
Probably not just "indistinguishable from magic" but likely closer to "indistinguishable from omnipotence".
So "stellar engineers" could, by that point, probably just pop over to the Sun and "fix" it, so that it doesn't expand in the first place.
Or, you know, everyone (who aren't "humanity" anymore) lives on the inside of a Dyson Sphere that's been placed at exactly the right distance from the expanded Red Giant (and the stellar engineers just keep it like that forever more).
If you don't know what a Dyson Sphere is, then look it up to realise how ridiculous a "tall order" that is - but, hey, 5 billion years' worth of technological progress? Child's play to the trans-human race.
Or, you know, we possibly vote for an Orange Man who launches a nuclear war, just because he's exactly that stupid, that wipes out all life on the planet next week, because folks still believe in religious fairy tales and can't get over the fact that some human beings look a bit different to them, and they want a tax cut to be able to afford the extortionate healthcare that wouldn't be so extortionate, if they weren't so obsessed with tax cuts in the first place.
One or the other. Chaos is, unfortunately, intrinsically unpredictable. So you never can tell.
Alan defending Pluto is all of us, really.
Not me. I don't argue the facts.
@@CloudsGirl7 my apologies.
@@CloudsGirl7 don't pick on Pluto because he's small
Defending the underdog???
There are three criteria for determining a planet in our lovely Solar System: 1) It orbits the Sun 🌞. 2) Its mass is such that it has formed into a round-ish shape. 3) It has cleared its neighbourhood/local area of other objects. Pluto was reclassified because it hasn't cleared its neighbourhood of other objects.
Nx Doyle but it was reclassified as a dwarf planet, so still a planet.
Just not a very large one.
In fact that will be my argument from now on, cause in this day an age people are constantly afraid of saying something that might be offensive. So if people argue that being a dwarf means that it’s not a planet... does that apply to other dwarfs too? I’ll just toss that one out there for you to think about ;)
Jesper Ohlrich
Yes, it does. ;)
Earth hasn't cleared it's orbital neighborhood. Earth is not a planet. D:
@@ThatDamnPandaKai Yes it has, yes it is.
I do enjoy being a nitpicker sometimes. Stephen said that there are four rocky planets and four gas giants. How delightfully old school he is. In recent decades astronomers have come to understand that there are only two gas giants - Jupiter and Saturn, and are quite different to Uranus and Neptune which are now classed as ice giants.
According to the current writings from Nasa the ice giants are a form of gas giant. The report I read was dated Feb 2019, so I guess things may have changed, although the NASA website has them as Gas Giants but this is a much more simplistic (made for public consumption) source than the research paper I read.
Jonathan Thorpe Because they were classed as gas giants for a century, and the understanding that they are not is less than 20 years old, we are in a transition period. Also they do have thick enough atmosphere’s for some people to feel justified in continuing to use classifications that they learned as kids. However, it should be noted that their atmosphere’s do not extend more than 10 to 20 percent of their diameter. Like the Earth, and unlike Jupiter and Saturn, the largest part of the planet’s interior is an extensive mantle, although, unlike the Earth’s fluid rock, in the case of Neptune and Uranus, their mantle consists of fluid ices.
Pluto’s demotion as a planet is similar in that while it is not classified as a planet, it is still easy to find references that still call it a planet. Likewise Ceres was reclassified as a dwarf planet, but people still refer to it as an asteroid, and because it resides within the asteroid belt, there is some justification in that. In the case of Uranus and Neptune, there is less reason to cling to tradition, as the study of exoplanets has revealed that these mid-sized planets are possibly the most common class of planet and exist within a certain restricted size range that suggests their origin and growth during the formative stages of a solar system is quite different to that experienced by gas giants. If so, then a classification system that clearly isolates them from gas giants like Saturn and Jupiter is more than just a simple matter of their interior composition.
It seems that there are 5 distinct classes of planets - rocky terrestrials, super-Earths (of which there are zero known in our solar system), gas giants, Neptunes (which we have 2 of in our solar system both of which are largely slushy ices with ice/rock cores. Unfortunately we do not know the composition of exoplanet Neptune sized objects so we don’t know if the ice giant model is typical). The fifth class is dwarf planets which our solar system seems to have large numbers, but none have been discovered yet around other stars. As we cannot resolve objects that small yet, the absence of discovery is presumed to say nothing about their abundance (or possible lack of it) elsewhere.
