This episode of Space Nuts is brought to you by NordVPN. Protect your online privacy today by visiting www.nordvpn.com/spacenuts for an exclusive offer!
Space Nuts: The Oort Cloud, Dwarf Planets, and Innovative Lander Designs
In this enlightening Q&A episode of Space Nuts, hosts Andrew Dunkley and Professor Fred Watson tackle a series of thought-provoking questions from listeners. Kicking off with Gerwin from Wales, they delve into the mysteries of the Oort Cloud and Kuiper Belt, discussing the potential mass of these distant regions and their influence on our solar system. Bob from Utah presents a unique perspective on dwarf planets, sparking a lively debate on definitions and classifications. Shumo from Oxford challenges the design of lunar landers, proposing a more insect-like approach to enhance stability on uneven terrain. Finally, Steve from the UK poses a fascinating hypothetical about gathering historical scientific greats to solve modern mysteries like dark matter and dark energy. Join Andrew and Fred Watson as they explore these cosmic curiosities with their signature blend of humour and insight.
Key topics
- The mass and significance of the Oort Cloud and Kuiper Belt in the solar system.
- Redefining dwarf planets: A discussion on classifications and implications.
- Innovative lunar lander designs inspired by nature's solutions to stability.
- The potential of historical scientists collaborating on contemporary scientific challenges.
Timestamps
00:00 - Introduction and overview of listener questions
01:20 - Gerwin’s question about the Oort Cloud and Kuiper Belt
15:30 - Bob’s thoughts on the definition of dwarf planets
25:00 - Shumo’s proposal for insect-inspired lunar landers
35:15 - Steve’s hypothetical scenario of historical scientists solving modern mysteries
45:00 - Closing thoughts and listener engagement
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/space-nuts-astronomy-insights-cosmic-discoveries--2631155/support.
00:00 - Introduction to Space Nuts Q&A Edition and Topics for Today's Episode
00:17 - Discussion of Listener Questions Including Oort Cloud, Kuiper Belt, and Dwarf Planet Theory
01:46 - Addressing a Question from Wales About the Oort Cloud and Kuiper Belt's Potential Planetary Mass
03:52 - Analyzing the Mass of Trans-Neptunian Objects and Oort Cloud Bodies in Relation to Planetary Formation
07:20 - Speculating on Planet Nine and the Hypothetical Mass of the Oort Cloud's Influence
08:53 - Debating Dwarf Planet Theory and the Definition of a Planet with Historical Context
13:29 - Exploring Biometric Approaches for Lunar Landers Versus Traditional Designs and Recent Mission Failures
23:54 - Humorous Discussion on Simple Solutions for Landing Stability and Future Lunar Missions
25:11 - Hypothetical Collaboration of Past and Present Scientists to Solve Cosmic Mysteries Like Dark Matter
32:01 - Concluding Thoughts on Unsolvable Mysteries and the Limits of Science.
00:00:00 --> 00:00:02 Andrew Dunkley: Hi there. Thanks for joining us on a Q and A
00:00:02 --> 00:00:04 edition of Space Nuts, where we talk
00:00:04 --> 00:00:07 astronomy and space science and we get all
00:00:07 --> 00:00:09 these questions from the audience and we
00:00:09 --> 00:00:11 laugh because we really don't know the
00:00:11 --> 00:00:13 answers. But we make it up as we go along and
00:00:13 --> 00:00:16 most people fall for it. Uh, on today's.
00:00:16 --> 00:00:17 Somebody's going to believe that.
00:00:17 --> 00:00:20 On today's episode, uh, we've got a question,
00:00:20 --> 00:00:23 a really well asked question, I might add,
00:00:23 --> 00:00:26 uh, about the Oort cloud and the Kuiper
00:00:26 --> 00:00:29 Belt. We're also going to talk dwarf
00:00:29 --> 00:00:31 planet theory. Somebody's got their own
00:00:31 --> 00:00:33 definition. Definition of a dwarf planet is
00:00:33 --> 00:00:36 really good. Uh, the design of landers. You
00:00:36 --> 00:00:38 know, when landers go on asteroids and the
00:00:38 --> 00:00:40 moon and other planets and sometimes they
00:00:40 --> 00:00:43 fall over. Well, um, one of our
00:00:43 --> 00:00:45 audience thinks they've got the solution to
00:00:45 --> 00:00:48 that and a room full
00:00:48 --> 00:00:51 of geniuses. We'll tell you all about that
00:00:51 --> 00:00:53 on this episode of space nuts.
00:00:53 --> 00:00:55 Professor Fred Watson: 15 seconds. Guidance is internal.
00:00:56 --> 00:00:58 10, 9. Ignition
00:00:58 --> 00:00:59 sequence start.
00:00:59 --> 00:01:00 Professor Fred Watson: Space nuts.
00:01:00 --> 00:01:03 Professor Fred Watson: 5, 4, 3. 2, 2, 3, 4, 5,
00:01:03 --> 00:01:05 5, 4, 3, 2, 1.
00:01:05 --> 00:01:07 Andrew Dunkley: Space nuts.
00:01:07 --> 00:01:08 Professor Fred Watson: Astronauts report it feels good.
00:01:10 --> 00:01:12 Andrew Dunkley: With us again to, uh, resolve all
00:01:12 --> 00:01:15 those issues is Professor Fred Watson Watson,
00:01:15 --> 00:01:17 astronomer at large. Hello, Fred Watson.
00:01:17 --> 00:01:20 Professor Fred Watson: Hello, Andrew. Good to be with you again.
00:01:20 --> 00:01:23 And good to see you too. Sorry,
00:01:24 --> 00:01:26 as the politicians always say.
00:01:26 --> 00:01:28 Andrew Dunkley: Yes, they do, don't they? Yeah, they've got
00:01:28 --> 00:01:29 all their catchphrases and they.
00:01:29 --> 00:01:30 Professor Fred Watson: What do they call them?
00:01:30 --> 00:01:33 Andrew Dunkley: A stump, Stump speech or something. They
00:01:33 --> 00:01:36 just run the same speech every time they go
00:01:36 --> 00:01:39 somewhere. New stump speech, I think is
00:01:39 --> 00:01:42 the term they use. Yes, um,
00:01:42 --> 00:01:44 well, you know, my introduction to Space
00:01:44 --> 00:01:46 Nuts is a stump intro.
00:01:46 --> 00:01:48 Basically. Say the same thing every time.
00:01:49 --> 00:01:52 Same, only different. Um, shall
00:01:52 --> 00:01:53 we tackle these questions?
00:01:54 --> 00:01:55 Professor Fred Watson: We should, yes.
00:01:55 --> 00:01:58 Andrew Dunkley: All right. Our first question comes from
00:01:58 --> 00:01:58 Wales.
00:01:59 --> 00:02:02 Gerwin: Hi, my name's Gerwin. I'm calling from Larne
00:02:02 --> 00:02:05 in West Wales township, known for
00:02:05 --> 00:02:07 Dylan Thomas, the poet question, um,
00:02:08 --> 00:02:10 about the Oort Cloud and, um, the
00:02:10 --> 00:02:11 Kuiper Belt.
00:02:15 --> 00:02:18 Not a lot known about the Oort cloud, but
00:02:19 --> 00:02:22 if all of the Oort cloud
00:02:22 --> 00:02:25 objects were to form a
00:02:25 --> 00:02:27 planet, how big would it be
00:02:28 --> 00:02:31 and what influence might it have on
00:02:31 --> 00:02:34 the rest of our planets? And similarly, you
00:02:34 --> 00:02:36 could ask the same question about the Kuiper
00:02:36 --> 00:02:39 Belt. Uh, what size
00:02:39 --> 00:02:42 planet would we suppose it
00:02:42 --> 00:02:44 might form? And again, what influence would
00:02:44 --> 00:02:47 it have on the rest of our planetary
00:02:47 --> 00:02:49 system? Thank you.
