3 Episode results for "Rovers Landers"

NASA Mars Mission Updates

SPACE NEWS POD

10:33 min | 2 years ago

NASA Mars Mission Updates

"Hey, space news pod listeners if you wanna show your opinions give feedback or tell me what you're thinking said me, a voice message voice messages, earn easy way for you to send me audio the might end up in a future episode of the space news, pod voice messages are the latest feature from anchor the platform, I used to make this podcast if you have an idea for an episode if you want me to cover something, you can send me a voice message right now from wherever you're listening, just tap. The Lincoln my show notes. And I can't wait to hear from you to order listening to the space news pod. So that means you like podcasts and you probably like music too. So on Spotify, you can listen to all of those things, all your podcasts, and all of your music in one place in, you don't need a premium account. They have a huge catalog of podcasts on every topic including space news pod. You can follow your favorite podcast. He never miss episodes. Download episodes. Listen to off line and easily share what you're listening to with your friends with Spotify integrations with. Social media platforms like Instagram. So just searched for space news pod on the Spotify app. Browse podcasts in the your library tab and follow me. So you never miss an episode of space news. Pot Spotify, the world's leading music, streaming service in now it can be your go-to for podcasts too. Hello. And welcome back to the space news pod. A daily podcast for space science in tech. My name is will Walden and today on this episode, I'm going to be talking about Nasr's future Mars missions, and current Mars missions like the Mars reconnaissance orbiter. But I, I wanna tell you about what's going to be happening on Monday. I did my first interview with somebody in that somebody is Dr David warm flash on Twitter. You can check him out at cosmic evolution. He's a he's a writer. He's an author. He's a doctor and we talk about his new book. It's called moon an illustrated history from ancient myths to the colonies of tomorrow. But we don't just talk about the moon. We talk about upcoming Mars missions, a little bit of space, politics, and some other stuff in there, too. But there's a lot of. About the moon. So if you're interested in that mixture to listen on Monday to the episode with Dr David warm flesh, and I'll be posting the full video interview on our YouTube channel YouTube dot com slash space news pod. So I got a news alert from NASA at JPL the Jet Propulsion Laboratory about their new Mars twenty twenty Rover updates in the a picture of the ship of the craft is going to be taking the Rover to Mars the ship. It's about the size of let's just say, like a I don't know, seven to eight person hot tub. If that makes sense where you're not cramped, like you have a lot of room, it's like a like a like a larger hot tub. It suspended by cables, there's a cruise stage which will power guide, the March twenty twenty spacecraft during its seventh month seven month trip to Mars. And below that there's an arrow shell which will protect the vehicle during cruise as well as during the crazy fire descent into the Martian atmosphere. In. You might remember something like the descent from curiosity, which was this like a seven minute, descent, where it's fiery, it's really really hot in it. Looks like the craft is gonna burn up in the atmosphere, but survives in, then we have great science going on Mars. But inside of that shell. There is a rocket powered descent stage and it has a Rover in there, too. But right now it's just a, a standing Rover for the time being until they actually lost the mission because they don't want to put the actual Rover in there did want a cocoon it up right now. They want to wait until the actual mission. They'll put it in and then the flight up to Mars in the actual Rover that's got to be going to Mars is getting its final assembly and GPL's high bay one cleanroom right now. So it's not complete. That's what Stanton is there just to make sure everything fits for when the actual Rover is done goes in the show, they send it off. And it says here that the Mars twenty twenty spacecraft was tested in the twenty five foot wide eighty foot tall, which is eight meter by twenty six meter chamber in the same configuration, it will begin while flying through interplanetary space, the twenty twenty Rover carries an entirely new suite of instruments, including a sample caching system. The. Will collect samples of Mars for return to earth on subsequent missions, this mission will launch from Cape Canaveral air force station