In this poignant episode of Space Nuts, hosts Andrew Dunkley and Professor Fred Watson reflect on the 40th anniversary of the Challenger space shuttle disaster, sharing their memories and insights about this tragic event. They also celebrate the announcement of the Australian of the Year and delve into intriguing discussions about the definition of moons and the rapid growth of black holes.
Episode Highlights:
- Challenger Space Shuttle Disaster: Andrew and Fred discuss the Challenger disaster of 1986, revisiting the events leading to the tragic explosion and the lessons learned from this pivotal moment in space history. They reflect on the human cost and the impact it had on the space program.
- Australian of the Year: The hosts celebrate the recognition of Catherine Bennell Pegg, an Australian astronaut and Director of Space Technology at the Australian Space Agency, as the Australian of the Year. They discuss her contributions to space science and her role in inspiring future generations.
- Defining a Moon: Andrew and Fred explore a recent study that challenges our understanding of what constitutes a moon. They discuss the discovery of a massive potential moon orbiting a gas giant and the implications for our definitions in astronomy.
- The Rapid Growth of Black Holes: The episode concludes with a fascinating examination of how black holes can grow rapidly in chaotic conditions, as discussed in recent research. The hosts analyze the findings and what they mean for our understanding of the universe.
For more Space Nuts, including our continuously updating newsfeed and to listen to all our episodes, visit our website. Follow us on social media at SpaceNutsPod on Facebook, Instagram, and more. We love engaging with our community, so be sure to drop us a message or comment on your favorite platform.
If you’d like to help support Space Nuts and join our growing family of insiders for commercial-free episodes and more, visit spacenutspodcast.com/about.
Stay curious, keep looking up, and join us next time for more stellar insights and cosmic wonders. Until then, clear skies and happy stargazing.
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/space-nuts-astronomy-insights-cosmic-discoveries--2631155/support.
00:00:00 --> 00:00:00 Professor Fred Watson: Hi there.
00:00:00 --> 00:00:03 Andrew Dunkley: Thanks for joining us on Space Nuts, where we
00:00:03 --> 00:00:05 talk astronomy and space science, uh, twice
00:00:05 --> 00:00:08 a week in fact, and I'm glad you could join
00:00:08 --> 00:00:10 us yet again. Uh, today's
00:00:10 --> 00:00:13 episode has some great, uh,
00:00:14 --> 00:00:16 news, but also, uh, a bit of a sad
00:00:16 --> 00:00:19 reflection. It's 40 years since
00:00:19 --> 00:00:22 the Challenger space shuttle disaster.
00:00:22 --> 00:00:24 Can you believe that? 40 years. Of course,
00:00:24 --> 00:00:27 some of you listening to us won't
00:00:27 --> 00:00:30 remember it because you're 40. Uh, but, uh,
00:00:30 --> 00:00:32 for those of us who are a few years older,
00:00:32 --> 00:00:34 uh, it is, um, a very, very strong
00:00:34 --> 00:00:37 memory. We'll, uh, talk about that. On a
00:00:37 --> 00:00:40 happier note, we will reveal the Australian
00:00:40 --> 00:00:42 of the Year. I think most Australians will
00:00:42 --> 00:00:45 know who that is. Uh, how do you
00:00:45 --> 00:00:47 define a moon? That question has come up
00:00:47 --> 00:00:50 because of a potential discovery and
00:00:50 --> 00:00:53 they think they know why black holes are
00:00:53 --> 00:00:56 getting bigger fast. We'll
00:00:56 --> 00:00:58 talk about all of that on this episode of
00:00:58 --> 00:00:59 Space Nuts.
00:00:59 --> 00:01:02 Generic: 15 seconds. Guidance is internal.
00:01:02 --> 00:01:04 10, 9. Ignition
00:01:05 --> 00:01:05 sequence start.
00:01:06 --> 00:01:07 Professor Fred Watson: Space Nuts.
00:01:07 --> 00:01:09 Generic: 5, 4, 3. 2. 1. 2, 3, 4,
00:01:09 --> 00:01:12 5, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1. Space
00:01:12 --> 00:01:15 Nuts astronauts report it feels good.
00:01:16 --> 00:01:18 Andrew Dunkley: Joining us as always, is his good self,
00:01:18 --> 00:01:20 Professor Fred Watson, astronomer at large.
00:01:20 --> 00:01:21 Hello, Fred.
00:01:21 --> 00:01:23 Professor Fred Watson: Hello. It's good to be good.
00:01:23 --> 00:01:25 Andrew Dunkley: It is good to be good. It's good to see you.
00:01:26 --> 00:01:29 It's good to be in a cool room because it's
00:01:29 --> 00:01:31 not cool in our part of the world at the
00:01:31 --> 00:01:33 moment. We're right in the middle of a week
00:01:33 --> 00:01:35 long, uh, run of 40 plus
00:01:36 --> 00:01:38 Celsius temperatures. Uh,
00:01:38 --> 00:01:41 we've, uh, broken our uh, record
00:01:41 --> 00:01:44 in Dubbo for the hottest day in January
00:01:44 --> 00:01:45 and that was
00:01:45 --> 00:01:48 46.21 I think
00:01:48 --> 00:01:51 we had, uh, on Monday on Australia
00:01:51 --> 00:01:54 Day, which, um, yeah, it was dreadful.
00:01:54 --> 00:01:57 I mean it was just horrific. Um, so,
00:01:57 --> 00:01:58 yeah, it's, it's been a pretty rough week.
00:01:59 --> 00:02:01 Um, my plants are suffering. There's nothing
00:02:01 --> 00:02:04 I can do about it. And I, uh, think we're
00:02:04 --> 00:02:06 going to lose a few. So unfortunately, that's
00:02:06 --> 00:02:09 the way it goes. Um, I suppose that's what
00:02:09 --> 00:02:11 happens when they plant plants in an
00:02:11 --> 00:02:13 environment like this that um, don't come
00:02:13 --> 00:02:16 from here. They struggle. But,
00:02:16 --> 00:02:18 uh, yes, all, all is well with you?
00:02:19 --> 00:02:22 Professor Fred Watson: Uh, yeah, our plants, uh, pretty well are all
00:02:22 --> 00:02:25 natives, uh, in Marnie's garden. So they,
00:02:25 --> 00:02:27 they don't seem to mind.
00:02:27 --> 00:02:29 But we've got much more modest temperatures
00:02:29 --> 00:02:31 than you have here on the coast.
00:02:31 --> 00:02:33 Andrew Dunkley: Probably about 10 degrees cooler.
00:02:33 --> 00:02:36 Professor Fred Watson: I imagine it's not quite that, but
00:02:36 --> 00:02:39 not far off. Yeah, yeah, actually, no, it's
00:02:39 --> 00:02:41 more like 20 at the moment. 20
00:02:41 --> 00:02:44 degrees? Yeah, we're down at, um. But it's
00:02:44 --> 00:02:45 forecast to be 29 today, so.
00:02:45 --> 00:02:48 Andrew Dunkley: Yes, well, we're going to get to 41 I think
00:02:48 --> 00:02:51 today, so I think we're already pushing
00:02:51 --> 00:02:54 towards 30 as I speak. And it's only what,
00:02:54 --> 00:02:56 9:30 in the morning local time. So,
00:02:57 --> 00:02:59 um, we've got a lot to talk about, so we
00:02:59 --> 00:03:00 better get stuck into it.
00:03:00 --> 00:03:03 Uh, the first thing is, uh, something
00:03:03 --> 00:03:06 that, um, I don't think anyone who
00:03:06 --> 00:03:09 was around at the time will ever forget.