00:02:49 --> 00:02:52 Andrew Dunkley: Thank you. Galwin. I think he said his name
00:02:52 --> 00:02:54 was, uh, from Wales. I don't think we've had,
00:02:54 --> 00:02:56 um. Have we had a question from Wales before?
00:02:56 --> 00:02:57 And we probably have.
00:02:57 --> 00:03:00 Professor Fred Watson: Yes, we have. Yeah, we have and indeed, uh,
00:03:00 --> 00:03:03 where uh, Galwin lives.
00:03:03 --> 00:03:06 Uh, we were there three years ago in Larne.
00:03:07 --> 00:03:09 Beautiful, beautiful town. Uh,
00:03:10 --> 00:03:13 on the coast of Wales. Uh, some lovely
00:03:13 --> 00:03:15 walks there. Uh, um, we had a tour group
00:03:15 --> 00:03:17 there. Marnie and I took a tour group,
00:03:17 --> 00:03:20 including, uh, perhaps the most
00:03:20 --> 00:03:22 famous woman in astronomy in the uk,
00:03:23 --> 00:03:25 um, Jocelyn Bell Burnell, who was with us for
00:03:25 --> 00:03:28 that trip. Uh, and she, and
00:03:28 --> 00:03:30 Marnie and I had a lovely walk on the beach,
00:03:30 --> 00:03:33 uh, uh, at Larne. So,
00:03:33 --> 00:03:36 um, nice to hear from. And more
00:03:36 --> 00:03:38 especially, this is such a good question
00:03:39 --> 00:03:41 and one that we definitely have not had
00:03:41 --> 00:03:41 before.
00:03:41 --> 00:03:42 Andrew Dunkley: No, we haven't.
00:03:43 --> 00:03:46 Professor Fred Watson: Yeah. Um, uh, I was really
00:03:46 --> 00:03:48 impressed with the question, uh, and the
00:03:48 --> 00:03:50 answers, to be honest, have
00:03:50 --> 00:03:51 surprised me.
00:03:52 --> 00:03:54 Um, so
00:03:55 --> 00:03:58 basically, let's do the Trans
00:03:58 --> 00:04:00 Neptunian objects first, the Kuiper Belt,
00:04:01 --> 00:04:04 um, because, um, that was mentioned in the
00:04:04 --> 00:04:06 question as well. Uh, and this
00:04:07 --> 00:04:10 didn't surprise me. If you add
00:04:10 --> 00:04:13 all these objects, uh, together,
00:04:13 --> 00:04:15 all the Trans Neptunian objects. So not just
00:04:15 --> 00:04:18 the Kuiper Belt, but, uh, the resonance
00:04:18 --> 00:04:20 objects as they're called. The scattered
00:04:20 --> 00:04:22 discs object, they're called. There's a whole
00:04:22 --> 00:04:25 array of these things way out beyond the
00:04:25 --> 00:04:28 orbit of Neptune. Um, you add them all up
00:04:28 --> 00:04:31 and you get somewhere
00:04:31 --> 00:04:34 between 100th and
00:04:34 --> 00:04:36 1/10 of the mass of the Earth.
00:04:36 --> 00:04:36 Professor Fred Watson: Uh.
00:04:37 --> 00:04:39 Professor Fred Watson: Oh, really? Wow, I
00:04:39 --> 00:04:42 wasn't expecting that. Well, that's what
00:04:42 --> 00:04:45 I. That's kind of
00:04:45 --> 00:04:47 where I thought it was gonna go. Because when
00:04:47 --> 00:04:50 you add all the asteroids together, add
00:04:50 --> 00:04:52 all their mass together in the main belt,
00:04:52 --> 00:04:55 which is far more populated than the, uh, you
00:04:55 --> 00:04:58 know, the Trans Neptunian belts, um,
00:04:59 --> 00:05:00 you get. I can't remember what it is
00:05:00 --> 00:05:02 something like 20% of the mass of the Moon.
00:05:03 --> 00:05:05 It's tiny, all these asteroids. So it
00:05:05 --> 00:05:08 didn't surprise me that we were looking at a
00:05:08 --> 00:05:10 fraction of the Earth's mass. And of course
00:05:10 --> 00:05:12 that includes objects like Pluto, uh, like
00:05:12 --> 00:05:15 Sedna, Crayole, all these, uh,
00:05:15 --> 00:05:18 distant objects, uh, but they're small.
00:05:18 --> 00:05:20 They're very small. Um, and
00:05:21 --> 00:05:23 there are probably lots and lots of objects,
00:05:24 --> 00:05:26 uh, like Arrokoth, our old friend, the
00:05:26 --> 00:05:28 snowman asteroid, way out there
00:05:29 --> 00:05:31 that was passed by New Horizons. Uh, it did
00:05:31 --> 00:05:33 look like a snowman because it's a double
00:05:33 --> 00:05:36 load object, um, that's thrown
00:05:36 --> 00:05:39 in the mix as well. Um, so that didn't
00:05:39 --> 00:05:41 surprise me, but the other part of the
00:05:41 --> 00:05:44 question did, uh, because
00:05:44 --> 00:05:47 the Oort cloud. Yeah, so the Oort cloud,
00:05:47 --> 00:05:50 hypothetical cloud of,
00:05:50 --> 00:05:53 uh, cometary bodies, in other words, frozen
00:05:53 --> 00:05:56 objects. I see dusty objects,
00:05:56 --> 00:05:59 the things that when they get Tipped into the
00:05:59 --> 00:06:02 inner solar system they become very bright,
00:06:02 --> 00:06:04 very spectacular, uh, portents of doom.
00:06:05 --> 00:06:08 In historical times, uh, because of the
00:06:08 --> 00:06:10 effect of the sun on the ices and the dust it
00:06:10 --> 00:06:13 creates tails and causes uh,
00:06:13 --> 00:06:16 their nucleus to glow brightly and look much,
00:06:16 --> 00:06:18 much bigger than it is. Uh, I mean
00:06:18 --> 00:06:21 cometary objects are just a few kilometres
00:06:21 --> 00:06:23 across. Typically, um, sort of
00:06:23 --> 00:06:26 comparable with what you might find in the
00:06:27 --> 00:06:29 uh, in the Trans Neptunian objects. But
00:06:30 --> 00:06:32 the estimates that come from
00:06:33 --> 00:06:35 um, basically calculations
00:06:35 --> 00:06:38 to do with the early history of the solar
00:06:38 --> 00:06:41 system, uh, and also the number of
00:06:41 --> 00:06:43 comets that we see, um,
00:06:44 --> 00:06:47 the calculation of a possible total
00:06:47 --> 00:06:49 mass of the Oort cloud is somewhere between
00:06:50 --> 00:06:53 five and 100 times the mass of the
00:06:53 --> 00:06:55 Earth and that's much, much bigger. So
00:06:55 --> 00:06:58 remember that Jupiter is
00:06:58 --> 00:07:00 300 times the mass of the ah, Earth roughly.
00:07:01 --> 00:07:03 Uh, so you're talking, if you could put them
00:07:03 --> 00:07:05 all together to a planet, you're talking
00:07:05 --> 00:07:08 something really significant, you're talking
00:07:08 --> 00:07:11 something comparable with Saturn I
00:07:11 --> 00:07:12 guess. Um,
00:07:13 --> 00:07:16 so the question is a well
00:07:16 --> 00:07:18 founded one because that would have a
00:07:18 --> 00:07:20 profound effect on the solar system.