@@artistjoh I'm not reading that. I'll stick to getting my info from NASA as opposed to 'Person on internet'.
Jonathan Thorpe I get my information from the same sources as NASA does, research papers. My main sources of information are reported in journals such as Nature, and science news such as Phys.Org and in current encyclopedias. As Wikipedia states, “Neptune, like Uranus, is an ice giant, a subclass of giant planet, because they are smaller and have higher concentrations of volatiles than Jupiter and Saturn.” Don’t be such a smart a**. Note that is says “subset of giant planet” not “subset of gas giant.” Perhaps you should do more research rather than being a smart a**.
@@artistjoh why the anger? If you use NASA sources why can't I? I'm not here for an argument, I know I'm correct so there's no point. Bye.
a day on Venus lasts longer than a year on Venus!
Actually pluto passes every single qualification for being a planet except for 1. It hasn't cleared its orbit of debris
And no, most asteroids would not qualify as planets, even minor ones, because they dont have enough mass to pull themselves into spheres under their own gravity.
Actually, two of the three criteria that the IAU came up with are crap.
One says that a planet has to orbit the Sun. Not just a star, but our star. That means that by definition, none of the exoplanets is a planet.
The other is the "cleared its neighborhood". How cleared is "cleared"? The IAU doesn't say. How big is a planet's "neighborhood"? Again, the IAU doesn't say.
Doesn’t that disqualify every planet with moon(s) as a planet then
@@almostfm The IAU refers specifically to the sun, because the criteria you're referring to are specifically for what qualifies a celestial body as a planet *of the solar system*. Exoplanets, by definition, are not planets of the solar system.
Now, how big is a planet's neighbourhood? Their neighbourhood is their orbital path. More accurately, an area around their orbital path which, if anything else was within that area, it would succumb quite heavily to gravitational forces from the celestial body in question, or vise versa. "Cleared its neighbourhood" is not hard to understand. It's simple. "Is the celestial body the dominant gravitational influence within its orbital path?" It not only asks if its the most massive object within its neighbourhood, but also if the combined mass of everything in its neighbourhood doesn't outweigh it. This doesn't take natural satellites into account, so Charon being quite large isn't the reason Pluto is a dwarf planet. A significant portion of Pluto's orbital path, however, is within the Kuiper belt. Its neighbourhood is shared by millions and millions of asteroids, as well as other dwarf planets of similar size and mass.
If a planet of comparable mass to Earth were to replace Pluto, the Kuiper belt would eventually disappear, or at least the inner edges of it would be cut back quite a ways. Much of it would be ejected. A ton of it would collide with the planet. Some of it might even become moons of the planet. It might take a few dozen orbits, which would take thousands of years, and it would still be classed a dwarf planet until its neighbourhood was clear, but the point is, it could clear its neighbourhood. Pluto is not massive enough to ever clear its neighbourhood. At least, not within any reasonable amount of time. It's been around for 4-ish billion years, and the Kuiper belt is not showing any sign of damage. Meanwhile, the 8 planets aren't being shrouded by the asteroid belt, because they had no trouble cutting it down to size.
@@PyroOfZen How many times, since the planets formed, has Pluto circled the sun? Earth has swept its orbit some 4.5 billion times compared to Pluto's 18 million or so, less than .5% the opportunity Earth has had to sweep its neighborhood, which is also a hell of a lot smaller than Pluto's. For a group of scientists, the IAU have allowed their criteria to be extremely biased against any smaller planet in a more distant orbit.
Put a naval officer in charge of a dinghy and the boat will sail well. Put a toddler in charge of a battleship and it won't. Give the kid a chance to grow up and learn the ropes, and don't congratulate the inner planets whose orbits were mostly cleared by Jupiter.
Pluto hasn't cleared its neighborhood because there is nothing to clear. We should send a few asteroids Pluto's way so it will have a chance.
