In this enlightening Q&A episode of Space Nuts, join host Andrew Dunkley and astronomer Fred Watson Watson as they field a range of intriguing questions from listeners. From the hypothetical concept of dark matter stars to the mysteries of dormant comets and the mechanics of gravitational slingshots, this episode is packed with engaging discussions that spark curiosity in the cosmos.
In this episode:
- An exploration of dark matter stars: What are they, and how could they hypothetically shine without fusion?
- Understanding dormant comets: What defines them, and how can we identify these ancient celestial bodies?
- The mechanics behind gravitational slingshots: How do spacecraft gain speed from planetary gravity, and what role does the planet's rotation play?
- The rise of smart telescopes: Are these automated devices a boon for budding astronomers, or do they undermine traditional astrophotography?
- Personal experiences with smart telescopes and their impact on learning and engagement in astronomy.
Resources & Links:
- [Dark Matter and Dark Energy Overview]( NASA (https://www.nasa.gov/feature/dark-energy-and-dark-matter) ) - Insights into these elusive components of the universe.
- [NASA's Comet Research]( NASA Comet Missions (https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/comets/index.html) ) - Discoveries and ongoing studies of comets in our solar system.
- [Gravitational Slingshots Explained]( NASA's Gravitational Assist (https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/resources/679/gravitational-assist/) ) - How spacecraft use gravity to navigate the solar system efficiently.
Join Andrew and Fred Watson as they unravel the complexities of space science, encouraging listeners to explore the universe and engage with the wonders of astronomy. Don't forget to submit your questions for future episodes!
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/space-nuts-astronomy-insights-cosmic-discoveries--2631155/support (https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/space-nuts-astronomy-insights-cosmic-discoveries--2631155/support?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=rss) .
(00:00) This is Space Nuts and we've got questions from our audience
(01:57) Frederick: Greens Goddess started following me some time ago
(02:47) Casey from Colorado says dark matter stars could be incredibly bright
(09:13) Our next question comes from Michael about dark matter
(10:27) What's a dormant comet and how do you detect them
(16:28) Just wondering if you could explain the orbital mechanics behind Slingshots
(22:32) Smart telescopes allow beginners to dive straight into astrophotography
(28:56) Jason: Is there a privacy infringement there? Maybe, yeah
(30:03) Astronomer Fred Watson answers your Space Nuts questions
(32:16) Space Nick Nuts podcast available at Apple Podcasts and Spotify
Episode link: https://play.headliner.app/episode/34603359?utm_source=youtube
00:00:00 --> 00:00:02 Hi there. Thank you for joining us. This
00:00:02 --> 00:00:05 is Space Nuts and it's a Q&A edition. My
00:00:05 --> 00:00:07 name is Andrew Dunley. What's Q&A stand
00:00:07 --> 00:00:10 for? I don't know. But we've got uh
00:00:10 --> 00:00:12 questions from our audience which we
00:00:12 --> 00:00:16 will answer. Q. Oh, there it is. Um
00:00:16 --> 00:00:18 Casey wants to know about dark matter
00:00:18 --> 00:00:20 stars even though they don't exist and
00:00:20 --> 00:00:23 we can't answer the question. Uh Michael
00:00:23 --> 00:00:26 um he's sent one in about dormant comets
00:00:26 --> 00:00:28 uh comets which I found most intriguing.
00:00:28 --> 00:00:30 So, uh, be interesting to discover what
00:00:30 --> 00:00:33 that's about. Uh, Derek is asking about
00:00:33 --> 00:00:36 gravitational slingshots.
00:00:36 --> 00:00:40 And Jason is asking what Fred thinks of
00:00:40 --> 00:00:44 the new wave of smart telescopes. Ooh.
00:00:44 --> 00:00:46 Uh, we'll talk about all of that on this
00:00:46 --> 00:00:48 episode of Space Nuts.
00:00:48 --> 00:00:53 >> 15 seconds. Guidance is internal. 10 9
00:00:53 --> 00:00:55 Ignition sequence start.
00:00:55 --> 00:00:58 >> Space Nuts. 5 4 3 2
00:00:58 --> 00:01:01 >> 1 2 3 4 5 5 4 3 2 1
00:01:01 --> 00:01:02 >> space notes
00:01:02 --> 00:01:04 >> astronauts reported feels good.
00:01:04 --> 00:01:07 >> And he's back again to try and sort all
00:01:07 --> 00:01:09 that out. It's Professor Fred Watson,
00:01:09 --> 00:01:11 astronomer at large. Hello Fred.
00:01:11 --> 00:01:13 >> Hello Andrew. Very good to see you
00:01:13 --> 00:01:13 again.
00:01:14 --> 00:01:16 >> And you too. It's been minutes.
00:01:16 --> 00:01:19 >> It has. Um I I might add a postcript to
00:01:20 --> 00:01:22 um when we recorded the last session.
00:01:22 --> 00:01:24 >> Yeah. Um, I just got back from the
00:01:24 --> 00:01:26 annual science meeting of the
00:01:26 --> 00:01:28 Astronomical Society of Australia and I
00:01:28 --> 00:01:31 meant to mention that uh an old friend
00:01:32 --> 00:01:34 of Space Nuts was there and I had dinner
00:01:34 --> 00:01:37 with him um on the first night and that
00:01:37 --> 00:01:39 is Peter Vean who is our wow
00:01:39 --> 00:01:42 >> our contact in the world of Mond
00:01:42 --> 00:01:44 modified Newtonian dynamics.
00:01:44 --> 00:01:45 >> Yeah.
00:01:45 --> 00:01:46 >> So terrific.
00:01:46 --> 00:01:49 >> Nice to nice to do. He's still monding,
00:01:49 --> 00:01:51 although um I think he's he's I think
00:01:51 --> 00:01:53 he's uh had some hurdles to overcome.
00:01:53 --> 00:01:56 So, we might have to do an update on
00:01:56 --> 00:01:58 that down the track. Well, while we're
00:01:58 --> 00:02:00 sending shoutouts, I'll send a shout out
00:02:00 --> 00:02:04 to an Instagram um presence person named
00:02:04 --> 00:02:07 the Greens Goddess, uh a female golfer
00:02:07 --> 00:02:10 who uh started following me, I don't
00:02:10 --> 00:02:12 know, some time ago, and I thought I'll
00:02:12 --> 00:02:14 do the honor of following her back. and
00:02:14 --> 00:02:16 uh she posted a video of her swing the
00:02:16 --> 00:02:19 other day and I noted a couple of
00:02:19 --> 00:02:21 issues with it. So I I sent her a note
00:02:21 --> 00:02:23 and said, "Look, you got a bit of a
00:02:23 --> 00:02:25 reverse pivot going there.
00:02:26 --> 00:02:29 >> Try try this drill to sort it out."
00:02:29 --> 00:02:30 Anyway, she sent a note back and said,
00:02:30 --> 00:02:32 "Oh, that's very helpful. By the way,
00:02:32 --> 00:02:34 big fan of space nuts."
00:02:34 --> 00:02:36 >> Okay, that's nice.
00:02:36 --> 00:02:37 >> Might have been why she followed me in
00:02:38 --> 00:02:39 the first place, but anyway,
00:02:39 --> 00:02:41 >> good on the green goddess. I like that.