00:03:09 --> 00:03:12 I'm talking about the Challenger space
00:03:12 --> 00:03:14 shuttle launch, uh, in
00:03:14 --> 00:03:17 1986. And this is
00:03:17 --> 00:03:18 basically what happened.
00:03:19 --> 00:03:21 Generic: T minus 15 seconds.
00:03:24 --> 00:03:26 T minus 10, 9,
00:03:27 --> 00:03:30 8, 7, 6. We
00:03:30 --> 00:03:32 have main engine start. 4,
00:03:32 --> 00:03:34 3, 2, 1.
00:03:35 --> 00:03:36 And liftoff.
00:03:37 --> 00:03:37 Andrew Dunkley: Liftoff.
00:03:37 --> 00:03:40 Generic: Uh, of the 25th space shuttle mission and it
00:03:40 --> 00:03:42 has cleared the tower.
00:03:46 --> 00:03:47 Challenger
00:03:50 --> 00:03:52 good roll program confirmed.
00:03:53 --> 00:03:55 Challenger now heading downrange.
00:04:03 --> 00:04:06 Engines beginning throttling down now at
00:04:06 --> 00:04:08 94%. Normal throttles
00:04:08 --> 00:04:10 for most of the flight. 104%.
00:04:13 --> 00:04:16 Throttle down to 65% shortly.
00:04:19 --> 00:04:22 Engines at 65%. Three engines running
00:04:22 --> 00:04:24 normally. Three good fuel cells. Three good
00:04:24 --> 00:04:25 APUs.
00:04:28 --> 00:04:30 Velocity 2257ft per second.
00:04:30 --> 00:04:32 Altitude 4.3 nautical miles downrange.
00:04:32 --> 00:04:33 Distance 3 nautical
00:04:33 --> 00:04:36 miles.
00:04:39 --> 00:04:41 Engines throttling up. Three engines now at
00:04:41 --> 00:04:43 104%. Challenger go at throttle up.
00:04:50 --> 00:04:53 1 minute 15 seconds. Velocity 2900ft per
00:04:53 --> 00:04:55 second. Altitude 9 nautical miles downrange.
00:04:55 --> 00:04:56 Distance 7 nautical miles.
00:05:03 --> 00:05:03 Professor Fred Watson: It.
00:05:18 --> 00:05:18 M.
00:05:26 --> 00:05:28 Generic: Flight controllers here looking very
00:05:28 --> 00:05:29 carefully at the situation.
00:05:31 --> 00:05:32 Obviously a major malfunction.
00:05:38 --> 00:05:39 We have no downlink.
00:05:49 --> 00:05:51 We have a report from the flight dynamics
00:05:51 --> 00:05:53 officer that the vehicle has exploded. Flight
00:05:53 --> 00:05:55 director confirms that we are looking at,
00:05:56 --> 00:05:58 uh, checking with the recovery forces to see,
00:05:58 --> 00:06:00 uh, what can be done at this point.
00:06:01 --> 00:06:03 Andrew Dunkley: And there it is. That was the launch of
00:06:03 --> 00:06:06 challenger in 1986, uh,
00:06:06 --> 00:06:08 in real time. Uh, and
00:06:09 --> 00:06:12 we heard the final words of, uh, the
00:06:12 --> 00:06:14 commander, Dick Scobie, when he said, roger,
00:06:15 --> 00:06:18 going with throttle up. And that was
00:06:18 --> 00:06:20 basically where it all went horribly wrong.
00:06:20 --> 00:06:22 Fred. Uh, the, um,
00:06:24 --> 00:06:26 cause of the accident was ultimately
00:06:26 --> 00:06:29 blamed on the O rings. The O rings
00:06:29 --> 00:06:32 joined each section of the solid
00:06:32 --> 00:06:34 rocket boosters and
00:06:35 --> 00:06:36 there were several of them, but one of them
00:06:37 --> 00:06:40 had a catastrophic failure and the, um,
00:06:40 --> 00:06:43 uh, the vehicle exploded as a consequence of
00:06:43 --> 00:06:46 that failure. And we all saw it,
00:06:46 --> 00:06:47 we all watched, um,
00:06:49 --> 00:06:49 was horrifying.
00:06:52 --> 00:06:53 Professor Fred Watson: Uh, indeed it was. I remember it very well
00:06:53 --> 00:06:56 too, of course. Um, so, yeah, it was
00:06:56 --> 00:06:58 um, nothing to do with the throttling up.
00:06:58 --> 00:07:00 That was just, that was just to get it going.
00:07:00 --> 00:07:02 Yeah, and
00:07:04 --> 00:07:06 they throttle back for the, um, maximum
00:07:06 --> 00:07:09 dynamic pressure, uh, region. When you've
00:07:09 --> 00:07:12 got the biggest aerodynamic forces, you
00:07:12 --> 00:07:13 Throttle back for that and then throttle up
00:07:13 --> 00:07:16 again. Um, and so it was
00:07:16 --> 00:07:19 eventually determined that, uh,
00:07:19 --> 00:07:21 what had happened was that the temperature on
00:07:21 --> 00:07:24 one side of the shuttle, uh, it was a cold
00:07:24 --> 00:07:26 morning, it was a winter morning, 28th of
00:07:26 --> 00:07:29 January, 2 degrees, I think it was 2 degrees
00:07:29 --> 00:07:32 above zero ambient when they launched. But
00:07:32 --> 00:07:34 one of the one side of the
00:07:35 --> 00:07:37 throttle, sorry, the shuttle and its boosters
00:07:37 --> 00:07:40 were still at minus two. And uh, those
00:07:40 --> 00:07:43 temperatures, um, those O
00:07:43 --> 00:07:46 rings become effectively, uh, non
00:07:46 --> 00:07:49 pliable. They, they don't, you know, they're
00:07:49 --> 00:07:51 not flexible. Uh, and so that's what
00:07:51 --> 00:07:54 allowed the fact that it was not behaving
00:07:54 --> 00:07:56 properly allowed gas to escape from that
00:07:56 --> 00:07:58 joint as exactly as you've said. There are
00:07:58 --> 00:08:01 four sections to the shuttle booster, each
00:08:01 --> 00:08:04 sealed by O rings. And it was the lower one,
00:08:04 --> 00:08:07 um, where combustion was at its extreme.
00:08:07 --> 00:08:10 Uh, it uh, meant the gases came through. And
00:08:10 --> 00:08:13 in fact, uh, there is footage that shows
00:08:13 --> 00:08:15 exactly that, uh, with these hot gases
00:08:15 --> 00:08:18 playing on the main fuel tank, um,
00:08:19 --> 00:08:21 the external fuel tank of the shuttle. So it
00:08:21 --> 00:08:24 was, uh, very much their fate was
00:08:24 --> 00:08:27 sealed even before launch, basically. And
00:08:27 --> 00:08:29 there were people at the company who built
00:08:29 --> 00:08:32 the boosters. Morton FIRE call who knew that.
00:08:32 --> 00:08:34 And they were overridden in their
00:08:34 --> 00:08:36 warnings that this was likely to be
00:08:36 --> 00:08:37 dangerous.
00:08:37 --> 00:08:40 Andrew Dunkley: They raised concerns a long time before this
00:08:40 --> 00:08:43 happened. In fact, uh, they'd discovered
00:08:43 --> 00:08:45 damage in the O rings from previous missions.