in Florida in July of twenty twenty in landed Jezero creator on February. Eighteenth of twenty twenty one. So if all goes, well will probably start getting some science from this thing in March of twenty twenty one and want to get back from this break. I'm gonna talk about Marzieh's m aro, which is the Mars reconnaissance orbiter and held many trips. It made around the red planet. It's a crazy number. So get ready. Hi everyone. I would've let you know about inker dot FM. It's where I host by podcast in, I find that it's the easiest place to do that. And it gives you everything that you need in one place, for free, which you can start. Podcasting from your phone, or from your computer. You don't need special crazy equipment to start doing it. You can talk into your phone video, editing equipment that costs thousands of dollars to start a podcast, you can do it from anywhere in when you're done, recording your episode anchored at FM will distribute it. So it can be hard everywhere on Spotify. Apple podcast Google podcasts. Stitcher, every place that podcasts can be heard, and you can make money with your podcast. It's pretty simple. There's no minimum listenership to start making money with anchor. So if you wanna make a little bit of money while having a cool podcast, while download the ANC rep or go to anchor up FM to get started. So Mars recounts, orbiter collects daily science about the planet surface at atmosphere, including detailed views with its high resolution image science experiment. Camber the high rise and it's powerful enough to see surface features the size of a dinner room table from one hundred eighty six miles above the surface in just a -ccomplish a really crazy milestone, it has done sixty thousand loops around Mars and on average, the M R O takes a hundred and twelve minutes to circle Mars in goes about two miles per second. That's three point four kilometers per second. It goes really, really fast. And it's not just a hot rod. It doesn't just go fast around Mars. It collects daily weather data it probes the subsurface for ice and the. This data that they get from this reconnaissance orbiter. Well, they can use that data for designing future missions that will take humans to the surface of the red planet in the future, and it doesn't just do its own science. It works as a relay. So it's a network of relays the being data back to earth from Nastase Mars. Rovers Landers, and later this month, the MRI will hit another milestone, it will have relayed one tear bit of data mainly. From Mars is curiosity Rover. So if you've ever seen, you know, sell fees from curiosity, or, you know, the surface of Mars, they have really great photos, Anastas website in on the social media channels, while the empire, oh, probably helped with that helped relay those images back to earth. Dan, Johnston in Nasr's JPL in Pasadena, California. He's the project manager over there. He said, MRI has given scientists in the. Public new perspective of Mars. We've also supported Nastase fleet of Mars surface missions. A loving them to send their images and discoveries back to scientists on earth. And also during landings of crafts on Mars, while the MRI takes pictures. It'll take pictures of these landings. It'll take pictures of the lending sites before they actually get there to make sure that nothing has changed, and make sure that everything is okay. And you know, and then they make decisions based on the photos from R O, and other orbiters. And also, not just before the landing though, make sure that the Lander got their properly in the make sure they'll take photos of the, of the Landers, and make sure that, you know, they didn't collide with the surface because instruments on the lenders could be wrong. You know, there could be some, some damage to some of the instruments. It does happen. And those instruments could be wrecked on their way, you know when they hit the surface. So am I rose there to take photos of Landers? Make sure they got there in one piece. Make sure that everything's good. Make sure that the parachute didn't deploy over the actual Lander in ruin all of the science. So I'm arose there for numerous reasons and they just got sixty thousand laps around Mars. So I wanna say thank you to everyone who subscribe to this podcast if you haven't subscribed yet. Police hit the subscribe button, if you'd like space science in tech, because it happens every single day on the space news pod. Also, thank you to patriot patrons patriot dot com slash space news podcast. And also, thank you for taking the time out of your day to spend it here with me on the space news pod. I'm your host will Walden and I will see you soon.