00:02:41 --> 00:02:44 >> Good for her. All right. Um, shall we
00:02:44 --> 00:02:46 answer some questions, Fred?
00:02:46 --> 00:02:47 >> Yes, we might as well, might we? Now
00:02:47 --> 00:02:48 we're here.
00:02:48 --> 00:02:50 >> Let's get into our first one. And it
00:02:50 --> 00:02:52 comes from one of our regular
00:02:52 --> 00:02:54 contributors. This is Casey.
00:02:54 --> 00:02:56 >> Hello, Fred. We are Drew Q. This is
00:02:56 --> 00:02:59 Casey from Colorado.
00:02:59 --> 00:03:01 I know that dark matter stars are
00:03:01 --> 00:03:04 completely hypothetical at this point.
00:03:04 --> 00:03:06 I've read before that they would be some
00:03:06 --> 00:03:08 of the brightest objects in the sky if
00:03:08 --> 00:03:10 they do exist, though. I was wondering
00:03:10 --> 00:03:12 if you could please explain why that is
00:03:12 --> 00:03:15 and also how they can get so hot without
00:03:15 --> 00:03:17 any fusion. Hope you're both well and
00:03:18 --> 00:03:20 thanks for the podcast.
00:03:20 --> 00:03:21 >> Thank you, Casey. I just knocked
00:03:21 --> 00:03:23 everything over on my desk, but um it'll
00:03:23 --> 00:03:27 it'll wash out. Um dark matter stars. I
00:03:27 --> 00:03:30 think I think somebody's brought these
00:03:30 --> 00:03:33 up once before if I'm correct in my
00:03:33 --> 00:03:36 thinking, but um maybe maybe we should
00:03:36 --> 00:03:37 start by trying to explain what they're
00:03:37 --> 00:03:39 supposed to be.
00:03:39 --> 00:03:43 Yes. Well, that's right. It's um uh I
00:03:43 --> 00:03:45 mean the first of all, dark matter is
00:03:45 --> 00:03:47 still hypothesized really
00:03:47 --> 00:03:49 notwithstanding uh what we're just
00:03:49 --> 00:03:52 saying about um Peter Vean that is an
00:03:52 --> 00:03:54 alternative theory to try and account
00:03:54 --> 00:03:59 for the uh the low access the um the way
00:03:59 --> 00:04:02 uh the galaxies tell us that there is
00:04:02 --> 00:04:05 something there that we can't see. uh um
00:04:05 --> 00:04:07 he his uh version of that is something
00:04:07 --> 00:04:10 called mod modified Newtonian dynamics
00:04:10 --> 00:04:12 that suggests that accelerations
00:04:12 --> 00:04:14 uh do not follow the normal Newtonian
00:04:14 --> 00:04:17 rules at very low levels. I think I
00:04:17 --> 00:04:19 think that's going into doubt though
00:04:19 --> 00:04:21 now. So I think I suspect that dark
00:04:21 --> 00:04:26 matter is um is basically
00:04:26 --> 00:04:29 uh consolidating its position as the
00:04:29 --> 00:04:31 number one theory for why galaxies don't
00:04:31 --> 00:04:33 just fly apart because they've got all
00:04:33 --> 00:04:35 this stuff in them that we call dark
00:04:35 --> 00:04:37 matter. So I think it's true to say um
00:04:37 --> 00:04:40 that despite a few people looking in
00:04:40 --> 00:04:42 other directions, most of the scientific
00:04:42 --> 00:04:45 community believes that we are we are in
00:04:45 --> 00:04:47 a universe that's whose matter content
00:04:47 --> 00:04:49 is dominated by something that we can't
00:04:49 --> 00:04:52 see sort of outweighs normal matter by 5
00:04:52 --> 00:04:53 to one.
00:04:53 --> 00:04:53 >> Yeah.
00:04:53 --> 00:04:55 >> Uh and it's probably some sort of
00:04:55 --> 00:04:57 subatomic particle that we just have not
00:04:58 --> 00:05:01 uh come to grips with yet. Now once you
00:05:01 --> 00:05:05 accept the idea of new species of
00:05:05 --> 00:05:08 subatomic particles that only interact
00:05:08 --> 00:05:11 with uh everything else through gravity,
00:05:11 --> 00:05:13 they don't interact through
00:05:13 --> 00:05:15 electromagnetic radiation or any other
00:05:16 --> 00:05:18 kind of uh particle physics. It's only
00:05:18 --> 00:05:20 gravity that lets us know that these
00:05:20 --> 00:05:23 things uh these dark matter particles
00:05:23 --> 00:05:26 are there hypothesized still but likely
00:05:26 --> 00:05:28 to be there. uh and it's their own
00:05:28 --> 00:05:30 gravitational attraction that stops
00:05:30 --> 00:05:32 galaxies falling apart or flying apart
00:05:32 --> 00:05:34 because they're rotating too quickly.
00:05:34 --> 00:05:36 >> So that's that's what dark matter is.
00:05:36 --> 00:05:42 Now um on that bare framework or
00:05:42 --> 00:05:44 foundation scientists have built up some
00:05:44 --> 00:05:46 models of what dark matter particles
00:05:46 --> 00:05:51 might be. And um in particular there is
00:05:51 --> 00:05:55 an idea that if dark matter particles
00:05:55 --> 00:05:59 come together then a bit like matter and
00:05:59 --> 00:06:03 antimatter they would annihilate and
00:06:03 --> 00:06:07 basically produce radiation.
00:06:07 --> 00:06:09 And that's the idea of a dark matter
00:06:09 --> 00:06:11 star that you've got a hypothetical
00:06:11 --> 00:06:15 object u bigger than your average solar
00:06:15 --> 00:06:17 system. So they're very large.
00:06:17 --> 00:06:21 >> Wow. uh made of dark matter. Uh but what
00:06:21 --> 00:06:23 makes them shine is the dark matter
00:06:23 --> 00:06:27 particles self annihilating.
00:06:27 --> 00:06:31 Uh and there are some pundits who
00:06:31 --> 00:06:33 believe
00:06:33 --> 00:06:36 that the very first stars that formed
00:06:36 --> 00:06:38 when the universe was in its infancy
00:06:38 --> 00:06:41 were actually dark matter stars. uh were
00:06:41 --> 00:06:44 these ones that are super bright in the
00:06:44 --> 00:06:47 sense that they emit a large amount of
00:06:47 --> 00:06:49 radiation,
00:06:49 --> 00:06:52 >> but not super bright in a way that you
00:06:52 --> 00:06:54 might imagine. And that's because they
00:06:54 --> 00:06:59 are so big. Um they are basically puffed
00:06:59 --> 00:07:02 up by the by the energy coming from this
00:07:02 --> 00:07:05 radiation. Uh but they because they're
00:07:05 --> 00:07:07 so big, their surfaces
00:07:07 --> 00:07:11 are relatively cool. And so what you see
00:07:11 --> 00:07:14 is an object in the infrared uh if
00:07:14 --> 00:07:16 you're looking out for a dark matter
00:07:16 --> 00:07:20 star or what you would see if they if
00:07:20 --> 00:07:21 they existed.
00:07:21 --> 00:07:23 >> Yeah, I get it.