00:08:46 --> 00:08:49 And even the night before
00:08:49 --> 00:08:52 the launch they held a meeting to say,
00:08:52 --> 00:08:54 we don't think you've got to scrub the
00:08:54 --> 00:08:56 launch. It's not safe,
00:08:57 --> 00:09:00 something dreadful could happen. And I
00:09:00 --> 00:09:02 think, uh, the factor that
00:09:02 --> 00:09:04 made the difference, as you said, was the
00:09:04 --> 00:09:07 temperature that morning. Um, because
00:09:08 --> 00:09:10 previous flights were warmer.
00:09:10 --> 00:09:12 It was warmer, Yeah.
00:09:12 --> 00:09:14 Professor Fred Watson: I think 12 degrees was the lowest they'd ever
00:09:14 --> 00:09:17 launched at. And it was two that morning, as
00:09:17 --> 00:09:19 you said. Um, and one of the
00:09:19 --> 00:09:22 reasons for the
00:09:22 --> 00:09:25 reluctance to scrub the mission may have
00:09:25 --> 00:09:27 been the fact that we did have
00:09:28 --> 00:09:30 this teacher, uh, on board,
00:09:31 --> 00:09:33 Christina McAuliffe, that's her name, I
00:09:33 --> 00:09:36 think. Um, she was, uh,
00:09:36 --> 00:09:39 a schoolteacher, not an astronaut. Uh,
00:09:39 --> 00:09:41 she'd engaged many, many schools
00:09:41 --> 00:09:44 across the country. So
00:09:45 --> 00:09:47 huge numbers of people were watching. And
00:09:47 --> 00:09:50 NASA had done that purposely, I think, to
00:09:50 --> 00:09:52 sort of inject some more interest into the
00:09:52 --> 00:09:54 shuttle program. Because they'd had 25
00:09:54 --> 00:09:57 successful launches and it was becoming
00:09:57 --> 00:10:00 basically routine. Um, you know,
00:10:00 --> 00:10:03 very. People were blase about it. Uh,
00:10:03 --> 00:10:06 but just to also confirm
00:10:06 --> 00:10:08 that there were a further 87 successful
00:10:08 --> 00:10:11 shuttle launches after that. So the problems
00:10:11 --> 00:10:13 were fixed and, uh, the lessons were learned.
00:10:14 --> 00:10:17 Um, it was a tragedy, of course,
00:10:17 --> 00:10:19 a human tragedy. With the loss of life.
00:10:19 --> 00:10:22 Uh, I noticed something yesterday that
00:10:22 --> 00:10:25 blew me away, Andrew. Um,
00:10:25 --> 00:10:27 there are 17 astronauts
00:10:28 --> 00:10:30 were lost, uh, in NASA
00:10:30 --> 00:10:33 programs. The three, um,
00:10:33 --> 00:10:36 Apollo 1 astronauts who died in
00:10:36 --> 00:10:39 the fire on the ground, uh, of the Apollo 1
00:10:39 --> 00:10:41 uh, capsule. That was on the
00:10:42 --> 00:10:45 uh, 27th of January
00:10:45 --> 00:10:48 1967. Yes, the uh,
00:10:48 --> 00:10:51 Columbia disaster, uh, when
00:10:51 --> 00:10:54 re. Um entry was um, basically turned
00:10:54 --> 00:10:57 into a uh, you know, a disintegration because
00:10:57 --> 00:11:00 of damage uh, to the, to the shuttle wing.
00:11:00 --> 00:11:02 Andrew Dunkley: That wasn't it.
00:11:02 --> 00:11:05 Professor Fred Watson: That's correct. That was on the 1st of
00:11:05 --> 00:11:07 February 2003. So these
00:11:08 --> 00:11:11 losses of life, we're all within a
00:11:11 --> 00:11:13 week of each other in anniversary times.
00:11:13 --> 00:11:16 It's quite amazing. So, yes, the
00:11:16 --> 00:11:19 Challenger disaster, uh, 59
00:11:19 --> 00:11:22 years before, uh, the day before we'd lost
00:11:22 --> 00:11:24 the Apollo 1 crew. And uh,
00:11:26 --> 00:11:28 um. It's a coincidence, but it's a spooky
00:11:28 --> 00:11:28 one.
00:11:29 --> 00:11:31 Andrew Dunkley: It is very spooky. I remember where I was
00:11:31 --> 00:11:34 when the news broke. I just got in my car
00:11:34 --> 00:11:37 and um, I naturally
00:11:37 --> 00:11:39 had the radio on being someone who worked in
00:11:39 --> 00:11:42 the industry. And uh, the news came on
00:11:42 --> 00:11:45 as I was backing the car out and I just
00:11:45 --> 00:11:48 stopped in my tracks and I just shook. I
00:11:48 --> 00:11:50 couldn't believe it. Um,
00:11:50 --> 00:11:53 and, and what really haunts me is that only a
00:11:53 --> 00:11:56 week before I'd been talking to my
00:11:56 --> 00:11:58 future sister in law who was still in high
00:11:58 --> 00:12:00 school at the time. And she brought it up
00:12:00 --> 00:12:02 with me about the space shuttle program. And
00:12:02 --> 00:12:05 I said what worries me is something
00:12:05 --> 00:12:07 horribly wrong is going to happen.
00:12:08 --> 00:12:10 Yeah, uh, I, I think, I think they're
00:12:10 --> 00:12:13 actually being too gung ho. Those. That's
00:12:13 --> 00:12:16 what I said to her. And I couldn't believe
00:12:16 --> 00:12:19 less. You know, about a week later this
00:12:19 --> 00:12:19 happened.
00:12:19 --> 00:12:21 Professor Fred Watson: Uh, well, you were right in, in a way that's
00:12:21 --> 00:12:23 sort of what, what led to it.
00:12:23 --> 00:12:25 Andrew Dunkley: Yeah, yeah. Uh, but the same thing,
00:12:26 --> 00:12:29 uh, as you mentioned with the, the loss of
00:12:29 --> 00:12:31 interest in the space shuttle program from
00:12:31 --> 00:12:34 the public perspect, uh, happened with
00:12:34 --> 00:12:36 Apollo like they supposed to, they were
00:12:36 --> 00:12:38 supposed to have more missions but they just
00:12:38 --> 00:12:40 went no, no one's interested anymore. So they
00:12:40 --> 00:12:43 stopped at 17 and. Quite
00:12:43 --> 00:12:46 right. And, and I, I suppose these
00:12:46 --> 00:12:49 days space travel has just become
00:12:49 --> 00:12:51 routine. There are missions going up and down
00:12:51 --> 00:12:53 all the time we never hear about because
00:12:54 --> 00:12:57 it's just it, it's so very regular
00:12:57 --> 00:12:59 now. And, and when you bring in the private
00:12:59 --> 00:13:01 sector on top of that there's launches every
00:13:01 --> 00:13:03 other day. It's, it's just happening.
00:13:04 --> 00:13:06 And was always going to go that way, I
00:13:06 --> 00:13:07 suppose. Uh, but
00:13:08 --> 00:13:11 um, you've got to spare a thought for
00:13:11 --> 00:13:14 the pioneers that uh, sacrificed their lives
00:13:14 --> 00:13:16 to make all this possible. Because without
00:13:16 --> 00:13:18 them it just would never have got to the
00:13:18 --> 00:13:21 point it is now. And I think
00:13:21 --> 00:13:23 we've said it before. You go back to the
00:13:23 --> 00:13:26 history of flight and we got to the moon in
00:13:26 --> 00:13:29 less than 100 years of the first flight by
00:13:29 --> 00:13:31 a human being in a, in a um, purpose
00:13:31 --> 00:13:34 built uh, aircraft. It's just
00:13:34 --> 00:13:37 extraordinary to think that we,
00:13:37 --> 00:13:40 we could have leapt so far so fast. And I
00:13:40 --> 00:13:42 suppose when you do that there is a price.