00:07:20 --> 00:07:23 An object of that size, uh, in the solar
00:07:23 --> 00:07:25 system rather than this distribution of these
00:07:25 --> 00:07:28 objects, uh, in a shell around the sun.
00:07:29 --> 00:07:31 So yeah, great question with uh, a
00:07:31 --> 00:07:33 few surprises in the answer.
00:07:33 --> 00:07:36 Andrew Dunkley: Yes, indeed. Um, of course my
00:07:36 --> 00:07:39 first thought was Planet nine. It's out
00:07:39 --> 00:07:41 there somewhere maybe, or
00:07:42 --> 00:07:44 there's something, there's something we don't
00:07:44 --> 00:07:46 know exactly what. Might not be a planet,
00:07:46 --> 00:07:47 might be a bunch of stuff.
00:07:48 --> 00:07:51 Professor Fred Watson: Yes, that's right. So you're quite right.
00:07:51 --> 00:07:53 That's a good um, caveat to make that
00:07:55 --> 00:07:58 ignores any possible Planet Nine,
00:07:58 --> 00:08:01 uh, which would be uh.
00:08:01 --> 00:08:04 And if Planet nine exists, uh, what
00:08:04 --> 00:08:07 it's done is profoundly affected the orbits
00:08:07 --> 00:08:09 of some of these Trans Neptunian objects. But
00:08:10 --> 00:08:12 we're not yet sure that it does exist. So
00:08:12 --> 00:08:14 still hypothetical.
00:08:14 --> 00:08:17 Andrew Dunkley: Yeah, yeah, but terrific question Galwin,
00:08:17 --> 00:08:20 thank you. Uh, no one's ever sort of
00:08:20 --> 00:08:22 come at us from that angle before and uh,
00:08:22 --> 00:08:25 yeah, I'm very surprised by the, the
00:08:25 --> 00:08:28 mass of objects in the Oort Cloud,
00:08:28 --> 00:08:31 um, and just as surprised that there's not
00:08:31 --> 00:08:34 that much in the um, Kuiper Belt and
00:08:34 --> 00:08:37 the asteroid belt and all that stuff.
00:08:37 --> 00:08:39 Yeah, they still throw rocks at us though
00:08:39 --> 00:08:39 Fred Watson.
00:08:40 --> 00:08:42 Professor Fred Watson: They do. Well a lot of those rocks
00:08:43 --> 00:08:45 probably originated in the Oort cloud, so
00:08:45 --> 00:08:47 it's not surprising perhaps. Yeah, rocks are
00:08:47 --> 00:08:48 nice.
00:08:48 --> 00:08:51 Andrew Dunkley: What did we ever do to them? Thanks
00:08:51 --> 00:08:52 Galvin, great to hear from you.
00:08:53 --> 00:08:55 Our uh, next question comes from Bob. Uh,
00:08:55 --> 00:08:58 Bob says Mike Brown says that Pluto
00:08:58 --> 00:09:01 isn't a planet I agree, but for a different
00:09:01 --> 00:09:04 reason. Its motion is not always concave to
00:09:04 --> 00:09:06 the sun. It sometimes moves backward with
00:09:06 --> 00:09:09 respect to the sun. In the Pluto Charon
00:09:09 --> 00:09:12 barycenter orbit, Earth's
00:09:12 --> 00:09:15 moon's motion is always
00:09:15 --> 00:09:18 concave to the sun. So it's Earth's moon that
00:09:18 --> 00:09:21 is the ninth planet. If we must have enough
00:09:21 --> 00:09:23 planets for a baseball team, uh, what are
00:09:23 --> 00:09:26 your thoughts on the redefinition. On my
00:09:26 --> 00:09:29 redefinition of planet, Uh,
00:09:29 --> 00:09:32 a dwarf human is still a human, and we
00:09:32 --> 00:09:34 deny that at our peril. A dwarf planet
00:09:34 --> 00:09:37 is still a planet, and we deny that at our
00:09:37 --> 00:09:39 peril. That comes from Bob Argyle in
00:09:40 --> 00:09:42 Ogden, Utah, in the United States.
00:09:42 --> 00:09:45 Thank you, Bob. I love this question. And,
00:09:45 --> 00:09:48 um. Well, first of all, Mike Brown,
00:09:48 --> 00:09:50 we should point, um, out that he has earned
00:09:50 --> 00:09:53 the nickname the man who killed Pluto.
00:09:53 --> 00:09:55 He was one of the astronomers that got
00:09:55 --> 00:09:58 behind, um, its reclassification back in
00:09:58 --> 00:09:59 2005.
00:09:59 --> 00:09:59 Gerwin: Ish.
00:10:00 --> 00:10:03 Andrew Dunkley: Uh, so, um, that's who he's referring
00:10:03 --> 00:10:05 to in the question. But I think you're on
00:10:05 --> 00:10:07 Mike's side in that regard, aren't you,
00:10:07 --> 00:10:08 Fred Watson?
00:10:09 --> 00:10:11 Professor Fred Watson: Yeah. Actually, the man who really killed
00:10:11 --> 00:10:14 Pluto was Neil, um, Degrasse Tyson. Because
00:10:14 --> 00:10:17 he, uh, in the 90s, I think,
00:10:17 --> 00:10:20 left Pluto off an
00:10:20 --> 00:10:23 exhibition that he was responsible for. He'd
00:10:23 --> 00:10:25 already decided it was not a planet.
00:10:26 --> 00:10:28 That's very bold. Very bold. Yeah. He
00:10:28 --> 00:10:30 got hate mail. Hate man.
00:10:30 --> 00:10:31 Andrew Dunkley: I bet he did.
00:10:31 --> 00:10:33 Professor Fred Watson: Yeah. And I think Mike Brown's had it as
00:10:33 --> 00:10:36 well. You're right. Mike's also,
00:10:36 --> 00:10:39 uh, been a mover and shaker in that. And I
00:10:39 --> 00:10:41 guess on the other opposite side is Alan
00:10:41 --> 00:10:43 Stern, who was the, uh, project scientist for
00:10:44 --> 00:10:47 New Horizons for the spacecraft that flew by
00:10:47 --> 00:10:49 Pluto. When his spacecraft was launched at
00:10:49 --> 00:10:51 the beginning of 2006, it was going to a
00:10:51 --> 00:10:54 planet. Uh, when it got there, uh, it
00:10:54 --> 00:10:57 wasn't. It was a dwarf planet. Yeah.
00:10:57 --> 00:10:58 So, um, I.
00:10:59 --> 00:11:00 Andrew Dunkley: Timing is everything.
00:11:02 --> 00:11:04 Professor Fred Watson: Absolutely right. Um, and actually, thank
00:11:04 --> 00:11:07 you, Bob as well. Um, my heartfelt thanks
00:11:07 --> 00:11:10 to Bob, uh, for including where he comes
00:11:10 --> 00:11:12 from. Uh, because, um, I've got an old friend
00:11:12 --> 00:11:14 called Bob Argyle, and I always wondered when
00:11:14 --> 00:11:17 we saw Bob Argyle, whether that was who it
00:11:17 --> 00:11:19 was. Partly because I can imagine the
00:11:19 --> 00:11:22 questions that Bob from Ogun, Utah,
00:11:23 --> 00:11:24 uh, and including the one that we're just
00:11:24 --> 00:11:26 talking about, the questions he's raised are
00:11:26 --> 00:11:28 very similar to the kinds of things that Bob
00:11:28 --> 00:11:31 Argyle might have raised. Uh, my old friend.