00:07:23 --> 00:07:26 >> So um so that's why that's basically
00:07:26 --> 00:07:27 where the energy comes from, the
00:07:27 --> 00:07:29 annihilation of dark matter particles,
00:07:29 --> 00:07:31 self annihilation.
00:07:31 --> 00:07:34 Um but they yet they're they're bright
00:07:34 --> 00:07:38 um because of the basically the you know
00:07:38 --> 00:07:39 the amount of radiation that they
00:07:40 --> 00:07:43 generate with these uh annihilation uh
00:07:43 --> 00:07:45 that that makes them bright and they get
00:07:45 --> 00:07:49 uh to something like 10 billion times
00:07:49 --> 00:07:53 more energetic than the sun in terms of
00:07:53 --> 00:07:55 the energy that they release. Uh but as
00:07:55 --> 00:07:57 I said it's infrared radiation so
00:07:57 --> 00:07:59 they're they're really releasing it in
00:07:59 --> 00:08:01 the in the form of heat.
00:08:01 --> 00:08:04 >> So in terms of naked eye observation you
00:08:04 --> 00:08:05 can't see a thing. I I think that's
00:08:06 --> 00:08:08 right. Yes. I mean they would also be if
00:08:08 --> 00:08:11 we're seeing them in the early universe
00:08:11 --> 00:08:12 these things will be very highly
00:08:12 --> 00:08:15 redshifted. That means their light will
00:08:15 --> 00:08:17 not only be infrared but it'll be even
00:08:17 --> 00:08:19 redder than red infrared uh because of
00:08:20 --> 00:08:21 the expansion of the universe stretching
00:08:21 --> 00:08:25 out the light waves. Um so it it they
00:08:25 --> 00:08:27 might be quite difficult uh might be
00:08:27 --> 00:08:29 quite difficult to detect. However uh
00:08:29 --> 00:08:32 it's basically uh one of the things that
00:08:32 --> 00:08:35 the James Web telescope is looking for.
00:08:35 --> 00:08:37 It's looking for any evidence of dark
00:08:37 --> 00:08:39 matter stars. So where a normal star
00:08:39 --> 00:08:42 like ours um depletes its fuel and then
00:08:42 --> 00:08:45 turns into a red giant and then
00:08:45 --> 00:08:47 collapses into a white dwarf, a dark
00:08:48 --> 00:08:50 matter star annihilates itself.
00:08:50 --> 00:08:51 >> I think that would be right. I think it
00:08:51 --> 00:08:54 would just basically fizzle out
00:08:54 --> 00:08:56 >> evaporate and fizzle out. Yeah.
00:08:56 --> 00:08:57 >> Okay. Wow.
00:08:58 --> 00:08:58 >> Yeah.
00:08:58 --> 00:09:01 >> Thank you, Casey. Um, haven't found one
00:09:01 --> 00:09:04 yet, but if you do stumble across one,
00:09:04 --> 00:09:05 let us know.
00:09:05 --> 00:09:06 >> Just hand it in, please.
00:09:06 --> 00:09:08 >> Yes. Yes. Just Yeah, don't forget to put
00:09:08 --> 00:09:10 it in a lead box.
00:09:10 --> 00:09:12 >> That's right.
00:09:12 --> 00:09:14 >> Thanks for the question. Our next
00:09:14 --> 00:09:16 question, Fred, comes from uh Michael.
00:09:16 --> 00:09:19 He said, "I understand that." Oh, he
00:09:19 --> 00:09:20 says, "Andrew, I apologize. I still not
00:09:20 --> 00:09:23 do not have uh questions about dark
00:09:23 --> 00:09:25 matter. It's all right person before you
00:09:25 --> 00:09:27 did it. Uh as I have a firm
00:09:27 --> 00:09:28 understanding of how coffee and
00:09:28 --> 00:09:31 Coca-Cola power my day. Uh I understand
00:09:31 --> 00:09:33 that dormant comments have been
00:09:33 --> 00:09:35 suggested with a few even confirmed
00:09:35 --> 00:09:37 inside the snow line. I'm wondering how
00:09:38 --> 00:09:42 many might exist. Seven. There's seven.
00:09:42 --> 00:09:45 I have no idea. Uh and how a a best
00:09:45 --> 00:09:48 guess might be made to arrive at that
00:09:48 --> 00:09:50 number. It was my best guess. I'm going
00:09:50 --> 00:09:51 well here. Uh
00:09:52 --> 00:09:53 >> you are you're guessing well.
00:09:53 --> 00:09:55 >> Other than infrared telescopes and
00:09:55 --> 00:09:57 cameras looking for low temperature dark
00:09:57 --> 00:10:00 objects, what instruments on a smaller
00:10:00 --> 00:10:02 satellite might be best for searching
00:10:02 --> 00:10:05 for either or both of the Earth's Sun
00:10:05 --> 00:10:08 Trojan Lrange points. Uh that comes from
00:10:08 --> 00:10:10 Michael. Now, I'm assuming Michael's in
00:10:10 --> 00:10:12 Alberta because I'm going off his email
00:10:12 --> 00:10:15 address and it had the abbreviation AB
00:10:15 --> 00:10:17 and I looked that up and that's the
00:10:17 --> 00:10:19 abbreviation for the province of
00:10:19 --> 00:10:21 Alberta, Canada. But I might be wrong
00:10:21 --> 00:10:24 and I'm sorry if I'm way off the map,
00:10:24 --> 00:10:27 Michael, but thanks for the question.
00:10:27 --> 00:10:29 Okay. Um,
00:10:29 --> 00:10:32 are there are there um
00:10:32 --> 00:10:33 dormant comets?
00:10:33 --> 00:10:36 >> Thought to be. So, um, what's a dormant
00:10:36 --> 00:10:39 comet? Uh well, it is it would be a
00:10:39 --> 00:10:42 comet that has
00:10:42 --> 00:10:45 uh gone past the sun several times in
00:10:46 --> 00:10:47 its lifetime. I think that's probably
00:10:47 --> 00:10:53 the bottom line. Uh it's uh an old comet
00:10:53 --> 00:10:58 and uh because every time a comet gets
00:10:58 --> 00:11:01 near the sun, it basically radiates its
00:11:01 --> 00:11:05 uh gas and dust into space. uh the gas
00:11:05 --> 00:11:06 turns into a kind of plasma. It's
00:11:06 --> 00:11:10 excited by the sun's radiation. Uh and
00:11:10 --> 00:11:12 so you get what we call a gas tail for a
00:11:12 --> 00:11:15 for a comet. And um you can also get a
00:11:15 --> 00:11:17 dust tail because comets are dusty
00:11:17 --> 00:11:19 objects with this sort of frozen gas
00:11:19 --> 00:11:22 around them. The the dust leaks out when
00:11:22 --> 00:11:25 the when the gas blows away. And so you
00:11:25 --> 00:11:29 get uh comets have two tails. So, um,
00:11:29 --> 00:11:30 imagine,
00:11:30 --> 00:11:34 uh, one of these things that's gone
00:11:34 --> 00:11:36 around the sun several times, and
00:11:36 --> 00:11:40 basically it would
00:11:40 --> 00:11:44 it would it would have a kind of crusty
00:11:44 --> 00:11:47 layer to it, an outer layer, uh, which
00:11:47 --> 00:11:50 is the the dust sort of coagulating on
00:11:50 --> 00:11:53 the surface. So, the gas has has been
00:11:53 --> 00:11:56 blowing dust off, but there's still a
00:11:56 --> 00:11:59 residual dust layer that might give you
00:11:59 --> 00:12:02 this crust around the edge of it. That
00:12:02 --> 00:12:04 means that even though it goes near the
00:12:04 --> 00:12:07 sun, the sun doesn't penetrate uh the
00:12:07 --> 00:12:09 sun's radiation and heat don't penetrate
00:12:09 --> 00:12:12 the dust and so it doesn't actually uh
00:12:12 --> 00:12:14 stir into action. It doesn't start
00:12:14 --> 00:12:15 behaving like a comet, which is to
00:12:16 --> 00:12:17 release its gas and dust.