00:13:42 --> 00:13:44 And this was one of the, one of the costs
00:13:44 --> 00:13:47 of uh, of space travel and aeronautics and
00:13:48 --> 00:13:51 yeah, it was very sad day and um, one I will
00:13:51 --> 00:13:52 never forget. Red.
00:13:54 --> 00:13:57 Uh, we will leave Challenger there um,
00:13:57 --> 00:14:00 to some happier news and of course
00:14:00 --> 00:14:03 uh, the other celebrated Australia
00:14:03 --> 00:14:06 Day in this country. 26th of January
00:14:07 --> 00:14:10 and every year we uh,
00:14:10 --> 00:14:13 have the announcement of the Australian of
00:14:13 --> 00:14:15 the Year. Now quite often it's a sports star.
00:14:16 --> 00:14:19 That usually, usually happens. Uh, although
00:14:19 --> 00:14:21 in recent years they've been focusing more on
00:14:21 --> 00:14:24 the academic side of things or the medical
00:14:24 --> 00:14:27 side of things. Which is, which is good. This
00:14:27 --> 00:14:29 year though, uh, you must be really pleased.
00:14:29 --> 00:14:32 It is an Australian astronaut,
00:14:33 --> 00:14:34 uh, absolutely.
00:14:34 --> 00:14:36 Professor Fred Watson: Delighted, yeah really thrilled about that.
00:14:36 --> 00:14:39 Um, she's an astronaut
00:14:39 --> 00:14:41 who uh, has been qualified under
00:14:41 --> 00:14:44 ESA's Program Astronaut Program, uh, the
00:14:44 --> 00:14:46 European Space Agency. She hasn't flown yet.
00:14:47 --> 00:14:48 Uh, there's every chance that she will, that
00:14:48 --> 00:14:51 she will fly to the space station, uh, and
00:14:52 --> 00:14:55 fulfill a mission. Catherine bennelpegg
00:14:55 --> 00:14:57 is her name. I discovered um, yesterday,
00:14:58 --> 00:15:01 looking at dates yesterday obviously um, she
00:15:01 --> 00:15:04 is one day short of 40 years younger
00:15:04 --> 00:15:06 than me but her birthday is the day
00:15:06 --> 00:15:08 after mine. So
00:15:09 --> 00:15:12 that's a non coincidence. But um, not
00:15:12 --> 00:15:15 only an astronaut, but she is also Director
00:15:15 --> 00:15:17 of Space Technology at the Australian Space
00:15:17 --> 00:15:19 Agency which was um, very much um,
00:15:20 --> 00:15:23 close to my heart in the work that I did for
00:15:23 --> 00:15:25 the government, the Australian Space Agency,
00:15:25 --> 00:15:27 uh, a sister organization within the
00:15:27 --> 00:15:28 Department of the Industry, Science and
00:15:28 --> 00:15:31 Resources where I worked. So uh, a lot of
00:15:31 --> 00:15:34 friends there. Um, and Catherine uh,
00:15:34 --> 00:15:36 is uh, absolutely
00:15:37 --> 00:15:39 well deserved recipient of the
00:15:39 --> 00:15:41 annual Australian of the Year award and
00:15:41 --> 00:15:44 she'll do great things with it. She wants to
00:15:44 --> 00:15:46 be um, very much a STEM
00:15:46 --> 00:15:49 ambassador as well for public ed,
00:15:49 --> 00:15:51 for education, uh, for science, technology,
00:15:52 --> 00:15:54 education. She'll do a great job. She's a
00:15:54 --> 00:15:54 lovely person.
00:15:55 --> 00:15:58 Andrew Dunkley: Yes, um, she comes across that way and
00:15:59 --> 00:16:02 I think the interest in space science is
00:16:02 --> 00:16:05 starting to really uh, grow from strength
00:16:05 --> 00:16:08 to strength and uh, she will do
00:16:08 --> 00:16:11 a wonderful job in that regard and
00:16:11 --> 00:16:13 maybe inspire other Australians to follow in
00:16:13 --> 00:16:16 her footsteps. And now that we have our own
00:16:16 --> 00:16:18 space agency. We certainly want that, don't
00:16:18 --> 00:16:19 we?
00:16:20 --> 00:16:22 Professor Fred Watson: Very much so, yes. The Australian Space
00:16:22 --> 00:16:24 Agency was formed in 2018.
00:16:24 --> 00:16:27 It's um, still going strong.
00:16:27 --> 00:16:30 A lot of its, uh, functions are regulatory.
00:16:30 --> 00:16:32 It's all about regulating launches and things
00:16:32 --> 00:16:35 of that sort, um, but also promoting
00:16:35 --> 00:16:38 startups and things of that sort to encourage
00:16:38 --> 00:16:40 the space industry here in Australia, which
00:16:40 --> 00:16:42 was why it was set up in the first place.
00:16:42 --> 00:16:42 Andrew Dunkley: Yeah.
00:16:42 --> 00:16:44 Professor Fred Watson: Catherine. Catherine's a great, you know, a
00:16:44 --> 00:16:46 great cheerleader for that. It's brilliant.
00:16:46 --> 00:16:48 Andrew Dunkley: She's got a busy year ahead of her now
00:16:48 --> 00:16:51 because her Australian of the Year duties
00:16:51 --> 00:16:53 will be on top of what she has to do for her
00:16:53 --> 00:16:56 regular gig. So she'll be doing a lot more
00:16:56 --> 00:16:58 travel, a lot more speaking, a lot more
00:16:58 --> 00:17:01 engagements. Uh, it, it's a big job when
00:17:01 --> 00:17:03 you're named Australian of the Year, so I'm
00:17:03 --> 00:17:03 told.
00:17:05 --> 00:17:08 Professor Fred Watson: Well, you never know. Andrew. One day. One
00:17:08 --> 00:17:09 day. Ah.
00:17:09 --> 00:17:12 Andrew Dunkley: Uh, look, I'd be, I'd be lucky to
00:17:12 --> 00:17:15 be named, you know, my street Member of
00:17:15 --> 00:17:18 the year. Not a
00:17:18 --> 00:17:20 big street either, but uh, no, good luck
00:17:20 --> 00:17:23 to her. And uh, congratulations to Catherine
00:17:23 --> 00:17:25 Bennell Pegg. This is Space
00:17:25 --> 00:17:28 Nuts with Andrew Dunkley and Professor
00:17:28 --> 00:17:28 Fred.
00:17:32 --> 00:17:34 Generic: Okay, we've had a problem here. This is
00:17:34 --> 00:17:35 Houston. Say again please.
00:17:35 --> 00:17:36 Andrew Dunkley: Houston, we've had a problem.
00:17:36 --> 00:17:39 Generic: We've had a main D bus. Roger made the
00:17:39 --> 00:17:41 interval. Okay, standby 13. We're looking at
00:17:41 --> 00:17:41 it.
00:17:42 --> 00:17:44 Andrew Dunkley: Do you like that, Fred? We've got some new
00:17:44 --> 00:17:47 links. I had a bit of time up my sleeve so
00:17:47 --> 00:17:48 I um, created some.
00:17:48 --> 00:17:51 Professor Fred Watson: New stuff that's a very appropriate one as
00:17:51 --> 00:17:51 well.
00:17:51 --> 00:17:53 Andrew Dunkley: Yes, I thought so too. Yeah.
00:17:53 --> 00:17:56 Uh, now our next story is
00:17:56 --> 00:17:59 about defining what is a moon.