Go home, Pluto. This isn't for you.
Dammit, Ceres! Now's not the time!
Not like a priest to suggest a holiday enjoying uranus.
Well the big bang theory (not the show) was proposed by a priest. Uranus fits well in a big bang.
They don't like to mix work with pleasure.
You won the internet, Dom.
Well, he is gay 🙂
@@unsuccessfullyjari9p90998p nplllöllpö9o9ll9ll99lkplopklk9ovonnpln olp9ö
9:15 "By no criterion on which planets are judged, could Pluto be said to be a planet."
*makes the klaxon noise*
Actually, Pluto fits two of the three criteria to be a planet. So up yer Khyber, Stephen.
Is a dwarf human still a human ... because Pluto is a dwarf planet?
@@rvllctt871 Nope, dwarves are classed as "nonhumans". Like elves.
Pluto's orbit is out of synch with the eight planets. It's just one of the largest and closest of the Ort Cloud.
That American accent, Stephen - 👌
Stephen's 'American' accent sounds like a Missourian trying to sound like a Californian.
Love how Phil Jupitus went from NMTB to QI in a big old hoody to wearing gentleman suits 😂
5:23 "How has this happened to me?" Is perfect
After a few years I'm starting to believe Alan is very stoned during some of these
And Stephen, during a couple of the earlier episodes. :)
I'm so glad Rich is our American Ambassador over there. I identify with him so much
I'm an American and I just don't find him that funny, I've given him a fair chance I think, and it may be because he's surrounded by such comedy greats that his style can't really flourish, but I just can't get into him
@@termeownator hes just worse at playing a fool than Alan is and his jokes arent jokes he just says random shit to get the occasional shock laugh..
@@jeroen92 yeah I guess that mite be it. I'm not really a fan of any Americans on QI, though I stopped watching after Stephen left. The only other American that comes to mind is that black fella (I'm assuming he's American). He's just not funny in the least
A question for any Astronomers or Physicists. The red spot on Jupiter is, from what I've been taught and read about, A raging storm thats been going for as long as we've been able to observe it. My question is, Does anyone have any idea when this storm will blow itself out? Or are the conditions on Jupiter just so, it will just keep on raging?
The Great Red Spot has been observed since 5 September 1831. By 1879 over 60 observations were recorded. After it came into prominence in 1879, it has been under continuous observation. The reason the storm has continued to exist for centuries is that there is no planetary surface (only a liquid core of hydrogen) to provide friction; circulating gas eddies persist for a very long time in the atmosphere because there is nothing to oppose their angular momentum.
In the 21st century, the Great Red Spot was seen to be shrinking in size. At the start of 2004, it had approximately half the longitudinal extent it had had a century ago, when it reached a size of 40,000 km (25,000 mi), about three times the diameter of Earth. At the present rate of reduction, it would become circular by 2040. It is not known how long the spot will last, or whether the change is a result of normal fluctuations. In 2019, the Great Red Spot began "flaking" at its edge, with fragments of the storm breaking off and dissipating. The shrinking and "flaking" fueled concern from some astronomers that the Great Red Spot could dissipate within 20 years.
However, other astronomers believe that the apparent size of the Great Red Spot reflects its cloud coverage and not the size of the actual, underlying vortex, and they also believe that the flaking events can be explained by interactions with other cyclones or anticyclones, including incomplete absorptions of smaller systems; if this is the case, this would mean that the Great Red Spot is not in danger of dissipating.
@@lanapowell - Wow! Thankyou for your reply. Its a breath of fresh air to get such an informed response from someone on UA-cam! 😂
At the time Alan Davies said that Pluto was a planet he was in fact correct. Although many astronomers were saying that it was only a minor planet at most it was still officially classified as a planet so Alan should not have been penalised for his answer. It wasn't until a few years later that it was officially reclassified as a minor planet.
There are still 9. It would of been 10 if they allowed Pluto.
There are 2 or 3 agencies looking for our 9th planet.
They say that things happen in our solar system that can only happen if there is a 9th planet on a huge orbit that is currently outside our observation but strong evidence say that it exists.