00:12:17 --> 00:12:21 >> Okay. Um and so uh that's um you know
00:12:21 --> 00:12:24 that would that would be a dormant comet
00:12:24 --> 00:12:27 once one that's gone to sleep. Um what
00:12:27 --> 00:12:33 might stir it back into action is if you
00:12:33 --> 00:12:36 had a dormant comet colliding with
00:12:36 --> 00:12:38 something else. Uh hopefully not the
00:12:38 --> 00:12:41 Earth uh but you know maybe another
00:12:41 --> 00:12:44 another u an asteroid or or something
00:12:44 --> 00:12:48 like that uh that might disturb that
00:12:48 --> 00:12:52 that dusty crust on the outside or
00:12:52 --> 00:12:55 crusty dust uh the sort of crust of the
00:12:55 --> 00:12:58 over the ice and then if you could
00:12:58 --> 00:13:00 expose the icy surface to the sun's
00:13:00 --> 00:13:02 radiation then it would it would
00:13:02 --> 00:13:05 basically start giving you what we would
00:13:05 --> 00:13:07 call an active comet as
00:13:07 --> 00:13:09 Um I mean the way they are and this is
00:13:09 --> 00:13:11 really the n of the question I guess how
00:13:11 --> 00:13:12 do you detect them
00:13:12 --> 00:13:15 >> because the problem is um if you've got
00:13:15 --> 00:13:17 a comet even though it's made mostly of
00:13:17 --> 00:13:20 ice uh it's and it's got if it's got
00:13:20 --> 00:13:24 this um dark crust on the outside of it
00:13:24 --> 00:13:26 there's very little to distinguish that
00:13:26 --> 00:13:30 from an asteroid. Um and so how do you
00:13:30 --> 00:13:32 know whether this is a a dormant comet
00:13:32 --> 00:13:35 or an asteroid? And you and it's really
00:13:35 --> 00:13:37 quite hard to do. Uh there's not that
00:13:37 --> 00:13:39 much to to choose between them. You
00:13:39 --> 00:13:42 would be looking at a kind of thermal
00:13:42 --> 00:13:44 signature because um asteroids are cold
00:13:44 --> 00:13:48 rock. Uh dormant comets are called ice
00:13:48 --> 00:13:52 with a kind of rocky sort of um dusty
00:13:52 --> 00:13:55 rocky layer on the outside. Uh there's
00:13:55 --> 00:13:56 not that much to to differentiate
00:13:56 --> 00:13:58 between them until you knock some of the
00:13:58 --> 00:14:01 dust off and the the thing wakes up.
00:14:01 --> 00:14:02 >> Yes.
00:14:02 --> 00:14:05 >> Yeah. So um so I think um you know I
00:14:05 --> 00:14:08 think there's uh there's scope for us
00:14:08 --> 00:14:10 trying to do a survey but it will be
00:14:10 --> 00:14:15 hard to know uh whether you've you've
00:14:15 --> 00:14:17 picked a dormant comet or you've got an
00:14:17 --> 00:14:18 asteroid and it may well be that some of
00:14:18 --> 00:14:20 the asteroids that we consider to be
00:14:20 --> 00:14:23 asteroids are actually dormant comets.
00:14:23 --> 00:14:25 >> So they're they're super duper old. I
00:14:25 --> 00:14:27 suppose the smoking gun would be most of
00:14:27 --> 00:14:30 them have got zimmer frames.
00:14:30 --> 00:14:33 >> Could be. Yep. um comments in the frame.
00:14:33 --> 00:14:34 Um
00:14:34 --> 00:14:36 >> yes, I like the sound of that. You never
00:14:36 --> 00:14:39 know. Um
00:14:39 --> 00:14:42 >> worth looking for or not, but um yeah.
00:14:42 --> 00:14:45 Okay. So um so then they might be out
00:14:46 --> 00:14:48 there when Michael said that uh a few
00:14:48 --> 00:14:51 have been confirmed in the snow line.
00:14:51 --> 00:14:53 What's what's he meaning there?
00:14:53 --> 00:14:56 >> So that means so the snow line is um
00:14:56 --> 00:14:59 basically it's on the far side of Mars's
00:14:59 --> 00:15:02 orbit. Yeah. It's where um
00:15:02 --> 00:15:05 water vapor stops being vapor and
00:15:06 --> 00:15:07 freezes.
00:15:07 --> 00:15:07 >> Okay.
00:15:07 --> 00:15:10 >> Um it's the sort of out outer side of
00:15:10 --> 00:15:13 the uh of the Goldilocks zone.
00:15:13 --> 00:15:15 >> Okay, fair enough.
00:15:15 --> 00:15:17 >> Michael, thanks for the question. Um
00:15:17 --> 00:15:20 that was uh fascinating and um yeah, I
00:15:20 --> 00:15:23 suppose one day someone might go, "Aha,
00:15:23 --> 00:15:25 I've found a way." And then we've got
00:15:25 --> 00:15:28 the answer. This is Space Nuts. Andrew
00:15:28 --> 00:15:32 Dunley with Professor Fred Watson.
00:15:32 --> 00:15:34 >> Space Nuts.
00:15:34 --> 00:15:37 >> Oh, that was that was it.
00:15:37 --> 00:15:38 >> That was so short. I'm going to do it
00:15:38 --> 00:15:39 again.
00:15:39 --> 00:15:40 >> Space nuts.
00:15:40 --> 00:15:41 >> Yeah, he's got a very nice voice, hasn't
00:15:42 --> 00:15:42 he?
00:15:42 --> 00:15:44 >> He has. Yes. I can do that on my
00:15:44 --> 00:15:46 machine. Hang on.
00:15:46 --> 00:15:49 >> Yeah. Wait for it. Uh, not there. Okay.
00:15:49 --> 00:15:51 No, not there. Oh, here it is.
00:15:52 --> 00:15:57 >> Space nuts.
00:15:57 --> 00:16:00 I um Yeah, I think you need some uh
00:16:00 --> 00:16:02 gravis or something.
00:16:02 --> 00:16:07 >> I can do it with this one.
00:16:07 --> 00:16:10 >> Yeah, I could I could go on forever.
00:16:10 --> 00:16:13 >> I know you could.
00:16:13 --> 00:16:16 >> But I won't. Um Yeah. Anyway, I I'm sure
00:16:16 --> 00:16:19 you can use that in uh suitable uh
00:16:19 --> 00:16:21 environments that um I mean audio
00:16:21 --> 00:16:23 environments that might intrigue our
00:16:24 --> 00:16:27 listeners or otherwise um confuse them.