00:17:59 --> 00:18:01 This has come about after
00:18:02 --> 00:18:04 a study been published, um, which
00:18:05 --> 00:18:08 is a, um, peer reviewed paper
00:18:08 --> 00:18:10 in the archive. Um,
00:18:11 --> 00:18:14 it's looking at a really big gas giant, but
00:18:14 --> 00:18:17 they think it's got a moon that could force
00:18:17 --> 00:18:19 us to redefine what a moon is.
00:18:20 --> 00:18:21 Is that the way it goes?
00:18:22 --> 00:18:24 Professor Fred Watson: Well, yeah, because it's big. That's
00:18:24 --> 00:18:25 right.
00:18:25 --> 00:18:26 Andrew Dunkley: I got that impression.
00:18:27 --> 00:18:29 Professor Fred Watson: Yeah. So, um, this is
00:18:30 --> 00:18:32 uh, work, uh, that's been done,
00:18:33 --> 00:18:35 uh, uh, actually led from the University of
00:18:35 --> 00:18:38 Cambridge using uh, a uh, thing called
00:18:38 --> 00:18:40 an interferometer, which is one of these
00:18:40 --> 00:18:43 things that brings light waves together and
00:18:43 --> 00:18:46 watches them cancel out. And by, um,
00:18:46 --> 00:18:49 doing that carefully enough, you can uh,
00:18:49 --> 00:18:51 learn a lot more than you otherwise could.
00:18:51 --> 00:18:53 Uh, and there is an interferometer which is
00:18:53 --> 00:18:56 called gravity. Uh, good name for it because,
00:18:56 --> 00:18:58 uh, that's one of its tasks was to um,
00:18:59 --> 00:19:01 kind of look at the. Look at the um,
00:19:01 --> 00:19:03 gravitational forces around black holes,
00:19:03 --> 00:19:05 which is done very successfully around the
00:19:05 --> 00:19:07 black hole at the center of our galaxy. It's
00:19:07 --> 00:19:09 on the Very Large Telescope in Chile. And
00:19:09 --> 00:19:12 it's a way of, you will know and some
00:19:12 --> 00:19:14 of your listeners, sorry, some of our
00:19:14 --> 00:19:16 listeners will remember, uh, that the Very
00:19:16 --> 00:19:19 Large telescope is actually 4 8.2 meter
00:19:20 --> 00:19:22 uh, telescopes which can be used together,
00:19:22 --> 00:19:25 uh, along with um, some auxiliary telescopes
00:19:25 --> 00:19:28 as well. And that's uh, they're used together
00:19:29 --> 00:19:31 in the science of
00:19:31 --> 00:19:33 interferometry, which lets you uh,
00:19:33 --> 00:19:36 look at um, objects in space
00:19:36 --> 00:19:39 in very great detail. And in particular,
00:19:40 --> 00:19:42 uh, the scientists have been watching the
00:19:42 --> 00:19:45 orbit of a gas giant, uh,
00:19:46 --> 00:19:48 uh, exoplanet, which
00:19:49 --> 00:19:50 has the Lovely name of HD
00:19:50 --> 00:19:53 206893B. It's
00:19:53 --> 00:19:56 133 light years from our uh, solar system
00:19:56 --> 00:19:58 as the crow flies. Um, but what they've done
00:19:58 --> 00:20:01 is they've watched the motion of this gas
00:20:01 --> 00:20:04 giant, uh, uh, as it
00:20:04 --> 00:20:06 uh, orbits around its parent star, which is
00:20:06 --> 00:20:09 HD 206893 itself. The
00:20:09 --> 00:20:12 B refers at the end of that refers to the gas
00:20:12 --> 00:20:15 giant planet itself. But what they've seen is
00:20:15 --> 00:20:17 that the orbit of this giant planet
00:20:17 --> 00:20:20 is wobbling slightly as it goes around
00:20:21 --> 00:20:24 little, um, you know, deviations, uh, from
00:20:24 --> 00:20:27 a perfect ellipse which are
00:20:27 --> 00:20:29 interpreted uh, as being due
00:20:29 --> 00:20:32 to a moon. And
00:20:32 --> 00:20:35 by knowing the, knowing the mass of
00:20:35 --> 00:20:38 the, or estimating the mass of the planet
00:20:38 --> 00:20:41 itself, um, you can estimate the
00:20:41 --> 00:20:43 mass of this moon and it's, it's
00:20:43 --> 00:20:46 enormous. Uh, it's um, many
00:20:46 --> 00:20:49 times the mass. If, uh, I remember rightly,
00:20:49 --> 00:20:51 uh, something like nine times the mass of
00:20:51 --> 00:20:54 Neptune, 40% of the mass of
00:20:54 --> 00:20:57 Jupiter. Uh, and you
00:20:57 --> 00:20:59 know, when you compare that with the moons in
00:20:59 --> 00:21:01 our solar system, it's much, much heavier
00:21:01 --> 00:21:04 than anything or much, much more massive
00:21:04 --> 00:21:07 than anything we've got. Uh, so
00:21:07 --> 00:21:10 that leads to the question, well,
00:21:10 --> 00:21:12 you know, if you've got something that's nine
00:21:12 --> 00:21:14 times the mass of Neptune, could you ever
00:21:14 --> 00:21:17 call it a moon? Uh, but the normal definition
00:21:17 --> 00:21:19 of a moon or satellite is
00:21:20 --> 00:21:22 something that is in orbit around an object
00:21:22 --> 00:21:25 that is in orbit around a star. In other
00:21:25 --> 00:21:28 words, a planet. Um, so do we want to
00:21:28 --> 00:21:30 bend that definition or are we just content
00:21:30 --> 00:21:33 for this thing to be the most massive moon
00:21:33 --> 00:21:33 known?
00:21:34 --> 00:21:36 Andrew Dunkley: Well, where do you draw the line?
00:21:37 --> 00:21:40 You know, if the definition is a satellite
00:21:40 --> 00:21:43 orbiting at a, an object orbiting a
00:21:43 --> 00:21:45 star, then that's. It shouldn't matter how
00:21:45 --> 00:21:46 big it is, should it?
00:21:48 --> 00:21:50 Professor Fred Watson: Uh, no, that's right, that would be my view,
00:21:50 --> 00:21:53 uh, that um, you
00:21:53 --> 00:21:56 keep the Basically keep the definition, uh,
00:21:56 --> 00:21:59 as it stands, uh, what you do is you just
00:21:59 --> 00:22:02 extend your range of uh,
00:22:04 --> 00:22:06 expectancy in terms of
00:22:07 --> 00:22:09 uh, the size of these objects. Um,
00:22:10 --> 00:22:13 there's a, in fact there's a lovely comment.