~7:29 once they figure out how to keep Jupiter from crushing any probe that dares to brave its atmosphere, they need to fit it with one of those 360 degree video cameras
"The great advantage of earth. Is that you can survive on it"
Nice reference to F Scott Fitzgerald’s “Diamond as Big as the Ritz”
Konstantin Batygin and Michael E. Brown argue the existence of a ninth planet beyond the dwarf planet called Pluto.
Imaine trying to bring a Jovian diamond through customs
I always watch these compilations to the very end, so i can hear Sandy complain
QI is my favourite TV Ceres!
My man Alan saw the future, we are going to live on mars😂
He’s probably right - over the next billion years, an increase in solar activity will make the surface of the earth uninhabitable, but Mars will warm up, giving it at least the potential for human habitation (if we can overcome issues like not having a Van Allen belt).
@@rojh9351 We’ll be on Mars a lot sooner than a billion years lol. In a billion years we’ll probably either have discovered faster than light travel, or gone extinct. Getting swallowed by the sun is not something we’ll have to worry about.
@@MerkhVision I don’t think anything I wrote a year ago precludes us from going to Mars before then, I just meant that it’s a likely place for humanity’s descendants to still be able to live within the solar system after the Earth is no longer habitable.
8:04 Lead, not aluminium. Aluminium melts at 660 C and would therefore be a solid on Venus at 460 C.
8:00 the surface of Venus is not hot enough to melt aluminium. It's about 460 degrees C at the surface, and doesn't vary much due to the thick atmosphere. Aluminium melts at about 660 degrees C. However, lead would melt on Venus, its melting point being about 327 degrees C, as would zinc with its melting point of about 419 degrees C.
Pressure.
@@froggy187888 You need pretty extreme pressures to appreciably change the melting point of metals. In any case, higher pressure would simply raise the melting point even more. Aluminium definitely will not melt in the ambient conditions on the surface of Venus.
Alan's role in QI seems to be akin to Pooh Bear. Not "book smart", but with an innate sense that initially seems comical but has an almost Taoist wisdom when considered more deeply.
"I like powdered custard" - Lao Tzu
as an american baseball fan it makes me weirdly excited to see a british guy wearing a shirt that says fenway park
One of my neighbours has a bumper sticker "Save Fenway Park". I'm in Melbourne Australia.
3:20--Alan may not be far wrong. As the sun evolves from a yellow star to a red giant, earth's water will boil away, the planet will become uninhabitable and, as the "red giant" expands outward, the innermost planets will be obliterated, (which will happen, eventually, to Mars and probably outward past the asteroid belt toward Jupiteras well. Carl Sagan, the exo-biologist who produced the gold anodized disc on the Voyagers of the 1970s, and who wrote Dragons of Eden, Broca's Brain, the Cosmos series, the novel Contact and whose protégé has upgraded the Cosmos series to incorporate newer findings and information, expounded upon this possibility.
Saturn. Nothing beats a sunset or sunrise on Saturn. All those rings act like prisms. Astonishingly beautiful.
0:38 It was July, not June.
"hahahahahaaahhhhahhhhhhhhhhh... minus 5"
Doesn't Uranus spin almost 90 degrees on it's side, making day 42 years? Or does the planet rotation define it regardless of the sun's position in the sky?
Got it in one. A day is rotational. Just like how in summer on earth towards the poles the sun stays in the sky for 24 hours.
If astronauts found porridge and three bears on mars then they would be in the goldilocks zone.
I don't care what anybody else thinks.... you just won the entire internet. Beautiful. Just... beautiful
Ronika Merl Thank you 😀
Definitely 5 points for that.
that first clip feels like a QI episode that you watch in your dreams
Despite its name Uranus is an Ice giant and not as the name might suggest a gas giant.
Pluto is the Rhode Island of the planets. Or the Monaco of the planets, for you Eurocentric folks.
Neon in the liquid state is colorless. Why would it be bright red as rain on Jupiter?
I can’t recall a single time that Phil Jupitus has ever made me crack a smile, let alone laugh. In fact it’s quite the opposite... he stops me from laughing.
At least I'm not the only one. He has ruined so many good episodes of different shows for me.