Mars Spotify Nastase Mars Rovers Landers Walden Dr David Nasr twenty twenty Rover YouTube Jet Propulsion Laboratory Twitter Cape Canaveral writer NASA Stanton Marzieh Apple Florida
Is there really life on Venus? How do we find out?

The Big Story

24:04 min | 9 months ago

Is there really life on Venus? How do we find out?

"When we talk about the possibility of life beyond this planet, and it seems like a good time to do that. We tend to focus on a couple of things. I. Always, on Mars. Either to wonder whether it once had life and might again. Or to wonder if we can. Lever. And go there preferably soon. Seconds though is to wonder about the vast reaches of the solar system and the universe. To think about whether or not there is life out there. Aside from us. If, we can just find some sign that there are other organisms. Out there on another planet just waiting to be found. And maybe we can find them. And maybe we are not alone. That's the romantic version. What we don't tend to much about is our other planetary neighbor. So it's kind of perfect that life might be just. Sitting there in a form, we can't imagine. Right next door. and. Sometime in the next few years that soon, if we're lucky, we could pop over for a look. If we can figure out how to do that and not melt. I'm Jordan Heath Rawlings. This is the big story. Neil Patel is the space reporter, the MIT Technology Review Hello. Hey. How're you doing? I'm doing pretty well happy to be talking about something off this planet at the moment. For sure. A nice reprieve from current events. Yeah and this is a fascinating topic and maybe you can start by for those of us who don't have much of a background in this stuff and who spent all our science fiction based time thinking about Mars can you tell us a bit about Venus what's it like there? Everything. Shores. Yeah. So Venus is long thought to have a very inhospitable world. It's almost like another hell it's got very, very high temperatures that are thought to be over four hundred degree Celsius on the surface of the planet. Its surface pressures are thought to be ninety times stronger than what you might find on earth. It's thought to have some very very acidic clouds and those clouds are actually why it shine. So brightly in the night sky when it's Seen during nighttime is that why we tend to? Focus our attention on Mars. so much more than Venus. I think we tend to focus attention Mars because. Yeah Mars is thought to be a place. We can actually go visit ourselves. Venus is interesting for so many reasons, but we're never ever going to see a time in our future when you see human colonists or human explorers venturing. Below those clouds towards the surface Mars is at least a place that you can see a future generations visiting one day. So what's changing then if we're never going to visit there or at least not in any foreseeable timeline changing about. How we see Venus right now. So it turns out Venus may not be as inhospitable as we once thought a lot of things changed last week when there was the announcement that we had found phosphene in the clouds of the planet. Phosphene, gas is not something that is thought to be able to be produced naturally in most kinds of conditions if it's produced. By any kind of human activity, it's because of sort of high industry things that we run here but otherwise, phosphene is a tiny little gas that is only thought to be produced by microbes that are in very poor oxygenated environments. Finding phosphene in the clouds of Venus might be a sign that there's some life forms that have found a way to make themselves at home within the atmosphere, and we'll talk about that and what it means in just a second but can you explain how we find phosphene? Sure. Yeah. So. Study that came out last week. What essentially happened was you had different groups of scientists that were kind of thinking about Venus certain ways and it happened to be the fact that. A few scientists, respect. In studying speech, which is like I said sort of rare gas on earth. So there was never any sort of inclination among astronomers to look for it outside of Earth. But after some discussions here in their between that team, a few astronomers thought, hey, why don't we point our ground based telescopes over to Venus and see you we can maybe detected in certain traces here and there, and so they reserve time on to very high telescopes on earth. One is the James Clerk Maxwell Telescope based in Hawaii and the other is the Atacama large millimeter submillimeter. In Chile. Both telescopes for able to sort of find these traces of phosphene gas in the atmosphere. It's not something that we would have found otherwise unless we were just specifically targeting the Venetian clouds for phosphene gas. And it just. So happened that these researchers able to reserve time on those observatories four studying Venus in this capacity. So did we just kind of stumble on it? Then did we did we find this out because a couple of researchers were really curious like there was no hardcore effort here to make this discovery. Yeah it these findings came as such a surprise to so much of the scientific world because. When it comes to looking for life on other planets, it's thought