00:22:13 --> 00:22:14 There's several comments from the lead
00:22:14 --> 00:22:17 author. Uh, I'm looking just to say where
00:22:17 --> 00:22:18 we're looking. We're looking at Daily Galaxy
00:22:18 --> 00:22:21 for this report, but it's a paper, uh, that's
00:22:21 --> 00:22:23 been published I uh, think in Monthly
00:22:23 --> 00:22:25 Notices, again, uh, one of the leading
00:22:25 --> 00:22:27 journals anyway, um, and
00:22:28 --> 00:22:30 the uh, you know, the, the
00:22:30 --> 00:22:33 quotation from Quentin Crowell, who's one of
00:22:33 --> 00:22:36 the authors, I think the lead author of this
00:22:36 --> 00:22:38 paper. Um, uh, some
00:22:38 --> 00:22:40 nice quotes. What we found is that
00:22:40 --> 00:22:43 HD20683B doesn't just
00:22:43 --> 00:22:46 follow a smooth orbit around its star. On top
00:22:46 --> 00:22:47 of that motion, it shows a small but
00:22:47 --> 00:22:50 measurable back and forth wobble. Wobble has
00:22:50 --> 00:22:53 a period of nine months and a size comparable
00:22:53 --> 00:22:55 to the Earth Moon distance. This kind of
00:22:55 --> 00:22:57 signal is exactly what you'd expect if the
00:22:57 --> 00:22:59 object were being tugged by an unseen
00:22:59 --> 00:23:02 companion such as a large moon, making this
00:23:02 --> 00:23:04 system a particularly intriguing
00:23:04 --> 00:23:07 candidate for hosting an
00:23:07 --> 00:23:09 exomoon. Um, and goes on
00:23:09 --> 00:23:12 to say um, uh,
00:23:13 --> 00:23:15 uh, this raises the question because of the
00:23:15 --> 00:23:17 mass of this moon, this naturally raises the
00:23:17 --> 00:23:19 question of whether such an object should
00:23:19 --> 00:23:21 even be called a moon. These masses, the
00:23:21 --> 00:23:24 distinction between a massive moon and a very
00:23:24 --> 00:23:26 low mass companion becomes blurred.
00:23:27 --> 00:23:29 However, there is currently no definition of
00:23:29 --> 00:23:32 an exomoon and in practice astronomers
00:23:32 --> 00:23:35 generally for generally refer to any object
00:23:35 --> 00:23:38 orbiting a planet or substellar companion
00:23:38 --> 00:23:41 as a moon. So that's the bottom line.
00:23:41 --> 00:23:44 Um, uh, there are not many known and that's
00:23:44 --> 00:23:46 because moons naturally are generally small
00:23:47 --> 00:23:50 and so their effect on their, on
00:23:50 --> 00:23:52 the planet around which they're orbiting is
00:23:53 --> 00:23:55 too small to uh, discover.
00:23:56 --> 00:23:59 Whereas uh, this thing is so big that its
00:23:59 --> 00:24:01 signal is really quite, uh,
00:24:01 --> 00:24:04 quite impressive. It's uh,
00:24:04 --> 00:24:06 sufficient for this team to
00:24:07 --> 00:24:09 give us the paper that we're talking about.
00:24:09 --> 00:24:12 Just one final quote, uh, from Kral. Uh,
00:24:12 --> 00:24:15 it's important to keep in mind that we're
00:24:15 --> 00:24:17 likely only seeing the tip of the iceberg,
00:24:17 --> 00:24:19 just as the first exoplanets discovered were
00:24:19 --> 00:24:21 the most massive ones orbiting very close to
00:24:21 --> 00:24:23 their stars simply because they were the
00:24:23 --> 00:24:26 easiest to detect. The first exomoons we
00:24:26 --> 00:24:29 identify are expected to be the most massive
00:24:29 --> 00:24:31 and extreme examples. It's a really good
00:24:31 --> 00:24:31 point.
00:24:31 --> 00:24:34 Andrew Dunkley: And there it is. And, and yet again we
00:24:34 --> 00:24:37 find in a potential new discovery
00:24:37 --> 00:24:40 that it's not what
00:24:40 --> 00:24:43 we would expect to be the norm. This, this is
00:24:43 --> 00:24:46 Another thing that we may not have
00:24:46 --> 00:24:47 anticipated.
00:24:48 --> 00:24:51 Professor Fred Watson: Uh, that's. That's right. Um, so.
00:24:51 --> 00:24:54 Yes. So, I mean, the point is well made.
00:24:54 --> 00:24:57 Quentin's point is well made that the, uh,
00:24:58 --> 00:25:00 the. The. That you're going to find the.
00:25:01 --> 00:25:03 The real outliers first because they're the
00:25:03 --> 00:25:06 easiest ones to find. Uh, but at, uh,
00:25:06 --> 00:25:09 the same time, what you've said is true. Uh,
00:25:09 --> 00:25:11 the outliers are sometimes so surprising that
00:25:11 --> 00:25:14 they're difficult to believe. Uh, but we've
00:25:14 --> 00:25:16 got a, um. Yeah, we've got an outlier here
00:25:16 --> 00:25:18 that might well be the first of a new breed
00:25:18 --> 00:25:21 of, uh. Or a whole new regime of
00:25:21 --> 00:25:23 exomoon discoveries.
00:25:23 --> 00:25:26 Andrew Dunkley: Yeah, I didn't even think about exomoons.
00:25:26 --> 00:25:28 Like, we've discovered so many exoplanets
00:25:28 --> 00:25:31 now, and we continue to do so, but we haven't
00:25:31 --> 00:25:34 actually laid our eyes on an exomoon yet.
00:25:35 --> 00:25:37 Professor Fred Watson: No. Um, and m. In fact, we've not laid our
00:25:37 --> 00:25:39 eyes on most of the exoplanets. We've
00:25:39 --> 00:25:42 inferred their presence, uh, by indirect
00:25:42 --> 00:25:45 means. There are one or two, uh, that we can
00:25:45 --> 00:25:47 observe directly. Uh, but when you think,
00:25:47 --> 00:25:49 yes, moons are always going to be smaller
00:25:49 --> 00:25:51 than their parent planets, um,
00:25:52 --> 00:25:54 that means that, uh,
00:25:56 --> 00:25:58 we're still pushing the limits of what is
00:25:58 --> 00:26:00 technically possible to detect.
00:26:01 --> 00:26:04 Andrew Dunkley: Could we maybe redefine this discovery
00:26:04 --> 00:26:05 as, uh, like a dual planet?
00:26:07 --> 00:26:09 Professor Fred Watson: So there is a definition of a dual planet,
00:26:10 --> 00:26:12 um, what we call a binary planet,
00:26:13 --> 00:26:15 uh, which is, uh. If you have
00:26:15 --> 00:26:18 two objects, one orbiting the other,
00:26:18 --> 00:26:21 if their center of gravity, or what we call
00:26:21 --> 00:26:24 the barycenter, is outside the body of either
00:26:24 --> 00:26:26 of them, then it's a binary planet
00:26:26 --> 00:26:28 rather than a planet and a moon.
00:26:29 --> 00:26:31 Uh, and in fact,
00:26:32 --> 00:26:35 uh, Jupiter, sorry, Pluto and
00:26:35 --> 00:26:38 its moon Charon fit that bill. Pluto, of
00:26:38 --> 00:26:40 course, is a dwarf planet, but Pluto and
00:26:40 --> 00:26:42 Charon are probably a binary dwarf planet for
00:26:42 --> 00:26:43 that reason.
00:26:43 --> 00:26:44 Andrew Dunkley: Okay. Interesting.
00:26:44 --> 00:26:45 Professor Fred Watson: Yeah.
00:26:45 --> 00:26:48 Andrew Dunkley: So, um, there'll be more work
00:26:49 --> 00:26:52 to find out exactly what the situation
00:26:52 --> 00:26:55 is here, because it's only suspicion at the
00:26:55 --> 00:26:55 moment, isn't it?
00:26:56 --> 00:26:58 Professor Fred Watson: That's right. There will be more observations
00:26:59 --> 00:27:01 to confirm that, uh, uh,
00:27:02 --> 00:27:04 the planet itself behaves in a way that is
00:27:04 --> 00:27:06 consistent with this large
00:27:07 --> 00:27:10 hypothesized moon. We haven't seen it
00:27:10 --> 00:27:12 yet. In fact, we haven't seen the planet
00:27:12 --> 00:27:15 either. But, uh, we can deduce
00:27:15 --> 00:27:17 things from, uh, know, from the way the
00:27:17 --> 00:27:17 orbits behave.