00:16:27 --> 00:16:29 Indeed. Our next question comes from
00:16:29 --> 00:16:30 Derek.
00:16:30 --> 00:16:32 >> Hi guys, this is Derek from Southern
00:16:32 --> 00:16:35 Ontario and Canada again. Um just
00:16:35 --> 00:16:38 wondering if you could explain the
00:16:38 --> 00:16:41 orbital mechanics behind slingshots,
00:16:41 --> 00:16:44 gravitational slingshots. And uh I'm
00:16:44 --> 00:16:46 trying to understand whether the
00:16:46 --> 00:16:48 rotation of the planet has anything to
00:16:48 --> 00:16:51 do with that slingshot or if it's just
00:16:51 --> 00:16:53 uh in terms of how close you get to the
00:16:53 --> 00:16:56 planet. Um if you can elaborate a little
00:16:56 --> 00:16:58 bit on that, that would be great. Thank
00:16:58 --> 00:17:00 you. Love the podcast. Have a great day.
00:17:00 --> 00:17:01 >> Thank you, Derek. Uh it's a good
00:17:01 --> 00:17:05 question. Uh, and I think we've seen it
00:17:05 --> 00:17:07 used uh many times for some of these
00:17:07 --> 00:17:10 probes that have been sent um way out
00:17:10 --> 00:17:14 into the solar system because we find
00:17:14 --> 00:17:15 it's uh a much more efficient way of
00:17:15 --> 00:17:17 doing things because we haven't got the
00:17:17 --> 00:17:19 fuel to send them all the way in
00:17:19 --> 00:17:20 >> under their own steam. That was
00:17:20 --> 00:17:22 certainly the case with the Voyagers.
00:17:22 --> 00:17:25 Uh, and they they were two of the best
00:17:25 --> 00:17:27 examples of using the gas giants for
00:17:27 --> 00:17:28 slingshots.
00:17:28 --> 00:17:32 Um but even launching things off our own
00:17:32 --> 00:17:33 planet, there's a bit of slingshot
00:17:33 --> 00:17:36 effect, isn't there? Uh yes, that's
00:17:36 --> 00:17:40 right. There there is. Um so, um it's
00:17:40 --> 00:17:41 not just getting to the outer solar
00:17:41 --> 00:17:45 system. I think um uh the Bey Columbo uh
00:17:45 --> 00:17:46 spacecraft which is on its way to
00:17:46 --> 00:17:48 Mercury, I think that's had something
00:17:48 --> 00:17:51 like seven slingshots with Venus and the
00:17:51 --> 00:17:52 Earth. That's right. might be
00:17:52 --> 00:17:55 exaggerating, but um it's had a large
00:17:55 --> 00:17:58 number and that's in order to make its
00:17:58 --> 00:18:01 velocity uh match the velocity of
00:18:01 --> 00:18:03 Mercury
00:18:03 --> 00:18:04 um which you'd think will be easy as you
00:18:04 --> 00:18:06 drop things into the inner solar system,
00:18:06 --> 00:18:08 but it's not actually. It's quite hard
00:18:08 --> 00:18:09 to do.
00:18:09 --> 00:18:11 >> You got to kind of catch up with Mercury
00:18:11 --> 00:18:13 as it steams around in its orbit because
00:18:13 --> 00:18:15 it's going faster than the Earth is in
00:18:15 --> 00:18:19 its orbit around the sun. Um, so, um,
00:18:19 --> 00:18:21 yes. So, it's a very useful tool for
00:18:21 --> 00:18:22 exploring the solar system. I think
00:18:22 --> 00:18:24 you're about to confirm how many it's
00:18:24 --> 00:18:25 had, have you?
00:18:25 --> 00:18:26 >> I haven't found it yet.
00:18:26 --> 00:18:28 >> I'm usually pretty quick, but I'm not
00:18:28 --> 00:18:30 >> You are pretty quick. Yeah,
00:18:30 --> 00:18:32 >> it's it's proving elusive at the moment,
00:18:32 --> 00:18:34 but I'll get it. I will get it.
00:18:34 --> 00:18:36 >> It's had an it has had an elusive number
00:18:36 --> 00:18:38 of slingshots.
00:18:38 --> 00:18:40 uh and uh but the the bottom line is
00:18:40 --> 00:18:43 that it's a process that works well and
00:18:43 --> 00:18:46 is actually very much a part of the
00:18:46 --> 00:18:49 astronamicist's toolkit when they're
00:18:49 --> 00:18:53 actually working out the um orbits and
00:18:53 --> 00:18:55 um trajectories of of planets exploring
00:18:55 --> 00:18:57 the space
00:18:57 --> 00:18:58 >> nine slingshots.
00:18:58 --> 00:19:01 >> Nine slingshots. There you go. Seven was
00:19:01 --> 00:19:02 an underestimate.
00:19:02 --> 00:19:04 >> Yeah. One one at Earth, two at Venus,
00:19:04 --> 00:19:06 and six at Mercury itself.
00:19:06 --> 00:19:09 >> Yes. Fantastic. That's what you need to
00:19:09 --> 00:19:11 match Mercury's orbital speed. Quite
00:19:11 --> 00:19:12 quite remarkable.
00:19:12 --> 00:19:15 >> So, um, how does it work? Well, it's
00:19:15 --> 00:19:16 counterintuitive, isn't it? Because you
00:19:16 --> 00:19:19 think that a spacecraft falling in
00:19:19 --> 00:19:23 towards a planet, uh, it's going to gain
00:19:23 --> 00:19:25 velocity, but then as it leaves the
00:19:25 --> 00:19:27 planet, it's going to decelerate and so
00:19:27 --> 00:19:29 it would lose velocity. And you might
00:19:29 --> 00:19:32 think the two would balance up, but the
00:19:32 --> 00:19:34 bottom line is they don't. And it's all
00:19:34 --> 00:19:37 about the angle that you come in. uh
00:19:37 --> 00:19:39 when you intercept the planet's orbit
00:19:39 --> 00:19:42 and um if you get the angle right, you
00:19:42 --> 00:19:45 can have this situation where uh without
00:19:45 --> 00:19:48 making contact at all where some of the
00:19:48 --> 00:19:51 momentum of the planet is transferred to
00:19:51 --> 00:19:55 the spacecraft. Um and so the spacecraft
00:19:55 --> 00:19:58 gets a a push in velocity. It's velocity
00:19:58 --> 00:20:00 increases. the planet doesn't even
00:20:00 --> 00:20:02 notice the difference because the
00:20:02 --> 00:20:05 spacecraft has so little mass compared
00:20:05 --> 00:20:09 with the um with the planet. Um so it's
00:20:09 --> 00:20:11 balancing the veloc the momentum.
00:20:11 --> 00:20:13 Momentum of course is just the mass
00:20:13 --> 00:20:16 times the velocity. Uh and so you've got
00:20:16 --> 00:20:19 a very big mass transferring momentum to
00:20:19 --> 00:20:22 a very small mass and um that means you
00:20:22 --> 00:20:24 get quite a significant velocity kick uh
00:20:24 --> 00:20:28 in doing that. And so it's not to do
00:20:28 --> 00:20:32 with the rotation. Um, so Derek is right
00:20:32 --> 00:20:35 to point out that as a query. Is it to
00:20:35 --> 00:20:37 do with the rotation? The answer is no.