Add Carr too...
The Cairns, Canberra aussie accent he did was on point🤣
First time hearing someone that isn’t aussie pronounce it properly instead of Can-BERRA
Allen is actually right about Mars. When the sun eventually expands into a red giant Earth will be consumed, but Mars will be in the new goldilocks zone... until the sun then explodes into a planetary nova a few million years latter. Then we best be gone from the Sol system proper.
I don't think humans will have to worry about that. Much sooner than most humans expect, they will already be an intergalactic race. They need to change a bit first, but it certainly won't be billions of years away.
Bold of you to assume humanity is going to be around when the sun expands.
@@ShizuruNakatsu: ...What do you mean, "they"?
@@CaptHayfever Reptilian overlord disguised as a human called "Diana Cavendish." Retract your comment before she sees it and has to eradicate the witnesses.
I'm not so sure about that. Even so, it won't bring back Mars's magnetic field, and without that, there can be no atmosphere. So humans (or whatever we evolve into, or whatever takes over from us) would still be pretty screwed.
It’s possible that it will become nine planets again because later in the series we learned that our moon might be considered a planet in a binary system with the Earth.
@ 5:13 ... it's obviously Telly Tubby Custard.. c'mon you are the BBC allegedly....
QI: A day lasts longer than a year on Venus! '🤯'
The way Alan pronounced Charleston is a remarkable facsimile to how it would sound if it were said by a 'Cajun of the bayou. Not quite the right State, but pretty close.
Best of David Mitchell more like!
One day we will holiday in the Solar System. And things just won't be valued quite the same any more.
Wow, David looks quite hot in his purple shirt...
The 10:30 cutaway edit to panel members reactions is so badly done. Captures them from a totally different section.
3:24 Wait, Alan actually has a desk?! Do they ALL have school desks?!
The term that Stephen Fry is looking for is called a planetoid.
it's actually a plutoid.
5:23 I giggled
Don't tell the Americans about those diamonds on Jupiter.
You know what they're like! ;-)
nah theyd think that the black stuff is oil and theyd get distracted
Mariah Carey already has already booked a ticket. :)
The moon landing was July not June Stephen. :-)
The recording of it happened in June on the stage, then they released it in July for the people, duh!
The 2 dislikes are from Pluto and Eucalyptus
The Pluto stuff was a bit sloppy. The IAU declassified it (presumably shortly before that episode), but it was a controversial decision, because it does actually meet 2 of the 3 criteria for a planet, and the 3rd (clearing its vicinity) is ill-defined.
It's pretty well defined and Pluto very clearly fails it.
If Pluto had actually cleared its vicinity, then the Kuiper Belt wouldn't exist. The Kuiper Belt is literally hundreds of times larger and has hundreds of times the number of objects as the Asteroid Belt. Not only that, Pluto is smaller than Ceres.
By literally every measure, Ceres has more claim to be a planet than Pluto does, but even Ceres fails so Pluto *DEFINITELY* fails.
PokemonTom09 I think the bigger issue is that Pluto is a binary system. Charon and Pluto orbit the same barycenter, which isn’t located inside Pluto.
I think the last nail in Pluto's coffin is that its orbit is not in the same plain as the other planets'. And yes, it is not logical to pick Pluto as a planet while there are many similar bodies in the outer solar system.
When something is dug up on this planet, we say that it has been unearthed, if the same was done on another planet, would it be e g Unuranused ?
You can’t dig up anything on an ice giant or gas giant. There’s no solid surface you can reach.
venus is not hot enough for liquid aluminum. the usual element referenced is lead.
one point USA.
1:34 David is right. A lot of people here in Australia are pissed off at the English for re-naming most places here after their counties, cities, towns and people.
Probably most places on earth are pissed off about that
Charleston was fucking slaughtered as far as Pronunciation goes
God, David is so much skinnier now! Good for him.
There are three errors In the first clip, which is easily the most I've ever picked up from an episode of QI. Stephen, uncharacteristically, says June 1969 in reference to the Apollo 11 mission, which took place entirely in July. He goes on to pronounce Houston as he did in his 50 States series, namely as "HOO-stuhn" as opposed to "HYOO-stuhn". But that's no biggie, because Houstonians themselves pronounce it "YOOZ-tuhn". Then again they also pronounce oil as awl and some say dishwarsher.