00:27:18 --> 00:27:20 Andrew Dunkley: Yes, indeed. If you'd like to read about
00:27:20 --> 00:27:22 that, the, uh, study's been published on the
00:27:22 --> 00:27:24 archive, and it has been accepted for
00:27:24 --> 00:27:27 publication in Astronomy and Astrophysics.
00:27:27 --> 00:27:29 You can also read about it on the
00:27:29 --> 00:27:32 dailygalaxy.com uh, website.
00:27:32 --> 00:27:35 This is Space Nuts with Andrew Dunkley and
00:27:35 --> 00:27:37 Professor Fred Watson.
00:27:41 --> 00:27:44 Generic: Tranquility Base here. The Eagle has landed.
00:27:44 --> 00:27:45 Professor Fred Watson: Space nets.
00:27:45 --> 00:27:48 Andrew Dunkley: Speaking of, um, big planets with big
00:27:48 --> 00:27:51 moons, what about big black holes,
00:27:51 --> 00:27:54 uh, and the fact that they get big fast. We
00:27:54 --> 00:27:56 have always been mystified by this
00:27:56 --> 00:27:59 phenomenon. Uh, uh, have they
00:27:59 --> 00:28:00 solved it, Fred?
00:28:01 --> 00:28:03 Professor Fred Watson: Uh, certainly some work that looks as though
00:28:03 --> 00:28:05 it's pointing in the right direction. Yeah,
00:28:05 --> 00:28:08 this comes about really. And it's uh, an
00:28:08 --> 00:28:10 issue that has uh, only arisen in the era of
00:28:10 --> 00:28:13 the James Webb Space Telescope when, uh,
00:28:13 --> 00:28:15 which has detected um,
00:28:15 --> 00:28:18 the evidence for supermassive black
00:28:18 --> 00:28:21 holes very, very early in the universe. Uh,
00:28:21 --> 00:28:23 until the Webb came along, we all thought
00:28:23 --> 00:28:26 that supermassive black holes evolved
00:28:26 --> 00:28:28 over timescales comparable with the age of
00:28:28 --> 00:28:30 the universe, that you started off with small
00:28:30 --> 00:28:33 black holes. And as time went on, you
00:28:33 --> 00:28:35 know, billions of years passing until we get
00:28:35 --> 00:28:38 to the universe's current age of 13.8 billion
00:28:38 --> 00:28:41 years, uh, that they gradually grew
00:28:41 --> 00:28:44 bigger to form the supermassive black holes
00:28:44 --> 00:28:46 that we see in today's universe. But when you
00:28:46 --> 00:28:48 look further back, further out into space, as
00:28:48 --> 00:28:50 the Webb has done, you're looking further
00:28:50 --> 00:28:52 back in time. We're now seeing within a few
00:28:52 --> 00:28:54 hundred million years of the Big Bang itself.
00:28:54 --> 00:28:57 And we find these supermassive black holes
00:28:57 --> 00:29:00 already there. Um, and that's the
00:29:00 --> 00:29:01 puzzle. That's the conundrum. How did they
00:29:01 --> 00:29:03 get so big so rapidly?
00:29:04 --> 00:29:06 And the.
00:29:06 --> 00:29:09 Andrew Dunkley: So, so they, they went to McDonald's. That's
00:29:09 --> 00:29:09 what they did.
00:29:12 --> 00:29:14 Professor Fred Watson: Uh, the McDonald's of the early universe.
00:29:14 --> 00:29:16 Yes. There must be a, must be a name for
00:29:16 --> 00:29:17 that.
00:29:17 --> 00:29:17 Generic: Um.
00:29:19 --> 00:29:21 Professor Fred Watson: Fast food. That's what it's not. It's fast
00:29:21 --> 00:29:23 food. Yeah, I was going to work on drive
00:29:23 --> 00:29:25 through somehow, but that doesn't scan quite
00:29:25 --> 00:29:28 the same way as fast food does. It is
00:29:28 --> 00:29:31 fast food. That's exactly. In fact, that sums
00:29:31 --> 00:29:33 up the, the research paper by this team of
00:29:33 --> 00:29:35 scientists who are actually based in Ireland,
00:29:37 --> 00:29:40 uh, sums up their work very, very succinctly.
00:29:40 --> 00:29:43 So the issue is, uh, that
00:29:43 --> 00:29:46 uh, as we, as the, you know, so
00:29:46 --> 00:29:49 what we've got is this observations, set
00:29:49 --> 00:29:52 of observations tells us that black holes
00:29:52 --> 00:29:55 got supermassive very quickly. And
00:29:55 --> 00:29:58 that's a puzzle for the theoretical
00:29:58 --> 00:30:01 astronomers who work out how
00:30:01 --> 00:30:04 galaxies work, how galaxies form, how black
00:30:04 --> 00:30:06 holes form, uh, and all of that
00:30:06 --> 00:30:09 great stuff in the early universe. And
00:30:09 --> 00:30:12 what um, has been the point
00:30:12 --> 00:30:15 that they've struggled with is that if
00:30:15 --> 00:30:18 a black hole starts eating
00:30:19 --> 00:30:22 the surrounding material, which is how they
00:30:22 --> 00:30:24 grow the gas and Dust that surrounds them.
00:30:25 --> 00:30:27 If they start eating that too quickly,
00:30:28 --> 00:30:30 in other words, quickly enough to grow into a
00:30:30 --> 00:30:32 supermassive black hole very quickly. What
00:30:32 --> 00:30:35 happens is um, the radiation
00:30:35 --> 00:30:38 generated by this swirling mass of stuff
00:30:38 --> 00:30:41 getting sucked in actually stops
00:30:41 --> 00:30:44 the process. It quenches the process
00:30:44 --> 00:30:47 of uh, accretion and the black
00:30:47 --> 00:30:50 holes growing. That's the way the
00:30:50 --> 00:30:53 theory has uh, appeared so far.
00:30:53 --> 00:30:56 But what the Irish astronomers have done
00:30:57 --> 00:30:59 is um, they've
00:30:59 --> 00:31:02 looked at the sort of general
00:31:02 --> 00:31:05 turbulence of the gas in the
00:31:05 --> 00:31:08 early universe, uh, as a background
00:31:08 --> 00:31:10 to the
00:31:11 --> 00:31:14 feeding black hole. And it turns
00:31:14 --> 00:31:17 out that if the universe
00:31:17 --> 00:31:20 is um, a lot more
00:31:20 --> 00:31:23 uh, chaotic, turbulent, very
00:31:23 --> 00:31:26 violent motions in the background gas, if
00:31:26 --> 00:31:28 you've got a black hole in an
00:31:28 --> 00:31:31 environment like that, um, it
00:31:31 --> 00:31:34 turns out that they can actually uh,
00:31:34 --> 00:31:37 absorb huge amounts of gas and
00:31:37 --> 00:31:40 so they can grow much faster than we
00:31:40 --> 00:31:43 originally thought. Uh, so, um, one
00:31:43 --> 00:31:46 of the authors, uh, of this paper,
00:31:46 --> 00:31:49 uh, there's a quote here, um, this is
00:31:49 --> 00:31:51 scitech Daily that uh, is carrying this
00:31:51 --> 00:31:54 story. But uh, the, the research is in one of
00:31:54 --> 00:31:55 the research papers, this is one of the
00:31:55 --> 00:31:58 authors saying we found that the chaotic
00:31:58 --> 00:32:01 conditions that existed in the early universe
00:32:01 --> 00:32:03 triggered early smaller black holes
00:32:03 --> 00:32:05 to grow into the supermarket. Massive black
00:32:05 --> 00:32:08 holes we see later. Following a feeding
00:32:08 --> 00:32:11 frenzy which devoured all the material
00:32:11 --> 00:32:14 around them, we revealed using state of the
00:32:14 --> 00:32:16 art computer simulations that the first
00:32:16 --> 00:32:18 generation of black holes, those born just a
00:32:18 --> 00:32:20 few hundred million years after the Big Bang,
00:32:20 --> 00:32:23 grew incredibly fast into tens
00:32:23 --> 00:32:26 of thousands of times the size of our Sun.