00:11:31 --> 00:11:34 So it's not him. Uh, that's good. So thank
00:11:34 --> 00:11:36 you for that, Bob. Uh, now I
00:11:36 --> 00:11:39 believe that, um,
00:11:41 --> 00:11:42 if you look at
00:11:43 --> 00:11:46 most of the dwarf planets that
00:11:46 --> 00:11:49 we know about, they start with Ceres.
00:11:50 --> 00:11:53 That's the nearest one, uh, uh,
00:11:53 --> 00:11:54 in the asteroid belt.
00:11:55 --> 00:11:55 Professor Fred Watson: Ah.
00:11:55 --> 00:11:57 Professor Fred Watson: And then you go through all these SEDNA and
00:11:57 --> 00:11:59 all the ones we mentioned a few minutes ago,
00:12:00 --> 00:12:03 um, uh, they would also
00:12:03 --> 00:12:05 have, uh, orbits that are concave to the sun.
00:12:06 --> 00:12:09 And so I don't think your definition gets you
00:12:09 --> 00:12:12 any further forward. You end up with too
00:12:12 --> 00:12:14 many planets, basically. Uh,
00:12:15 --> 00:12:17 because your definition there, uh, says a
00:12:17 --> 00:12:20 planet has to have enough mass
00:12:20 --> 00:12:23 that it's differentiated. That means it's
00:12:23 --> 00:12:26 formed a spherical shape, uh, and it has to
00:12:26 --> 00:12:27 have an orbit that's always concave to the
00:12:27 --> 00:12:29 sun. I think that lets a whole lot of stuff
00:12:29 --> 00:12:32 in. Whereas the definition that
00:12:32 --> 00:12:34 we have arrived at by the International
00:12:34 --> 00:12:37 Astronomical Union in I think it was August
00:12:37 --> 00:12:40 2006, uh, which says it's
00:12:40 --> 00:12:43 also got to be the dominant body in its part
00:12:43 --> 00:12:45 of the solar system. Gravitationally
00:12:45 --> 00:12:48 dominant. That's the crucial thing. And that
00:12:48 --> 00:12:50 is the definition of a planet that we have
00:12:50 --> 00:12:51 now. And I think it's the right one.
00:12:52 --> 00:12:54 Andrew Dunkley: Yeah, well, when they started discovering
00:12:54 --> 00:12:57 more of these things out in the
00:12:57 --> 00:13:00 Kuiper Belt region, I think they found that
00:13:00 --> 00:13:03 there was a similar dwarf
00:13:03 --> 00:13:05 planet to Pluto, except it was bigger. Wasn't
00:13:05 --> 00:13:05 that Sedna?
00:13:05 --> 00:13:06 Gerwin: It was.
00:13:06 --> 00:13:07 Andrew Dunkley: Sedna was bigger than Pluto.
00:13:07 --> 00:13:09 Professor Fred Watson: Was Sedna. That's right. It's more
00:13:09 --> 00:13:12 massive. It's about the same diameter, but
00:13:12 --> 00:13:15 significantly more massive, which suggests
00:13:15 --> 00:13:17 it's got a higher density. Yeah, that's
00:13:17 --> 00:13:20 right. Uh, and there are others that are of
00:13:20 --> 00:13:22 comparable size. Uh, so, um,
00:13:23 --> 00:13:25 yeah, it's a nice thought, though. I do like,
00:13:25 --> 00:13:28 uh, Bob's thinking on that. I think that's a
00:13:28 --> 00:13:29 very clever idea.
00:13:29 --> 00:13:31 Andrew Dunkley: Indeed it is. Um, thank you, Bob. Great to
00:13:31 --> 00:13:33 hear from you. Uh, thanks for sending the
00:13:33 --> 00:13:36 question in. This is Space Nuts with
00:13:36 --> 00:13:38 Andrew Dunkley and Professor Fred Watson
00:13:38 --> 00:13:39 Watson.
00:13:41 --> 00:13:44 Professor Fred Watson: Okay, we checked all four systems and being
00:13:44 --> 00:13:46 with a Go Space Nuts, and
00:13:46 --> 00:13:49 Andrew Dunkley: it's a Q and A edition. Our next question,
00:13:49 --> 00:13:51 Fred Watson, comes from Shumo, who is in
00:13:51 --> 00:13:54 Oxford in the uk. Thanks for many hours, uh,
00:13:54 --> 00:13:56 of pleasure, pleasurable listening. Uh,
00:13:56 --> 00:13:58 Fred Watson and Andrew, I heard a recent
00:13:58 --> 00:14:01 podcast where you describe lunar landers
00:14:01 --> 00:14:04 toppling over. Fred Watson, why do we design
00:14:04 --> 00:14:07 lunar landers like tables rather than
00:14:07 --> 00:14:09 like insects? Uh, recent landers
00:14:09 --> 00:14:12 have toppled after landing on, um, uneven
00:14:12 --> 00:14:15 terrain. Evolution solved this problem
00:14:15 --> 00:14:18 long ago. Insects have multiple articulated,
00:14:18 --> 00:14:21 compliant legs, uh, tolerate
00:14:21 --> 00:14:23 awkward landings and can often right
00:14:23 --> 00:14:26 themselves after falling over in the Moon's
00:14:26 --> 00:14:29 low gravity. Why not design small landers,
00:14:30 --> 00:14:32 uh, the same way, uh, with six
00:14:32 --> 00:14:35 articulated legs that can adapt to the
00:14:35 --> 00:14:38 terrain and crucially push the lander
00:14:38 --> 00:14:40 upright again if it topples. Has anyone
00:14:40 --> 00:14:43 seriously considered this kind of biometric
00:14:43 --> 00:14:46 approach that comes from Shumo in
00:14:46 --> 00:14:48 Oxford? It's a great question. Um,
00:14:49 --> 00:14:52 when you look at the lunar landers in the
00:14:52 --> 00:14:54 Apollo um, mission series,
00:14:55 --> 00:14:58 they had four legs, uh, they
00:14:58 --> 00:14:59 seemed rather stable. But um,
00:15:01 --> 00:15:03 we've seen a few mishaps over the years too,
00:15:03 --> 00:15:04 haven't we?
00:15:04 --> 00:15:07 Professor Fred Watson: Yes, that's right. So um, it's a great
00:15:07 --> 00:15:09 question. I'm sure people have looked at six
00:15:09 --> 00:15:12 legged landers. It's
00:15:12 --> 00:15:14 uh, the kind of thing that um, anybody
00:15:14 --> 00:15:17 designing something to land on the moon would
00:15:17 --> 00:15:20 look at. Do, uh, you need more legs than just
00:15:20 --> 00:15:23 4? So clearly in the case of
00:15:23 --> 00:15:24 Apollo, the decision was made that no, you
00:15:24 --> 00:15:27 didn't, you didn't need more legs, uh, you
00:15:27 --> 00:15:29 needed four for the uh,
00:15:29 --> 00:15:32 lunar module. But as you've kind of
00:15:32 --> 00:15:35 hinted at, they were well spaced. These legs
00:15:35 --> 00:15:38 or the feet are well spaced out. So the legs
00:15:38 --> 00:15:41 extend a long way from the body of the lunar
00:15:41 --> 00:15:43 module. And it means that you do have
00:15:44 --> 00:15:46 some protection against
00:15:46 --> 00:15:49 uh, that instability that
00:15:50 --> 00:15:52 um, would caused something to fall over.