that we should be looking for quote unquote bio signatures that are probably much more relevant to what we might find on earth phosphene is not a gas that. Is Very representative of ninety, nine percent of life here on. Earth. So to go out of your way to target for phosphene on another planet is. Just a confluence of different factors that are super rare and we just happened to stumble on gold at this point. What was the reaction when that hit the scientific community? It was amazing. It was. kind of a surprise, but also if you talked to so many astronomers in. The space community A. so many of them have been bullish on wanting to investigate Venus. Because of. Sort of little tidbits of data that suggests there's something maybe there that there are bio signatures worth probing for. This was a very, very encouraging finding and it was not quite as the shock as I. Think it was through the rest of the public, but it certainly made waves and it only fueled more excitement around the fact that we should go explore Venus more in depth. Often or how thoroughly have we studied and explored Venus in the past like how much work has been done? Not. Very much. The biggest program for Venus exploration has been the former Soviet Union's VENERA program which ceased Hud to launch new missions in the mid eighty s probably the biggest profile mission on that was venera thirteen, which managed to sit bit managed to land on the surface of Venus and I think exist for about one hundred and twenty seven minutes before succumbing to temperatures and pressures their. Venus because it's so inhospitable study there just hasn't been much interest in building these. Multimillion dollar even perhaps even a billion dollar. Mission to then have it just succumb. In a matter of hours turn to the Venetian and battlefield. So there hasn't really been that much willpower among public space agencies to devote that much money towards studying Venus that's been one of the major issues here. This might be a dumb question, but if that was in the mid. Eighties. Surely we've come quite far since then in terms of the technology, do we have stuff now we think could last for longer in that climate. Yeah definitely when it comes to actually. Possibly, studying the surface. There have been a lot of engineers that have been working on new technologies, new kinds of metals or circuitry that could last. Much longer than just a couple of hours on the surface of Venus none of those things unfortunately have been put into very much action. These are sort of little. Proof of concept studies here and there or proposals suggest you might be able to build materials out of this way but there hasn't been again. There hasn't been a sort of willpower to just. Actually, build the probe or lander itself and send it out to be. But that is one of sort of the exciting things about this new study is that it raises more hopes in the possibility that we could build those sorts of things now and that we have an actual sort of target for studying Venus in closer depth your piece in Mit Technology Review is titled We need to go to Venus as soon as possible, and that's not just you. There's there's some experts quoted in that piece as well. When when you use that phrase, we need to go to Venus. Does that actually entail this story that I wrote was advocating for a very broad exploration program one that we could compare to what we do for Mars on Mars. We've already launched several different orbiters we've launched. Rovers. Landers. We've launched different kinds of missions that are digging into into the underground surface. There is such a massively comprehensive program for studying Mars and that's sort of what I'm advocating for. When it comes to Venus we don't want just launch a single new orbiter or a single new probe that will go through the atmosphere or a single new lander or just devote a little bit more time on ground observatories on earth to study Venus, we WANNA to do all the above. All of those things are essential because there's too much to study on Venus that only one mission kin can investigate. It's worth having very many different programs all at once in order to share different data, and then those missions can use the insights of other missions to more closely investigate peculiar things perhaps signs of life or signs of new bio signatures that are worth investigating more in depth. Are you mentioned another orbiter? Are there orbiters there right now and what are they telling us? So the last major orbital mission around Venus was Venus Express which was run by the European Space Administration to study the planet's atmosphere and surface characteristics. It was launched in two thousand six and it was retired in two thousand fourteen. So since then we have not had a sort of very rigorous. Program in studying Venus even from just the clouds right now, there is one orbiter of note that is. Circling the planet right now it's the Japanese space agency's Akkad. sukey. Spacecraft and it's has sort of a weird history on its own. It was launched in two thousand ten. And it was supposed to make Venetian orbit by December two, thousand ten but unfortunately. Some glitches occurred and it was not able to sort of make it