00:32:27 --> 00:32:28 Uh, and another comment,
00:32:30 --> 00:32:32 uh, from one of the other team members. This
00:32:32 --> 00:32:34 breakthrough unlocks one of astronomy's big
00:32:34 --> 00:32:37 puzzles, that being how black holes born in
00:32:37 --> 00:32:39 early universe are observed by the James Webb
00:32:39 --> 00:32:42 Space Telescope, uh, as observed by the James
00:32:42 --> 00:32:44 Webb Space Telescope, managed to reach such
00:32:45 --> 00:32:47 supermassive sizes so quickly. So
00:32:47 --> 00:32:49 maybe that's the answer to the puzzle,
00:32:49 --> 00:32:50 Andrew.
00:32:50 --> 00:32:52 Andrew Dunkley: Yeah, they ate too much too fast.
00:32:54 --> 00:32:55 Professor Fred Watson: That's right. Fast food.
00:32:56 --> 00:32:58 Andrew Dunkley: And then they get indigestion and then they
00:32:58 --> 00:32:59 have those, you know.
00:32:59 --> 00:33:01 Professor Fred Watson: Well, I think that was the problem before,
00:33:01 --> 00:33:04 uh, that you know, they got indigestion and
00:33:04 --> 00:33:07 so they stopped the process. But what these,
00:33:07 --> 00:33:09 these authors are saying is that if you put
00:33:09 --> 00:33:12 them in a really turbulent um,
00:33:12 --> 00:33:15 you know, field of gas, which
00:33:15 --> 00:33:18 we think was in the early universe, then
00:33:18 --> 00:33:21 things change. They don't get indigestion,
00:33:21 --> 00:33:22 they just go for it.
00:33:22 --> 00:33:25 Andrew Dunkley: They just eat and eat. They don't, don't
00:33:25 --> 00:33:26 notice that they're full.
00:33:27 --> 00:33:27 Professor Fred Watson: That's right.
00:33:27 --> 00:33:29 Andrew Dunkley: And keep eating like a goldfish.
00:33:29 --> 00:33:30 Professor Fred Watson: That's.
00:33:30 --> 00:33:32 Andrew Dunkley: Goldfish have that problem. That's what they
00:33:32 --> 00:33:34 say. Um, that's why they're so blobby
00:33:34 --> 00:33:34 looking.
00:33:34 --> 00:33:36 Professor Fred Watson: No, they don't want to stop eating.
00:33:36 --> 00:33:37 Andrew Dunkley: No, they don't. No.
00:33:37 --> 00:33:39 Professor Fred Watson: Apparently because they can't remember when
00:33:39 --> 00:33:40 they started eating.
00:33:42 --> 00:33:45 Andrew Dunkley: I don't believe that theory that goldfish
00:33:45 --> 00:33:47 only have a three minute memory because I
00:33:47 --> 00:33:50 used to keep goldfish and they knew who
00:33:50 --> 00:33:52 fed them because they always reacted when you
00:33:52 --> 00:33:55 went near the tank. Uh, the time to be. Time
00:33:55 --> 00:33:57 for food. Time for food. They're like dogs,
00:33:57 --> 00:34:00 except you can't take them for a walk. They
00:34:00 --> 00:34:01 tend to buy.
00:34:01 --> 00:34:01 Professor Fred Watson: Not yet.
00:34:04 --> 00:34:06 Got to take their bowl with them as well. If
00:34:06 --> 00:34:08 you try. Exactly.
00:34:08 --> 00:34:09 Andrew Dunkley: You put them in a dog bowl.
00:34:10 --> 00:34:10 Professor Fred Watson: Fill it with water.
00:34:11 --> 00:34:13 Andrew Dunkley: No, uh, let's not go there. Uh, but that's a
00:34:13 --> 00:34:16 fascinating story and, uh, another one that
00:34:16 --> 00:34:19 will probably be subject to future analysis.
00:34:19 --> 00:34:20 Uh, I imagine.
00:34:20 --> 00:34:21 Professor Fred Watson: Yep, that's right.
00:34:21 --> 00:34:23 Andrew Dunkley: If you'd like to read about it, as Fred said,
00:34:23 --> 00:34:26 it's in scitechdaily.com or you can read the
00:34:26 --> 00:34:28 entire paper, start to finish, if you're
00:34:28 --> 00:34:31 having trouble falling asleep. And that's in
00:34:31 --> 00:34:34 nature astronomy. Oh, dear. Um,
00:34:34 --> 00:34:36 we're just about done, Fred. Thank you very
00:34:36 --> 00:34:36 much.
00:34:36 --> 00:34:39 Professor Fred Watson: Oh, a pleasure, Andrew. Always good to talk.
00:34:39 --> 00:34:41 And, um, we'll see you next time.
00:34:41 --> 00:34:43 Andrew Dunkley: We will. Professor Fred Watson, Astronomer at
00:34:43 --> 00:34:45 large. Don't forget to visit us online in the
00:34:45 --> 00:34:48 meantime@spacenutspodcast.com or
00:34:48 --> 00:34:51 spacenuts IO you can have a
00:34:51 --> 00:34:53 look around. You can visit the shop, you can
00:34:53 --> 00:34:56 sign up for the daily news feed. Uh,
00:34:56 --> 00:34:58 if you hit the supporter page. There are ways
00:34:58 --> 00:35:01 to support us if you so desire. We will never
00:35:01 --> 00:35:04 make you do it. It's voluntary. And plenty of
00:35:04 --> 00:35:06 other things to see and do. And don't forget
00:35:06 --> 00:35:08 our social media while you're at it, the
00:35:08 --> 00:35:10 Space Nuts Facebook page or the
00:35:10 --> 00:35:13 podcast group on, uh, Facebook.
00:35:13 --> 00:35:15 They're very active. Always new members
00:35:15 --> 00:35:18 joining there. We're on Instagram as well.
00:35:18 --> 00:35:20 And I was going to say something else. Oh,
00:35:20 --> 00:35:23 no, I can't remember. Anyway, um, that's just
00:35:23 --> 00:35:25 about it. Um, also thanks to Huw in the
00:35:25 --> 00:35:27 studio who couldn't be with us today. He's,
00:35:27 --> 00:35:30 um, gone out to uh, the back to uh, to
00:35:30 --> 00:35:33 brood for not being named Australian of the
00:35:33 --> 00:35:35 Year. And from me, Andrew Dunkley. Thanks for
00:35:35 --> 00:35:37 your company. See you on the next episode of
00:35:37 --> 00:35:38 SpaceNuts. Bye bye.
00:35:40 --> 00:35:42 You've been listening to the Space Nuts
00:35:42 --> 00:35:45 podcast available at
00:35:45 --> 00:35:47 Apple Podcasts, Spotify,
00:35:47 --> 00:35:50 iHeartRadio or your favorite podcast
00:35:50 --> 00:35:52 player. You can also stream on
00:35:52 --> 00:35:55 demand@bytes.com. this has been another
00:35:55 --> 00:35:57 quality podcast production from
00:35:57 --> 00:35:58 bytes.um.com.