00:15:52 --> 00:15:55 And well, you're right to
00:15:55 --> 00:15:58 mention, um, uh, and indeed, um,
00:15:58 --> 00:16:01 it's part of the question, uh,
00:16:01 --> 00:16:04 Shumo mentions it as well. There have been
00:16:04 --> 00:16:06 spacecraft that have fallen over recently.
00:16:07 --> 00:16:09 Uh, and I'm thinking there's more than just
00:16:09 --> 00:16:12 this, but I'm thinking of the four
00:16:13 --> 00:16:15 spacecraft um, that have attempted to land on
00:16:15 --> 00:16:17 the moon in NASA's Commercial
00:16:17 --> 00:16:20 Lunar Payload Services mission. This
00:16:20 --> 00:16:23 is the idea of using commercial companies
00:16:23 --> 00:16:26 to send stuff to the moon, uh,
00:16:26 --> 00:16:29 that astronauts can then use. NASA
00:16:29 --> 00:16:31 sends the astronauts there, uh, the
00:16:31 --> 00:16:33 commercial world sends the other stuff there.
00:16:34 --> 00:16:35 Uh, there have been four of those
00:16:36 --> 00:16:38 Andrew Dunkley: to uh, Athena and
00:16:38 --> 00:16:41 Odysseus. And uh,
00:16:41 --> 00:16:43 during the um, mission In February of
00:16:43 --> 00:16:46 2024, the Odysseus Lander caught a
00:16:46 --> 00:16:49 landing leg on an uneven surface and fell
00:16:49 --> 00:16:52 sideways, uh, though it still operated for a
00:16:52 --> 00:16:54 week. And its successor
00:16:54 --> 00:16:57 Athena landed near the lunar South Pole in
00:16:57 --> 00:16:59 March 2025 and broke its leg
00:17:00 --> 00:17:03 and toppled into a small crater, depleting
00:17:03 --> 00:17:04 its batteries within 12 hours. I'm not
00:17:05 --> 00:17:08 um, it's not funny. Haha, I'm laughing with
00:17:08 --> 00:17:10 them. No I'm not. I think it's hilarious. But
00:17:10 --> 00:17:12 um, it's. Yeah,
00:17:13 --> 00:17:16 but it makes the question quite
00:17:16 --> 00:17:17 valid.
00:17:18 --> 00:17:20 Professor Fred Watson: Yeah, so, um, you're absolutely right.
00:17:20 --> 00:17:22 The Commercial Lunar Payload Services
00:17:23 --> 00:17:25 programme has so far attempted to land
00:17:25 --> 00:17:28 four spacecraft on the moon, of which only
00:17:28 --> 00:17:30 one has been successful. And that's the one
00:17:30 --> 00:17:32 you've just mentioned that worked for a week,
00:17:33 --> 00:17:36 uh, two of them tilted over, as you
00:17:36 --> 00:17:38 said. Um, and so, uh,
00:17:39 --> 00:17:42 it's an absolutely valid question. And
00:17:42 --> 00:17:45 to my mind it is even
00:17:45 --> 00:17:47 more pertinent when you look at the two
00:17:47 --> 00:17:50 alternative vehicles that,
00:17:50 --> 00:17:53 uh, NASA is looking at to bring
00:17:53 --> 00:17:55 astronauts down to the lunar surface.
00:17:56 --> 00:17:59 And, um, they haven't chosen
00:17:59 --> 00:18:02 which one yet. Uh, the two choices
00:18:02 --> 00:18:04 are Blue, ah, Moon, which is Blue
00:18:04 --> 00:18:07 Origin's hls, or Human Landing
00:18:07 --> 00:18:10 System, which looks rather like an
00:18:10 --> 00:18:12 overgrown lunar module. And it
00:18:12 --> 00:18:15 shares the wide, uh, footprint,
00:18:15 --> 00:18:17 if I can put it that way, the widely
00:18:17 --> 00:18:20 separated footprint of the old lunar
00:18:20 --> 00:18:22 module. It's much bigger. It's 16 metres
00:18:22 --> 00:18:24 tall, compared with 7 metres for the lunar
00:18:24 --> 00:18:27 module. But it's got the same morphology. The
00:18:27 --> 00:18:29 bottom half stays on the moon's surface. The
00:18:29 --> 00:18:32 top half is what brings, uh, astronauts back
00:18:32 --> 00:18:34 to the orbiting, um,
00:18:34 --> 00:18:36 Orion spacecraft. But the
00:18:37 --> 00:18:39 alternative is
00:18:39 --> 00:18:42 Starship, ah, which is
00:18:42 --> 00:18:45 52 metres tall, has
00:18:45 --> 00:18:48 actually got across. You know, the
00:18:48 --> 00:18:50 landing legs occupy a smaller
00:18:51 --> 00:18:53 square than they do on, um, Blue
00:18:53 --> 00:18:56 Origin, which is, you know, basically a
00:18:56 --> 00:18:57 third of the height,
00:18:59 --> 00:19:02 it seems like, given where
00:19:02 --> 00:19:04 they're waiting to happen. Absolutely,
00:19:05 --> 00:19:07 absolutely where they're going to land, which
00:19:07 --> 00:19:10 is in this very, very mountainous region
00:19:11 --> 00:19:14 around the South Pole. Um, I did a
00:19:14 --> 00:19:17 keynote talk on Saturday at M
00:19:17 --> 00:19:20 Macquarie University and so I prepared a talk
00:19:20 --> 00:19:23 about Artemis and where it's going.
00:19:23 --> 00:19:26 Uh, and included in that talk a, uh, video
00:19:27 --> 00:19:29 of the region around the South Pole.
00:19:30 --> 00:19:32 A flyover, effectively, which is based on
00:19:32 --> 00:19:34 Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter data. And
00:19:34 --> 00:19:37 there's barely a level patch of surface
00:19:37 --> 00:19:40 anywhere. You're looking at slopes, you're
00:19:40 --> 00:19:43 looking at, um, terrain that's rough,
00:19:43 --> 00:19:46 it's probably got boulders as well. Uh, and
00:19:47 --> 00:19:50 it does seem like a very
00:19:50 --> 00:19:53 awkward misfit to have something that wasn't
00:19:53 --> 00:19:55 originally designed to be the lunar lander.
00:19:55 --> 00:19:58 It was kind of almost an
00:19:58 --> 00:20:00 afterthought. Starship is designed to take
00:20:00 --> 00:20:03 people to Mars, which it might do one
00:20:03 --> 00:20:06 day. Uh, but to land it on the
00:20:06 --> 00:20:08 Moon, I think is courting disaster.
00:20:09 --> 00:20:11 It's still an open question. It will not be
00:20:11 --> 00:20:14 resolved until after the Artemis 3 mission,
00:20:14 --> 00:20:17 which will be late next year, uh,
00:20:17 --> 00:20:20 when both those vehicles will fly in
00:20:20 --> 00:20:22 orbit along, uh, with the,
00:20:23 --> 00:20:25 um, Orion capsule containing astronauts. And
00:20:25 --> 00:20:27 they'll dock with both of them to see whether
00:20:27 --> 00:20:28 they can do the dock.
00:20:29 --> 00:20:32 Andrew Dunkley: At face value, you'd have to say Blue
00:20:32 --> 00:20:35 Origin's design makes more sense,
00:20:35 --> 00:20:37 but it too looks top heavy,
00:20:38 --> 00:20:40 really, compared
00:20:40 --> 00:20:42 Professor Fred Watson: with one of the, um, you know, the lams,
00:20:42 --> 00:20:45 the lunar Excursion modules, uh, from
00:20:45 --> 00:20:48 Apollo. Yes, it does. Uh, but it.