00:20:37 --> 00:20:39 So if you had a planet that wasn't
00:20:39 --> 00:20:41 rotating at all, uh, you could still do
00:20:41 --> 00:20:43 a gravitational slingshot very
00:20:43 --> 00:20:43 successfully with it.
00:20:43 --> 00:20:45 >> Oh, okay.
00:20:46 --> 00:20:50 >> So Okay. So does the spacecraft when
00:20:50 --> 00:20:52 it's doing the slingshot actually steal
00:20:52 --> 00:20:55 some of the planet's energy? Yeah,
00:20:55 --> 00:20:57 that's exactly it. It's stealing
00:20:57 --> 00:21:01 stealing momentum uh and um and using
00:21:01 --> 00:21:03 that to accelerate and sometimes quite
00:21:03 --> 00:21:05 dramatically so you know the the change
00:21:05 --> 00:21:08 in the orbital trajectory is really
00:21:08 --> 00:21:10 significant but it's a fantastic tool
00:21:10 --> 00:21:13 for exploring the planets.
00:21:13 --> 00:21:16 >> Yeah, it is until the day we can come up
00:21:16 --> 00:21:20 with a new way of of
00:21:20 --> 00:21:23 a new form of engine. propulsion. That's
00:21:23 --> 00:21:25 the word I was wanting.
00:21:25 --> 00:21:29 >> Uh that um renders gravitational assist
00:21:29 --> 00:21:30 unnecessary.
00:21:30 --> 00:21:32 >> Yes, that's right. At the moment, it's
00:21:32 --> 00:21:34 we haven't got there yet. You're right.
00:21:34 --> 00:21:34 >> Yeah,
00:21:34 --> 00:21:37 >> but it might. Yeah, it it could be
00:21:37 --> 00:21:40 scramjet technology. It could be nuclear
00:21:40 --> 00:21:42 power like fusion engines, things like
00:21:42 --> 00:21:45 that. We're a long way from that, but
00:21:45 --> 00:21:47 those are possibilities.
00:21:47 --> 00:21:47 >> Yeah.
00:21:47 --> 00:21:52 >> Yeah. Um who knows? Um, but the more you
00:21:52 --> 00:21:53 speed up in space, the more you got to
00:21:54 --> 00:21:55 be careful because there's lots of stuff
00:21:55 --> 00:21:57 you can bump into. You don't really want
00:21:57 --> 00:22:00 to do that at pace, do you?
00:22:00 --> 00:22:02 >> You got to know where all this stuff is.
00:22:02 --> 00:22:04 And that's what astronomers are for
00:22:04 --> 00:22:04 >> indeed.
00:22:04 --> 00:22:06 >> Tell you where it all is. Yeah.
00:22:06 --> 00:22:09 >> Uh, thank you, Derek. I hope that uh
00:22:09 --> 00:22:14 covered your question adequately.
00:22:14 --> 00:22:15 >> G. And I feel
00:22:16 --> 00:22:17 >> space nuts.
00:22:17 --> 00:22:20 What we're going to do now, Fred, is um
00:22:20 --> 00:22:22 we've got uh we've we had quite a
00:22:22 --> 00:22:25 Canadian influence in in today's show by
00:22:25 --> 00:22:27 the look of it. Uh this um comes from
00:22:27 --> 00:22:30 Jason in Montreal in Quebec and uh he
00:22:30 --> 00:22:32 says, "I'm a big fan of the show. I have
00:22:32 --> 00:22:34 a question regarding the rapid rise of
00:22:34 --> 00:22:38 fully automated smart telescopes and
00:22:38 --> 00:22:41 their place in the modern hobby. Uh on
00:22:41 --> 00:22:43 one hand, it feels like these devices
00:22:43 --> 00:22:45 are an incredible cost-effective
00:22:45 --> 00:22:47 gateway. They allow beginners to dive
00:22:47 --> 00:22:50 straight into astrophotography and see
00:22:50 --> 00:22:52 almost instant results without spending
00:22:52 --> 00:22:54 thousands of dollars on complex gear
00:22:54 --> 00:22:57 right away. That immediate reward seems
00:22:57 --> 00:22:59 to be a fantastic way to spark a
00:22:59 --> 00:23:01 lifelong interest in astronomy. On the
00:23:01 --> 00:23:04 other hand, there seems to be a bit of a
00:23:04 --> 00:23:06 divide in the community with some
00:23:06 --> 00:23:08 traditional astrophotographers viewing
00:23:08 --> 00:23:11 them as cheating because the automated
00:23:11 --> 00:23:13 software removes so much of the steep
00:23:14 --> 00:23:16 learning curve. What do you what are
00:23:16 --> 00:23:17 your thoughts on this technological
00:23:17 --> 00:23:20 shift? Do you see smart telescopes as a
00:23:20 --> 00:23:22 positive tool for opening up the night
00:23:22 --> 00:23:26 sky to a broader audience or do you feel
00:23:26 --> 00:23:28 something valuable is lost when we
00:23:28 --> 00:23:31 automate the setup and tracking process?
00:23:31 --> 00:23:34 Uh I actually bought one recently and
00:23:34 --> 00:23:36 I've already learned a lot over the past
00:23:36 --> 00:23:38 few months. Getting those quick results
00:23:38 --> 00:23:40 didn't stop me from wanting to learn
00:23:40 --> 00:23:43 more. In fact, it did the opposite. Uh,
00:23:43 --> 00:23:45 it got me watching more astronomy and
00:23:45 --> 00:23:48 astrophotography videos than usual uh on
00:23:48 --> 00:23:50 YouTube and joining Facebook groups to
00:23:50 --> 00:23:53 learn from other users. And of course,
00:23:53 --> 00:23:56 let me find your podcast. Uh, thank you
00:23:56 --> 00:23:57 for the great episodes. Uh, that comes
00:23:57 --> 00:23:59 from Jason in Montreal. I'm going to
00:23:59 --> 00:24:00 show you something, Fred.
00:24:00 --> 00:24:02 >> Yep.
00:24:02 --> 00:24:06 >> Let me see.
00:24:06 --> 00:24:07 >> I've got one.
00:24:07 --> 00:24:08 >> He's got one.
00:24:08 --> 00:24:10 >> I've got one. And yes, it simplifies
00:24:10 --> 00:24:12 everything. It does all the hard work
00:24:12 --> 00:24:13 for you. But if you're someone who
00:24:13 --> 00:24:15 doesn't like doing the hard work,
00:24:15 --> 00:24:17 >> it's a godsend.
00:24:17 --> 00:24:19 >> Yeah, that's my take on it. I'll keep it
00:24:19 --> 00:24:21 nice and short. I I know I know a couple
00:24:21 --> 00:24:23 of people who've got both. They've got a
00:24:23 --> 00:24:26 traditional telescope with the whole
00:24:26 --> 00:24:28 >> kit set up with their computers and the
00:24:28 --> 00:24:31 programs and the, you know, all the the
00:24:31 --> 00:24:33 tracking technology. They like to do it
00:24:33 --> 00:24:35 the oldfashioned way. And uh they've
00:24:35 --> 00:24:38 also got smart telescopes
00:24:38 --> 00:24:42 um which do the same thing. But um you
00:24:42 --> 00:24:44 know you got to rob Peter to pay Paul.