As for Martian crater nomenclature, it may be that certain-sized craters have to be named after towns with sub-100,000 populations, but not overall. For example, the Opportunity rover spent quite a bit of time at Endeavour crater, named after the bark used by James Cook on his first voyage to map the transit of Venus across the Sun. On the way back, Cook charted the east coast of Australia. All the points around the edge of the Endeavour crater are named after the places named by Cook during his exploration and mapping.
Yes, well, I don't think the French pronounce the name of their capital city as _pérris_ so Houston can be pronounced Throat Warbler Mangrove by Stephen for all I care.
After New Horizon's visit to Pluto, some of Stephen's diatribe against Pluto needs revision...
There’s planet Hollywood ☝️😏
Stephen's American accent is so obviously British it hurts
It's no worse than the awful 'British' accents that Americans attempt.
Juneish 1969 by which you mean the 20th of July 1969 is the day man landed on the moon QI really.
It's only 20 days away from being June, and therefore easily meets the definition of "Juneish".
@@gwishart indeed
Alan gets punished for trying to help 🤔😂😂
I mean, if we're being technical, should Pluto even be in this compilation?
It's still a discussion regarding planets, over whether or not this icy ball (practically a comet, without a highly elliptic orbit) is a full-fledged planet. (Which it isn't.)
Plus, I guess it's delicious to drink the tears of the butthurt losers still upset about the demotion, as if it meant Pluto was any less special, or had disappeared altogether. 😆
The main question was regarding how many planets there are and Pluto just happened to be a part of the discussion, so the answer is yes.
Eris is a dwarf planet that is 97% as big as Pluto and has a higher mass
Allen's potatohead looks like frankfurter
"In just seven days, I can make you a maaaaaaan..."
Pluto and Charon is more accurate than just Pluto.
Is that the same documentary karl pilkington watched about the sun exploding
And we're still searching for that ninth planet
Canberra has a population greater than 100,000. Even when the crater was named in 1979...
damnit sandy, you mustnt interrupt stephen mid rant.
There are actually nine. Planet 9 has been found by its gravitational impact on Transneptunal objects.
Edie Wilde really
It hasn't been found, it's only a hypothesis.
Edie Wilde - It's not been "found", but heavily theorized to exist just no visual confirmation. Also, another theory as to the gravitational effect on the planets is a black hole that suddenly appeared the size of 6 earths (but the size of like a baseball iirc) and then dissipated. I'm extremely rusty on the latter but for the most part I think that's another solid theory
If Jupiter is 'entirely gas' how does it have a magnetic field ?
it asked nicely, and god gave it one
I believe there is debate about it having a solid metal core , but it would be tiny compared to the rest of Jupiter's mass. I think we are just not really sure because matter does funny things under that amount of pressure.
@@JanglesPrime999 :-) It's impossible for a body that size not to be continually eating asteroids etc. I have been trying to get my little head around cosmic magnetism, without much success. In theory for example the earths core is way too hot to be a magnet, ditto i guess for Jupiter. So i lean toward rotating metal in a solar current rather than 'natural' magnet (?). Yes i have read about 'metalic hydrogen' for example as a way to explain the enormous magnetism of the sun, but just as obviously it aint made just of gas. Tnx for your reply :-)
You don't need an Earth-like core to have a magnetic field. The sun has a magnetic field and it is made out of almost entirely hydrogen. Also, the rotating solid core of the Earth is not what creates our magnetic field. It's the convection of the molten outer core layer which creates the magnetic field.
So it's perfectly reasonable for a gas giant to have a magnetic field.
There is always more than one way to skin a cat, as they say.
@@TheBeeFactory Cheers :-) Yes I was quite taken by the convection theory, till I heard the alternate theory of spin in an electric field...(just like electric motors).( possibly accounting for the unexplained rotation speed of galaxies, without inventing dark something or other). There are also Quasars and Black holes which also must be giant magnets (?)