00:20:49 --> 00:20:52 Andrew Dunkley: But technologically probably much, much
00:20:52 --> 00:20:53 more Advanced.
00:20:53 --> 00:20:56 Professor Fred Watson: Yes, of course, of course it is. But um, will
00:20:56 --> 00:20:58 that stop it tipping over? Who knows?
00:20:59 --> 00:21:01 Andrew Dunkley: That's the 60 form billion dollar question,
00:21:01 --> 00:21:03 isn't it? Probably others that have fallen
00:21:03 --> 00:21:06 over, uh, JAXA Slim.
00:21:07 --> 00:21:09 Uh, okay, jaxa's smart lander for, uh,
00:21:09 --> 00:21:12 investigating. Um, the moon landed on its
00:21:12 --> 00:21:15 nose with its solar panels
00:21:15 --> 00:21:17 facing in the wrong direction. It's not
00:21:17 --> 00:21:20 funny. Uh, an engine thruster failed just
00:21:20 --> 00:21:23 above the surface during the point descent. I
00:21:23 --> 00:21:26 remember that it initially lacked power.
00:21:26 --> 00:21:29 The probe miraculously reawakened weeks
00:21:29 --> 00:21:32 later when the sun's angle shifted strike
00:21:32 --> 00:21:35 the panel. So, um, a successful failure
00:21:35 --> 00:21:38 maybe. And of course the Philate lander,
00:21:38 --> 00:21:40 uh, on Comet 67.
00:21:40 --> 00:21:42 Professor Fred Watson: Yeah, that's right, yes. Didn't um,
00:21:43 --> 00:21:45 Wasn't there an Israeli spacecraft or
00:21:45 --> 00:21:47 did that, I think that just crashed? Actually
00:21:47 --> 00:21:50 it didn't tip over as one
00:21:50 --> 00:21:52 Andrew Dunkley: of the crash don't count as failed landings.
00:21:52 --> 00:21:54 Professor Fred Watson: No, that's right. No, they don't.
00:21:54 --> 00:21:55 Andrew Dunkley: Um,
00:21:57 --> 00:22:00 Professor Fred Watson: they're, um. What is it? Um, unscheduled,
00:22:00 --> 00:22:03 uh, I can't remember unscheduled disassembly
00:22:03 --> 00:22:06 or what it, whatever Elon's stock phrase
00:22:06 --> 00:22:08 is for that assembly. Yeah,
00:22:09 --> 00:22:10 I'm just looking up,
00:22:13 --> 00:22:14 Andrew Dunkley: looking up that Israeli one.
00:22:15 --> 00:22:15 Professor Fred Watson: Yeah.
00:22:15 --> 00:22:18 Andrew Dunkley: Uh, Israel's first lunar probe. The um,
00:22:18 --> 00:22:20 Beresheet spacecraft crash on the
00:22:20 --> 00:22:23 moon, April of 2019.
00:22:24 --> 00:22:26 That was a crash. It didn't even get the fall
00:22:26 --> 00:22:27 over.
00:22:28 --> 00:22:30 Professor Fred Watson: No. So Schumer, it's been definitely been
00:22:30 --> 00:22:33 looked at the idea of six independently
00:22:33 --> 00:22:36 controlled legs. I'm sure that would have
00:22:36 --> 00:22:38 been part and parcel of some of the ideas
00:22:38 --> 00:22:40 that have been put forward. Uh, I think the
00:22:41 --> 00:22:43 lunar module, the Apollo era lunar module
00:22:43 --> 00:22:45 demonstrated that they got it right. Uh,
00:22:45 --> 00:22:48 because all of them were stable
00:22:48 --> 00:22:51 and one or two of them did land. Uh, the
00:22:51 --> 00:22:53 later ones in hilly regions of the moon, they
00:22:53 --> 00:22:55 played it safe with the early ones always
00:22:55 --> 00:22:58 landing in Maria, the very flattest areas of
00:22:58 --> 00:23:00 the moon. But now we going. Yep, we're going
00:23:00 --> 00:23:03 right to the most difficult
00:23:03 --> 00:23:06 part of the moon, uh, par
00:23:06 --> 00:23:08 excellence, as it were, uh, and
00:23:08 --> 00:23:10 hoping for the best to land things the right
00:23:10 --> 00:23:13 way up. And it's an interesting time.
00:23:14 --> 00:23:16 Andrew Dunkley: Yes, indeed. But you know, when you think
00:23:16 --> 00:23:17 about it, you're spending millions upon
00:23:17 --> 00:23:20 millions upon millions of dollars to send
00:23:20 --> 00:23:22 these spacecraft to these
00:23:22 --> 00:23:25 destinations in the hope that they won't fall
00:23:25 --> 00:23:27 over. I mean, couldn't you
00:23:27 --> 00:23:30 whip down to Bunnings or Home Depot
00:23:30 --> 00:23:33 or Home Base and just
00:23:33 --> 00:23:35 buy a couple of pieces of wood and just stick
00:23:35 --> 00:23:38 them on the side and if it does lose balance,
00:23:38 --> 00:23:40 at least it'll have something to Prop on.
00:23:40 --> 00:23:43 Come on, spend 10 bucks.
00:23:44 --> 00:23:45 M. It's simple.
00:23:46 --> 00:23:49 I'm sure it's that simple. Wood is good in
00:23:49 --> 00:23:50 space, it's been proven.
00:23:50 --> 00:23:52 Professor Fred Watson: Yeah, we've got. That's right. Wooden
00:23:52 --> 00:23:53 satellites.
00:23:54 --> 00:23:55 Thing of the future. Exactly.
00:23:55 --> 00:23:56 Gerwin: Yeah.
00:23:56 --> 00:23:59 Professor Fred Watson: Yeah. Interesting. Really interesting topic,
00:23:59 --> 00:24:01 though. And we won't know. So Artemis iv, the
00:24:01 --> 00:24:03 first lunar landing in the Artemis programme
00:24:03 --> 00:24:06 is planned for early 2028.
00:24:06 --> 00:24:09 That might be when we find out. Uh, we'll
00:24:09 --> 00:24:11 know which of the two, uh, landing vehicles
00:24:11 --> 00:24:13 has been chosen for the first landing by
00:24:13 --> 00:24:15 then. Uh, and we'll find out whether they're
00:24:15 --> 00:24:17 going to stay vertical.
00:24:18 --> 00:24:20 Andrew Dunkley: Indeed. Or you could. In the uk, you could go
00:24:20 --> 00:24:22 to B and Q. Apparently that would be the
00:24:22 --> 00:24:22 place to
00:24:22 --> 00:24:24 Professor Fred Watson: go and get some Texas as well.
00:24:25 --> 00:24:25 Gerwin: Yes.
00:24:25 --> 00:24:26 Andrew Dunkley: There you are.
00:24:26 --> 00:24:29 Professor Fred Watson: Texas is the other. The other one. B and Q
00:24:29 --> 00:24:31 and Texas, they're the big ones in the UK
00:24:32 --> 00:24:33 and in
00:24:33 --> 00:24:35 Andrew Dunkley: Australia, um, it's Bunnings and Mitre 10.
00:24:36 --> 00:24:39 And I know about Home Depot.
00:24:39 --> 00:24:41 I'll say it the American way. And there's
00:24:41 --> 00:24:43 probably a couple of others over there too.