into the planet's orbit. Properly, it had to end up circling around the sun and coming back again around two thousand fifteen and it's been studying Venus since two, thousand fifteen. But unfortunately, that orbiter is really not equipped to studying the planet's atmosphere or surface in-depth for any kinds of bio signatures or life bearing characteristics. It's religious around there to study the planet's whether and a bit of the climate and tell us a bit more of some of the geophysical characteristics you mentioned back at the beginning of our talk that it was. Very Unlikely. I guess if I'm if I'm putting it wrong correct me that phosphene would be created by anything except biological forms we say unlikely or probably not how do we make certain and what are the chances that you know we just don't understand the chemistry going on on Venus and it's just this random thing that happened. That's a very good question and that's a question that is being hotly debated right now in the scientific community actually. So, when I mentioned that it's unlikely that for phosphene to have been created by. Anything other than life I mean that very strictly in terms of earth in the environment, there's a lot of different kinds of exotic chemistries that are possible off world and Venus being one of the most extreme environments in the solar system. It's extremely possible that there may be some kind of natural geophysical processes or natural chemistry happening in the atmosphere that is creating phosphene. Now, there have been some studies especially by the authors of the new fascinating study that have followed up and gone through more in depth into why they were able to sort of eliminate the known possibilities for how phosphene might have been created Venus naturally the study is it's very good. And definitely anyone to check out in case they're curious to learn more about like why scientists? Were able to sort of eliminate any news natural processes. But one of the experts I talked to Paul Burnett North Carolina State raises the simple fact that we just don't know enough about Venus to say that. There isn't some kind of weird chemistry or processes going on on the surface or in the clouds that are creating phosphene so It's entirely possible that phosphene is just being created by some kind of natural processes and what we really need to do, which is why we need to launch a very comprehensive Venus expiration program is studying the planet more in depth in order to actually eliminate the possibility of those things. Would we just scoop up some of the gas and analyze it? Is that what we're really like is at the heart of this. Yeah I would say, so I think. There hasn't. been a kind of interest in A. WHAT YOU CALL A. Sample return mission when it comes to Venus. I think the new findings at this point? Really bolster support for emission that like that you can imagine an orbiter. You know letting go. Some kind of small probe that does just sort of dip into the atmosphere captures a little bit of the sample of the gas and then returns to the orbiter or mixed way directly back to Earth to bring to us to study in the lab, I think a sample return mission of Venus would be one of the most exciting. Space exploration missions we can conceive of in the next couple of decades. You say, the next couple of decades how long would it take like if we if we had the will behind in the money it and I know there's all sorts of political fights around that potentially. But let's say we reached a consensus that we had to figure out if this was life or not, and we'll start tomorrow how soon. Would we find out? So that's another big question on the minds of a lot of scientists and engineers launch windows to Venus meaning when our planet and Venus are the shortest distance, which makes it much easier for us to launch missions, their launch windows to only opened up about every nineteen months. So it takes even if you wanted to just launch tomorrow, you're going to have to wait a bit of time to. For. You can actually send something out there The other issue too is these missions are so expensive if we want to properly develop the kind of. Spacecraft that will withstand the. Rigors and pressures of the atmosphere and that environment you need to really take time in building out these kinds of spacecraft and you don't want to rush onto something like that and you WanNa, make sure that there's enough funding to go along those things. There are two sort of big missions that NASA is currently debating when it comes to exploring Venus I think these new findings would bolster the case for green-lighting either or both this things. There's Veritas which is a proposed orbital mission and there's Davinci plus which is a proposed mission to launch a little probe that would go into Venetian atmosphere and kind of study it using the most state of the art tools we can build right now neither of those missions if they're selected would launch any earlier than twenty twenty six. That doesn't mean that we're not going to Venus anytime soon, there are a couple other proposals that are sort of being debated right now one in particular is. Actually being built by a private company based in New Zealand called rocket