00:24:44 --> 00:24:46 The the efficiency and simplicity of
00:24:46 --> 00:24:50 that uh also means that your images
00:24:50 --> 00:24:53 aren't going to be nearly as good as a
00:24:53 --> 00:24:57 traditional uh telescope. So there
00:24:57 --> 00:24:59 there's there's it es and flows. There's
00:25:00 --> 00:25:02 there's a there's a cost for the um
00:25:02 --> 00:25:04 let's not say the word cheating.
00:25:04 --> 00:25:08 But there is a cost. Um but it does make
00:25:08 --> 00:25:10 astrophotography
00:25:10 --> 00:25:13 immensely affordable
00:25:13 --> 00:25:14 for a lot of people.
00:25:14 --> 00:25:17 >> Yeah. And accessible too.
00:25:17 --> 00:25:21 >> So yes, look, I I think um you know, I
00:25:21 --> 00:25:22 think Jason sort of answered his own
00:25:22 --> 00:25:24 question in the way exactly the way I
00:25:24 --> 00:25:28 would. Uh that uh you've got you've got
00:25:28 --> 00:25:32 the two aspects of it. It's a brilliant
00:25:32 --> 00:25:37 way of getting into astrophotography
00:25:37 --> 00:25:42 um almost painlessly. Um and and and on
00:25:42 --> 00:25:46 a very good level too. Uh, and if you
00:25:46 --> 00:25:49 then wanted to do more, if you wanted to
00:25:49 --> 00:25:52 go for a bigger telescope and do your
00:25:52 --> 00:25:56 image processing in a in a more um
00:25:56 --> 00:25:59 perhaps a more precise way, that's still
00:25:59 --> 00:26:02 open to you. I think I think as a tool
00:26:02 --> 00:26:04 for getting people involved in
00:26:04 --> 00:26:06 astronomy, I think they're absolutely
00:26:06 --> 00:26:08 fabulous. I don't have one myself. Uh,
00:26:08 --> 00:26:10 I'm glad you've got one, Andrew, because
00:26:10 --> 00:26:11 I've seen some of the results from that
00:26:11 --> 00:26:14 and they are very impressive. uh got a
00:26:14 --> 00:26:15 number of other friends who have got
00:26:15 --> 00:26:17 them as well who are themselves
00:26:17 --> 00:26:19 professional astronomers.
00:26:19 --> 00:26:19 >> So
00:26:19 --> 00:26:21 >> well there's there's a photo I took the
00:26:21 --> 00:26:22 other night of the M8.
00:26:22 --> 00:26:25 >> Yeah. There you go. And it's lovely
00:26:25 --> 00:26:27 color balance. That's pretty well what
00:26:27 --> 00:26:29 you'd expect to see from a David Merlin
00:26:29 --> 00:26:30 image.
00:26:30 --> 00:26:32 >> And that's what's that's what's like
00:26:32 --> 00:26:34 David Men was a pioneer in this stuff.
00:26:34 --> 00:26:35 >> He did.
00:26:35 --> 00:26:37 >> Now you can do it from your lounge room.
00:26:37 --> 00:26:39 >> Yes. With you can literally with your
00:26:39 --> 00:26:43 mobile phone. on your mobile phone
00:26:43 --> 00:26:45 telescope outside. Um, yeah, I think
00:26:45 --> 00:26:47 it's I think it's fantastic. I
00:26:47 --> 00:26:50 >> I'm very much old school. I I love
00:26:50 --> 00:26:52 pottering around with a telescope with
00:26:52 --> 00:26:53 nothing more than an eyepiece. I've
00:26:54 --> 00:26:54 never really ventured into
00:26:54 --> 00:26:57 astrophotography. The nearest thing I've
00:26:57 --> 00:26:59 got to that has been a lot of aurora
00:26:59 --> 00:27:01 photography,
00:27:01 --> 00:27:03 >> uh, which, um, which I love and is now
00:27:03 --> 00:27:05 also a lot more accessible just with a
00:27:06 --> 00:27:08 smartphone. Uh, so I don't carry around
00:27:08 --> 00:27:10 all the kit I used to when we go up to
00:27:10 --> 00:27:12 the Arctic uh to look for the Aurora. I
00:27:12 --> 00:27:16 just take my smartphone. Uh, but um but
00:27:16 --> 00:27:19 you're right. Uh, I think um I think I
00:27:19 --> 00:27:20 think as I said, I think Jason's
00:27:20 --> 00:27:22 answered it perfectly. He's it's
00:27:22 --> 00:27:25 obviously stimulated him to go further.
00:27:25 --> 00:27:27 Uh, he loves what he's got and he's
00:27:27 --> 00:27:29 finding out more. Best of all, he found
00:27:29 --> 00:27:32 Space Nuts. That's nice. But you know
00:27:32 --> 00:27:36 it's um uh I I I would I would not be
00:27:36 --> 00:27:39 somebody who would uh frown upon these
00:27:39 --> 00:27:42 devices and saying in my day this we did
00:27:42 --> 00:27:44 not have this sort of thing. You know we
00:27:44 --> 00:27:46 had to do it properly. We had to
00:27:46 --> 00:27:49 understand what was going on. Well you
00:27:49 --> 00:27:51 can still do it and understand what's
00:27:51 --> 00:27:53 going on uh with your with your smart
00:27:53 --> 00:27:54 telescope.
00:27:54 --> 00:27:57 >> Well what what's sorry go ahead. mine.
00:27:57 --> 00:27:59 When I pick a target, it then gives me
00:27:59 --> 00:28:02 an audio briefing on what the target is,
00:28:02 --> 00:28:03 who found it, when it was found.
00:28:04 --> 00:28:06 >> See, that's that is fabulous.
00:28:06 --> 00:28:09 >> It is amazing. Fantastic.
00:28:09 --> 00:28:10 >> It's good stuff.
00:28:10 --> 00:28:13 >> It's an astronomy class as well.
00:28:13 --> 00:28:16 >> Um I think I'm right in saying that the
00:28:16 --> 00:28:19 the first of these smart telescopes was
00:28:19 --> 00:28:21 a Uni Hadron, I think. Uh that was
00:28:21 --> 00:28:24 probably six or seven years ago when I
00:28:24 --> 00:28:26 saw the first one of those and I was
00:28:26 --> 00:28:28 very impressed with it. But what I was
00:28:28 --> 00:28:30 going to say was that they have now come
00:28:30 --> 00:28:33 down in price to be
00:28:33 --> 00:28:36 >> um really quite affordable and it's not
00:28:36 --> 00:28:37 beyond the realms of possibility that
00:28:38 --> 00:28:39 one day there might be one in the Watson
00:28:39 --> 00:28:41 household. Although I do like things
00:28:41 --> 00:28:43 that are made of brass. And do you look
00:28:43 --> 00:28:45 through one end and see how?
00:28:45 --> 00:28:47 >> There are a mass of them out there and
00:28:47 --> 00:28:51 quite a few are well under $1.
00:28:51 --> 00:28:52 >> Yes.