00:24:43 --> 00:24:45 Yeah, we went into a Home Depot once just to
00:24:45 --> 00:24:48 have a look because we heard about them
00:24:48 --> 00:24:50 all on TV and seen them and, and I thought,
00:24:50 --> 00:24:52 we've got to check one of these out. Yeah,
00:24:52 --> 00:24:55 they're pretty cool. You can pretty well buy
00:24:55 --> 00:24:57 a house that's already made in a place like
00:24:57 --> 00:25:00 that. Um, Shumo, thanks for the question.
00:25:00 --> 00:25:03 Absolutely love that question. And, uh, yeah,
00:25:03 --> 00:25:06 um, I think common sense will prevail one
00:25:06 --> 00:25:08 day, but maybe, maybe not in the near future.
00:25:11 --> 00:25:13 Professor Fred Watson: 3, 2, 1.
00:25:14 --> 00:25:15 Gerwin: Space nuts.
00:25:16 --> 00:25:18 Andrew Dunkley: 1 more question. Let's hear from Steve.
00:25:19 --> 00:25:21 Steve: Hey, Andrew. Hey, Fred Watson. Steve here
00:25:21 --> 00:25:24 from the UK questionnaire for you. Um,
00:25:24 --> 00:25:27 if we put all the past
00:25:27 --> 00:25:29 scientists from history, I,
00:25:29 --> 00:25:32 Einstein, Hawkins, Newton, da Vinci, Maxwell,
00:25:32 --> 00:25:35 you can name a list of others, put them in a
00:25:35 --> 00:25:38 room with current scientists. Do you think
00:25:38 --> 00:25:41 they'd be all collectively be able to answer
00:25:41 --> 00:25:43 some of the greatest mysteries we have today,
00:25:43 --> 00:25:46 I. E. Dark matter, dark energy, with
00:25:46 --> 00:25:49 that collective genius. Anyway, keep up the
00:25:49 --> 00:25:50 great work. Love your show. Love to
00:25:50 --> 00:25:53 understand what your, uh, answers might
00:25:53 --> 00:25:53 be.
00:25:55 --> 00:25:57 Andrew Dunkley: Yeah, thank you so much, Steve. I love this
00:25:57 --> 00:26:00 question. I love hypotheticals. And, um,
00:26:01 --> 00:26:02 he brings up a really good point. There have
00:26:02 --> 00:26:05 been some incredibly bright people in history
00:26:06 --> 00:26:08 who've come up with theories and concepts,
00:26:08 --> 00:26:11 and, um, some of them still challenge
00:26:11 --> 00:26:14 science today. What if you got them all
00:26:14 --> 00:26:16 together, dug them up out of their respective
00:26:16 --> 00:26:18 graves and hit them with a couple of volts of
00:26:18 --> 00:26:20 electricity and brought them back to life and
00:26:20 --> 00:26:22 said, okay, you're all here together. Sorry
00:26:22 --> 00:26:25 about the Smell. Um, what do you
00:26:25 --> 00:26:28 reckon about this? Could they solve it all?
00:26:30 --> 00:26:33 Professor Fred Watson: It is a great question. Um,
00:26:33 --> 00:26:36 Steve, uh, I love your thinking on this.
00:26:36 --> 00:26:39 Um, in a way, the
00:26:40 --> 00:26:43 genius of all these people is
00:26:43 --> 00:26:46 preserved in their writings. It's
00:26:46 --> 00:26:48 preserved in the papers that they
00:26:48 --> 00:26:51 authored. If you think about it in modern
00:26:51 --> 00:26:54 terms, uh, or the books that they wrote, the
00:26:54 --> 00:26:56 things that they wrote historically,
00:26:57 --> 00:27:00 that genius is all, in a way, still
00:27:00 --> 00:27:03 around, um, and
00:27:03 --> 00:27:06 maybe, um, individually,
00:27:07 --> 00:27:10 uh, if they'd been able to go on forever, uh,
00:27:10 --> 00:27:11 they might have
00:27:13 --> 00:27:15 thought through some breakthroughs. I'm
00:27:15 --> 00:27:18 thinking particularly of one person who was
00:27:18 --> 00:27:21 clearly a genius. He, uh, was contemporary
00:27:21 --> 00:27:24 with Newton, uh, and in fact, he
00:27:24 --> 00:27:27 was described as somebody whose, uh, depth
00:27:27 --> 00:27:29 and profundity of thought, particularly in
00:27:29 --> 00:27:32 mathematics. Uh, he made him the only person
00:27:32 --> 00:27:35 who could rival Newton at that time. And the
00:27:35 --> 00:27:37 reason why his name was, uh,
00:27:37 --> 00:27:39 James Gregory. He was a Scottish
00:27:40 --> 00:27:42 astronomer and mathematician. In fact, the
00:27:42 --> 00:27:45 university that I was educated, uh, at, at
00:27:45 --> 00:27:48 St. Andrews. Uh, but he died at the age
00:27:48 --> 00:27:51 of 36. And so, unlike Newton, who went on
00:27:51 --> 00:27:54 into his 80s, he, uh, died
00:27:54 --> 00:27:57 before, probably before his genius really had
00:27:57 --> 00:28:00 time to fully blossom. And so whether
00:28:00 --> 00:28:03 putting all these people together would,
00:28:03 --> 00:28:06 after you've flashed them with a few folds
00:28:06 --> 00:28:09 to bring them back to life, whether that
00:28:09 --> 00:28:11 would m. Be any different from any one of
00:28:11 --> 00:28:13 them having an extended
00:28:14 --> 00:28:16 lifetime that would have allowed their own
00:28:16 --> 00:28:19 genius to, um,
00:28:19 --> 00:28:21 arrive at different ideas, particularly on
00:28:21 --> 00:28:23 things like dark matter and dark energy. Uh,
00:28:24 --> 00:28:25 I don't know. I think that's a moot point.
00:28:25 --> 00:28:27 It's a good question. It is.
00:28:27 --> 00:28:30 Andrew Dunkley: Um, ChatGPT has some thoughts
00:28:30 --> 00:28:31 on this.
00:28:31 --> 00:28:32 Professor Fred Watson: Okay, that's interesting.
00:28:32 --> 00:28:35 Andrew Dunkley: Go for it. I said, if you could put all the
00:28:35 --> 00:28:37 geniuses in world history together in a room,
00:28:37 --> 00:28:39 could they collectively solve some of the
00:28:39 --> 00:28:42 riddles of the universe? Uh, it said
00:28:42 --> 00:28:44 absolutely, but probably not in the way we
00:28:44 --> 00:28:47 imagine. If you could somehow put Einstein,
00:28:47 --> 00:28:50 Newton, Darwin, Curie, and the list goes
00:28:50 --> 00:28:52 on. Turing, Hawking, et cetera, and
00:28:52 --> 00:28:54 dozens of other extraordinary minds in the
00:28:54 --> 00:28:56 same room, give them access to all the
00:28:56 --> 00:28:58 current scientific knowledge and somehow
00:28:58 --> 00:29:01 eliminate the practical constraints of time
00:29:01 --> 00:29:03 and communication. I think they could make
00:29:03 --> 00:29:06 enormous progress in some of the universe's
00:29:06 --> 00:29:08 deepest problems. But there is a fascinating
00:29:08 --> 00:29:11 catch. Intelligence alone doesn't
00:29:11 --> 00:29:12 guarantee an answer.
00:29:13 --> 00:29:15 Professor Fred Watson: No, that's right. Uh, some of those people
00:29:15 --> 00:29:17 were pretty difficult to get on with, like
00:29:17 --> 00:29:20 Newton. Um, the other thing.