lab, and they want to launch small satellite called photon towards Venus as a fly by mission as early as twenty, twenty three, and that mission might actually launch a deploy a small probe into the atmosphere to collect some data. It's not quite clear a small product that would be able to carry any sort of. instruments. That could really investigate the phosphene question or any other signatures in the atmosphere, but it's possible. It could find something that. Lends more hope to the idea that there's life on Venus. So it's certainly nothing to just sort of scoff at. And not to be ridiculous here because I again, I'm not certain if anything when we have these discussions but if we Just. Found out about phosphene and we've never really been able to study Venus comprehensively. What are the chances that a if that is a sign of life that it's it's not the only sign of life and there are all sorts of things going on there that we don't understand absolutely I. mean is a sign of life on Venus. It's entirely possible. It is simply one form of life. Like I said before phosphene is produced on earth by organisms that are living in environments that are very poor in oxygen. This makes sense for Venus obviously because the atmosphere is so densely composed of carbon dioxide but that doesn't mean that you know perhaps in other pockets of the environment perhaps on the surface or perhaps. In other altitudes of the atmosphere, there are other forms of life that are producing other kinds of bio signatures that revealed they are. Of a different species or Of Very different family of organisms in the instance that we find an organism on Venus that is producing that phosphene that does not mean it's the only life form on the planet if I had to ask for your gut feeling first of all, is there life on Venus and second of all is there varied life there. So my answer to that. Should I know I'm a little bit of a cynic when it comes to. Thinking about the Astra biological possibilities of the universe. I right now we don't know enough about phosphene on Venus to. Outright suggest it's a product of life on the planet. And I would say it's probably more likely that phosphene is just being produced by some kind of exotic chemistry on Venus. That doesn't mean that there's that it's impossible to through life on. Venus. At all other kinds of forms of it the planet has such a vibrant chemistry in such a weird exotic extreme. Composition on the surface in on in the atmosphere that There might be life that exist in other ways we haven't really conceived of here on Earth and. That's at surviving right now on in the division clouds or on the Venetian surface. My gut feeling is that the life on Venus is probably very rare. It's possible but I wouldn't hold my breath, but I don't think that deters us from thinking about a larger Venus expiration program anyways. We just don't know enough about the planet and I think there's other reasons that we wanted to explore Venus as well. One of the things that you'll hear from a lot of scientists is that. Venus started out. So similarly to Earth both of the planets are similar sizes, similar distances from the sun. It's long thought that Venus and the Earth were pretty similar at some point billions and billions of years ago, and there's a strong questions to what happened that caused Venus to turn to such a hellish landscape and allowed Earth's to blossom into this. Park. Place that is home to countless kinds of species and organisms. So maybe we're about to find out exactly what it was. Right there's a huge mystery as to what happened and I think that in itself is already enough reason for us to want to go investigate Venus and explore the planet more in depth with a very robust expiration program. It would be really something if after kind of scouring as far out as we could get for signs of life that we found something like next door absolutely absolutely I I think while Mars is such an exciting place for so many reasons. Venus. Also right there, and it's a waiting for us to explore it as well. and. If if it turns out that the the fostering signatures are assign of life, it means that we should at once go as soon as possible to investigate those organisms in find out how they got there how they were able to survive. Venus's sort of strange in extreme evolution and what else might be lurking down on the surface Neil. Thank you for a indulging us with this today. It's fascinating. Absolutely. Thank you for having me. Neil Patel of MIT technology review. That was the big story for more head to the big story PODCAST DOT CA. You can find all our episodes there I promise. Next week, we'll be back to covering the pandemic and politics and every other thing that makes us wanNA leave Earth right now you can talk to us at the Big Story F. PM on twitter you can find us as always in your podcast player apple or Google or stitcher or spotify or you choose I don't care just listen and subscribe rate and review tell your friends. Clare Broussard is the lead producer of the Big Story Ryan Clark and Stephanie Phillips our associate. Producers. Anna Lisa Nielsen is our digital editor and I'm Jordan Heath Rawlings. Extra listening. Have a great weekend. We'll talk Monday.