00:28:52 --> 00:28:54 >> So, you know, that makes that that that
00:28:54 --> 00:28:57 makes a pretty wide target audience. The
00:28:57 --> 00:28:58 other thing mine does is you can click
00:28:58 --> 00:29:01 on the map on your phone and you can see
00:29:01 --> 00:29:04 where other se people are that are using
00:29:04 --> 00:29:06 the same gear as you.
00:29:06 --> 00:29:07 >> Interesting.
00:29:07 --> 00:29:09 >> I'm not sure. I'm sure that goes down
00:29:09 --> 00:29:10 with the privacy laws, but anyway,
00:29:10 --> 00:29:12 >> I was going to say, is there a privacy
00:29:12 --> 00:29:14 infringement there? Maybe
00:29:14 --> 00:29:16 >> I I've got um satellite navigation in
00:29:16 --> 00:29:18 the car that does the same thing. Shows
00:29:18 --> 00:29:20 you other users of that particular
00:29:20 --> 00:29:23 device, but um they've they've um
00:29:23 --> 00:29:25 curtailed it in Australia, so it only
00:29:25 --> 00:29:26 shows you where they were like 10
00:29:26 --> 00:29:27 minutes ago. So,
00:29:27 --> 00:29:28 >> I see. Okay.
00:29:28 --> 00:29:30 >> Which is pointless. Just turn it off,
00:29:30 --> 00:29:30 you know.
00:29:30 --> 00:29:32 >> Yes. It's a bit it is a bit of a waste.
00:29:32 --> 00:29:35 >> Yeah. that uh well, you know, we live in
00:29:35 --> 00:29:37 Nanny State, New South Wales, so you've
00:29:37 --> 00:29:39 um
00:29:39 --> 00:29:40 everything's on the table for some sort
00:29:40 --> 00:29:42 of scrutiny.
00:29:42 --> 00:29:44 >> Probably me now after saying that.
00:29:44 --> 00:29:46 >> But uh yeah, Jason, look, I'm a big fan
00:29:46 --> 00:29:49 and you are too. And uh it and it I
00:29:49 --> 00:29:52 don't think it does spoil the tradition
00:29:52 --> 00:29:54 or the traditional approach to um
00:29:54 --> 00:29:56 astrophotography because
00:29:56 --> 00:30:00 >> um vinyl records have come back. So, you
00:30:00 --> 00:30:01 know,
00:30:01 --> 00:30:04 >> you can't write anything off. Yeah.
00:30:04 --> 00:30:07 >> But I wanted that question to um I
00:30:07 --> 00:30:09 wanted you to hear that question, Fred,
00:30:09 --> 00:30:11 because I know you've got a long history
00:30:11 --> 00:30:13 in um in telescopes. You've written
00:30:13 --> 00:30:14 books about them
00:30:14 --> 00:30:17 >> and um this is this is the next big
00:30:17 --> 00:30:19 thing, I suppose.
00:30:20 --> 00:30:21 >> Yeah. While we're talking about it, um,
00:30:21 --> 00:30:26 when you were away last, um, Jonty her
00:30:26 --> 00:30:27 grabbed a couple of astrophotographers
00:30:27 --> 00:30:29 and we did a special on
00:30:29 --> 00:30:31 astrophotography,
00:30:31 --> 00:30:33 which I'm not sure if Hugh's released it
00:30:33 --> 00:30:35 yet, but I think he's still working on
00:30:35 --> 00:30:37 how to get that out there. It's quite a
00:30:37 --> 00:30:40 I think it's an hourong special on
00:30:40 --> 00:30:43 astrophotography and the techniques and
00:30:43 --> 00:30:45 how they did it and what you can do. So,
00:30:45 --> 00:30:47 if you really want to get into the nuts
00:30:47 --> 00:30:49 and bolts of astrophotography, have a
00:30:49 --> 00:30:51 look for that one. Um, I'm not sure it's
00:30:51 --> 00:30:54 been released yet. Um, it it took some
00:30:54 --> 00:30:55 pretty heavy editing cuz there were four
00:30:55 --> 00:30:57 people on it, so it was
00:30:57 --> 00:30:57 >> okay.
00:30:58 --> 00:31:00 >> It was a big show. But, uh, yeah, that
00:31:00 --> 00:31:02 one will be available soon, if not
00:31:02 --> 00:31:04 already.
00:31:04 --> 00:31:05 Uh, and thanks for all your questions.
00:31:05 --> 00:31:08 Please keep them coming at our website,
00:31:08 --> 00:31:09 spacenutspodcast.com
00:31:09 --> 00:31:12 or spacenuts.io, IO and click on the
00:31:12 --> 00:31:14 little AMA tab at the top and send us
00:31:14 --> 00:31:16 your text or audio questions. If you're
00:31:16 --> 00:31:18 sending us an audio question, please
00:31:18 --> 00:31:20 remember to tell us where you're from
00:31:20 --> 00:31:23 and your name. Um, it doesn't do that by
00:31:23 --> 00:31:25 itself. Uh, although I know sometimes
00:31:25 --> 00:31:27 people forget to tell us their name on
00:31:27 --> 00:31:30 where they're from on text as well. Um,
00:31:30 --> 00:31:32 but that's okay. Um, it does, you know,
00:31:32 --> 00:31:34 it's not mandatory, but it just helps us
00:31:34 --> 00:31:37 to know where everybody's at. Uh, Fred,
00:31:37 --> 00:31:40 we're done. Thanks very much. Oh, thank
00:31:40 --> 00:31:42 you, Andrew. Uh, good fun and great to
00:31:42 --> 00:31:43 hear from the listeners as well,
00:31:43 --> 00:31:45 especially, you know, when we get
00:31:45 --> 00:31:47 questions that, uh, cover everything
00:31:47 --> 00:31:50 from dark matter stars and dormant
00:31:50 --> 00:31:52 comets to the latest in telescope
00:31:52 --> 00:31:53 technology.
00:31:53 --> 00:31:55 >> Where else can you hear about all that?
00:31:55 --> 00:31:58 >> Exactly right. Yeah. All right. Thanks,
00:31:58 --> 00:31:59 Fred. See you soon.
00:31:59 --> 00:32:00 >> Yeah. Cheers. Cheers for
00:32:00 --> 00:32:02 >> Professor Fred Watson, astronomer at
00:32:02 --> 00:32:03 large. And thanks to Hugh in the studio,
00:32:03 --> 00:32:05 couldn't be with us today because he
00:32:05 --> 00:32:08 bought a smart telescope. He's not smart
00:32:08 --> 00:32:10 enough to use it. And from me, Andrew
00:32:10 --> 00:32:12 Dunley, thanks for your company. We'll
00:32:12 --> 00:32:14 catch you on the next episode of Space
00:32:14 --> 00:32:15 Nuts. Bye-bye.
00:32:15 --> 00:32:16 >> Space Nuts.
00:32:16 --> 00:32:18 >> You've been listening to the Space Nuts
00:32:18 --> 00:32:20 podcast,
00:32:20 --> 00:32:23 >> available at Apple Podcasts, Spotify,
00:32:23 --> 00:32:26 iHeart Radio, or your favorite podcast
00:32:26 --> 00:32:28 player. You can also stream on demand at
00:32:28 --> 00:32:31 byes.com. This has been another quality
00:32:31 --> 00:32:36 podcast production from byes.com.