00:29:20 --> 00:29:23 You know, I'm surprised, uh,
00:29:23 --> 00:29:25 GPT didn't just say, well, what about
00:29:25 --> 00:29:28 artificial intelligence? Because that, you
00:29:28 --> 00:29:29 know, that's where we're headed.
00:29:30 --> 00:29:32 Andrew Dunkley: I think chatgpt thinks it's human,
00:29:33 --> 00:29:35 the way it talks back to people. Um,
00:29:36 --> 00:29:37 it goes on to say some of the biggest
00:29:37 --> 00:29:40 mysteries may not be waiting for someone
00:29:40 --> 00:29:43 clever enough to solve them. They may require
00:29:43 --> 00:29:45 new concepts that humanity hasn't invented
00:29:45 --> 00:29:48 yet. So there's also why we
00:29:48 --> 00:29:49 can't figure things out.
00:29:50 --> 00:29:53 Professor Fred Watson: Yeah. And I mean I also,
00:29:54 --> 00:29:56 um, this is m perhaps
00:29:56 --> 00:29:59 controversial as a scientist, but there might
00:29:59 --> 00:30:00 be things that we can never understand
00:30:00 --> 00:30:03 because we simply don't have,
00:30:03 --> 00:30:06 um, the mental capacity to do that.
00:30:06 --> 00:30:08 Andrew Dunkley: Well, how do you explain,
00:30:09 --> 00:30:12 um, the tens of thousands of
00:30:12 --> 00:30:15 experiences of near death and people
00:30:15 --> 00:30:18 coming back with exactly the same stories
00:30:18 --> 00:30:20 and scenarios? How do you explain that?
00:30:21 --> 00:30:23 That's just beyond comprehension.
00:30:24 --> 00:30:26 Professor Fred Watson: Um, yes, it might be, but there might very
00:30:26 --> 00:30:28 well be physiological reasons why that
00:30:28 --> 00:30:28 happens.
00:30:28 --> 00:30:31 Andrew Dunkley: There could be. And that's one of the things
00:30:31 --> 00:30:33 that gets thrown up as a probability. Yeah,
00:30:34 --> 00:30:36 but it's interesting. It is interesting
00:30:36 --> 00:30:36 indeed.
00:30:36 --> 00:30:37 Professor Fred Watson: Yeah.
00:30:37 --> 00:30:38 Andrew Dunkley: M. Indeed.
00:30:38 --> 00:30:41 Professor Fred Watson: Um, that's a joyous note to end on, isn't it?
00:30:41 --> 00:30:43 Andrew Dunkley: Yeah, it is, but it's a great question,
00:30:43 --> 00:30:46 Steve, and, um, really worth looking
00:30:46 --> 00:30:49 into. But, uh, the AI
00:30:49 --> 00:30:52 platform I use says yeah, they probably would
00:30:52 --> 00:30:55 make inroads, but, um, maybe not in the way
00:30:55 --> 00:30:57 that you would expect. And as Fred Watson
00:30:57 --> 00:30:59 said, they didn't all like each other. Uh,
00:30:59 --> 00:31:02 and some of them were pretty prickly people
00:31:02 --> 00:31:04 in, you know, in their time.
00:31:05 --> 00:31:08 Um, and even today scientists
00:31:08 --> 00:31:10 still argue about the
00:31:11 --> 00:31:13 theories that Einstein came up with,
00:31:14 --> 00:31:16 um, relativity, et cetera. So, uh,
00:31:16 --> 00:31:19 the arguments and the analysis, they keep
00:31:19 --> 00:31:22 trying to break relativity and they can't,
00:31:23 --> 00:31:23 so.
00:31:24 --> 00:31:25 Professor Fred Watson: That's right. Yeah.
00:31:25 --> 00:31:28 Andrew Dunkley: M. It's fascinating. Really good
00:31:28 --> 00:31:28 question.
00:31:29 --> 00:31:32 Professor Fred Watson: Yeah, I mean, trying to break relativity
00:31:32 --> 00:31:35 is trying to see, you know, to what,
00:31:35 --> 00:31:37 because relativity is as good as it gets, but
00:31:37 --> 00:31:39 to see where its limits are, uh, because
00:31:39 --> 00:31:42 those limits might illuminate new physics and
00:31:42 --> 00:31:44 things that, as chatgpt said, we haven't
00:31:44 --> 00:31:45 thought of yet.
00:31:45 --> 00:31:47 Andrew Dunkley: Yeah, yeah. And I think that's got a lot to
00:31:47 --> 00:31:50 do with it. And uh, as you say, and
00:31:50 --> 00:31:52 it's probably true, there may be things we
00:31:52 --> 00:31:55 will never ever be able to figure out, like
00:31:57 --> 00:31:59 why the universe is expanding at an
00:31:59 --> 00:32:01 accelerating rate. Things like that.
00:32:01 --> 00:32:02 We may never know.
00:32:02 --> 00:32:05 Professor Fred Watson: Well, yeah, I do hope we can
00:32:05 --> 00:32:06 noble that one because that's such an
00:32:06 --> 00:32:09 intriguing question. Yeah, indeed.
00:32:09 --> 00:32:11 Andrew Dunkley: Thanks. Steve Schumo, Bob, uh, Galwin
00:32:11 --> 00:32:14 and everybody who sends in questions to us.
00:32:14 --> 00:32:17 You can do that too on our website spacenuts
00:32:18 --> 00:32:20 IO and just click, uh, on the Ask me
00:32:20 --> 00:32:23 anything button at the top it's labelled ama.
00:32:23 --> 00:32:25 And send your questions there in text or
00:32:25 --> 00:32:27 audio format. And don't forget to tell us who
00:32:27 --> 00:32:30 you are and where you're from and your, um,
00:32:30 --> 00:32:33 cousin's sister's brother's birthday date. We
00:32:33 --> 00:32:35 really need to know that and whatever, uh,
00:32:35 --> 00:32:37 else you want to tell us. And have a look
00:32:37 --> 00:32:39 around while you're there. And Fred Watson,
00:32:39 --> 00:32:40 thank you so much. It's been a great
00:32:40 --> 00:32:41 pleasure. Lots of fun too.
00:32:42 --> 00:32:44 Professor Fred Watson: Uh, indeed it has. Thanks, Andrew. Um, uh,
00:32:44 --> 00:32:46 great to talk and we'll catch up next time.
00:32:46 --> 00:32:48 Andrew Dunkley: Time we will. Professor Fred Watson Watson,
00:32:48 --> 00:32:50 astronomer at large. And thanks to Huw in the
00:32:50 --> 00:32:52 studio, who wasn't invited
00:32:53 --> 00:32:55 to a room full of geniuses, which is why he's
00:32:55 --> 00:32:58 not with us today. Boom. Got him.
00:32:58 --> 00:33:01 And from me, Andrew Dunkley, Why m am I here?
00:33:02 --> 00:33:04 Thanks for listening. We'll catch you on the
00:33:04 --> 00:33:06 next episode of Space Nuts.
00:33:06 --> 00:33:06 Professor Fred Watson: Bye. Bye.
00:33:08 --> 00:33:10 Andrew Dunkley: You've been listening to the Space Nuts
00:33:10 --> 00:33:12 podcast, available
00:33:13 --> 00:33:15 at Apple Podcasts, Spotify,
00:33:15 --> 00:33:18 iHeartRadio or your favourite podcast
00:33:18 --> 00:33:20 player. You can also stream on
00:33:20 --> 00:33:21 demand@bytes.com.
00:33:21 --> 00:33:24 Professor Fred Watson: um, this has been another quality podcast
00:33:24 --> 00:33:26 production from bytes.um com.