Earth phosphene Jordan Heath Rawlings Mit Technology Review Neil Patel Chile Atacama Soviet Union Rovers Akkad. sukey NASA representative James Clerk Maxwell Telescope European Space Administration MIT Technology Landers Hawaii
The Skeptics Guide #719 - Apr 20 2019

The Skeptics' Guide to the Universe

1:33:16 hr | 2 years ago

The Skeptics Guide #719 - Apr 20 2019

"You're listening to the skeptics guide to the universe. You're scape to reality. Hello. And welcome to the skeptics guide to the universe. Today is Wednesday April seventeenth 2019. And this is your host even Vela joining this week Arbab novella everybody, Jane Avella. Hey, guys. Evan bernstein. Good evening, folks. And we have a special guest rogue this week, James Hart. James welcome to the skeptics guide. Welcome from England. A just got through telling us that it's one o'clock in the morning where you are. Yes. It's a little bit pasta that time I say. James tell us a little bit about yourself. So yeah, I'm software engineer based in Brighton. Currently working cool startup, and I've been a long time listener pretty sure I've listened to every single episode. I didn't quite start the beginning of kind of moved back, and like a very very long time ago. So yeah. So most of my life. I've been listening to skeptics guide. It's up slightly astounding to how old are you? Now, I'm turning fifty this year. Yes. Fourteen years almost half your life. Couple will be. Completely mind blowing don't understand it. So it's amazing. I did we. I did we. James? So you said you've been you've listened to most of the episodes if not all of them, especially how do we compare now to the older episodes to say thirteen fourteen years ago, I was thinking about introducing with the whole sort of Hello? Never. Podcasts are for. Let's you know, that I did actually listen to that one. So. James how realistic is the show Silicon Valley since you work at a at a startup. I it's almost a little bit too close to home. Does that make thin? Just listen to it. Yeah. Like when I watched like a medical show, like ER, whatever's like, they wouldn't do it that way. That's stupid. Why are they doing that? It's hard to get past that if you're too close material. Absolutely. Unfortunately, we've got a couple of depressing things to talk about. Well, the first one I one is at CARA is not here. But it's a good reason actually for her. She has a gig, which we can't tell you about the secret. She's the filming stage. This is a new project. But I'm sure you'll hear about it. When when it when it airs. But I mean, she is a TV personality. When when we contract with her to be on the issue. This was like we knew this was going to happen. It's going to be a few episodes of year, which is going to be filming. And it's says not going to be possible to have run. There's not a big deal. It's always into perfect time to have on a guest row because whenever we're one rogue down. It's that's when we like to fill in Evan was was absent last week. So we replaced him. So your care for this episode. Oh, yeah. Hopefully, I measure up. Well, we will see. We're going to start by talking about Notre Dom fad. Yes. This is the big news for the week. I always wanted to how much this dates are show like James when you listen to show from five or ten years ago. And we're talking about something in the news time travel, right? Yeah. So anyways, Notre Dom caught fire earlier in the week. So what we know so far we don't know what caused it. But the working fury is that it was an accident. It could have been a worker error like a discarded cigarette. It could have been electrical short it start. But here's the thing that they do know it started in the attic and the fire alarm did go off, but there was a glitch in the fire system and that actually directed them to the wrong place at the cathedral. And so they searched for like, twenty minutes and couldn't find it. Times twenty three minutes on then at twenty three minutes later a second alarm went off. And then by the time, they found the fire. It was basically too late. It was running along the rafters, and it was too far gone. Those timbers they something insane. Like sort of three hundred years old. Yeah. Really? I heard they were from the year. Twelve hundred drive would really dry would. Yeah. And also the reconstruction that took place in the nineteenth century, they used more would to even though the technology to use metal steel and other things they decided to keep it keep it real as it were with and then probably dust and other flammable objects around and then the structure of the cathedral itself. Made it hard to douse the fire. They couldn't really get access to the part that was burning. They couldn't get access to from the ground. They basically had to wait for the lead to melt and before they can get the hoses to where the fire was. So it burned out the spire. You know, the famous spire in the middle. And the worst thing that fold down would roofing along in the, you know, the cross shape in the middle the stone structures. They say the stone is probably sound structurally sound. But there they still have to inspect it because who knows how well eight hundred year old limestone, fared under the system under that fire. I also found out prepping for this that they had an opportunity to upgrade the the building to make it more fire resistant, and they did not do it other big cathedrals in Europe did do it. So they didn't replace the wood or put in fire barriers to limit the spread of the fire and note, they decided no sprinkler system. She was yeah. I think they just going gonna have to update so like with many disasters, right? It's also an opportunity, obviously, there's a loss of some history here of traditional beauty saying it's gonna take six years to. To get the space shut down for six years and reconstructed, but they have an opportunity to make it even better than it was before, you know, so this'll be the famous fire of two thousand nineteen and they'll be hopefully, a lot of upgrades, and I strongly suspect they'll make it a lot more fiery assistant. But basically, we have sort of the the cathedral was built they started construction. You guys know one eleven fifty seven sixty and the majority of the construction was done in twelve sixty so one hundred years, but then there was you know, depends I read different dates depending on when you count that. It was quote unquote, finished there was sort of major upgrades additions, and whatever over the next even more like eighty years or so, but officially it was basically done in twelve sixty one hundred years, you know, you have a building this old eight hundred whatever year old structure, these things are going to happen. You know, and this wasn't the first damage to be done to the two. To the cathedral. But you know, I it is very sad. Whenever anything destructive like this happens. But that's kind of the life story of these, you know, huge ancient buildings as things happen. They rebuild. They they update they reconstruct. So this will just be one more chapter in the history of this building. It's not totally destroyed which was great. It was really just mostly the would parts to it. Yeah. But Steve what about I'd never have been able to get any sense of. What was destroyed? That's irreplaceable. You could rebuild the structure, but what has it been any identified in released artwork that this? This is gone. We will never hurt all the stained glass windows, are what I read. I don't know if there's other artwork. Probably no. Actually, you know, first of all. Yeah. Like anything we say tonight. The information changes pretty quickly. Yeah. But like, the the primary stained glass window survived is what I heard and I saw pictures of it after the fire. I saw someone had it took a take an video inside. The the big circular stained glass window had survived. Let's good. You know, what they're trying to do. Now is they're trying to stabilize the building to make sure that it doesn't keep like falling in Hume's any more of it. And then they're going to let the inspectors come in to do a legitimate inspection. A really figure out exactly what happened which could take some time other facts, I heard lots of people donated a lot of money like billionaires donating hundreds of millions of dollars, you know, multiple instances of this. It's an icon, obviously in Paris. And it's it's an icon of Paris end of France. And it's it's basically the most I think dramatic icon of gothic architecture European gothic architecture. You know, it's the masive -nificant historical. But it's even I think TV it's beyond. I this is the kind of thing that is so culturally priceless that they really they really deserved really needed to be protected extra something, you know. This is such an amazing thing. It's a so sad that this could have been prevented if it wasn't in multiple steps along the way this could have been prevented, and they they neglected. I'm still shocked to hear that they they elected to take some precautionary measures that would have saved this this all this damage, and who knows what what's replaceable. So there's already of course, any big event happened is already spiracy theories zipping around the did at this time. Well, crow. Yeah. Probably the most common one is that it was deliberate and it was terrorism. Yeah. Yeah. Well, anytime there's uncertainty, you know, that those sorts of ideas and elements are going to enter the equation. It was it was expected basically as soon, of course, we're watching this unfold on television. You sort of knew that this was going to be the case. Just no there's no way that there was not going to be conspiracy theories. Yeah. I mean, look, it's a conspiracy theory for someone to think, you know, hey, this could have been terrorism make sure could have been terrorism. But you know, we can't say it's not implausible when it's happening unless the terror organization is claiming that they did it you really just got to like keep that under wraps and wait until a legit investigation is done. I think it was coveting scaffolding wasn't it. So I mean like such a knees easy, easy thing to happen in massive works. Like that. Like, you just gonna have accidents that Schorr the so many explanations for what how it could have happened. You don't have to make these leaps into totally unsubstantiated ideas, let's move onto some news items. So I have sort of a love hate relationship with the FDA, obviously, they have a very critical role to play the food and Drug administration, regulating, not only food products. But also drugs, of course, over the counter as well as prescrip-. Option and supplements cetera. So they serve a critical role. And in a lot of ways they sort of get smart people in the FDA who get it who they're supposed to be doing. But they're kinda hamstrung. They don't really have the power of the resources to do. They're supposed to do. So it's just frustrating. But here's a perfect example of my frustration. So the FDA comes out with some guidelines right actually guidelines and rules. Funny. How to say this is four labeling of of food products as to whether or not they contain genetically modified organisms right now. Some of the regulations are just sort of the common sense things that you would imagine how what constitutes a GMO and things are most substances or not actually the organisms themselves, but they're derived from a GMO, but but what's interesting is they touch on. How you can deceive the public with information. That's technically true. But that is giving a miss a deliberate misperception rates creating an impression it's implying something that isn't true because it's either selective or because we'll you'll see. So so one thing for example, is like if you have on a product, let's say, you know. For example, is I'm just going to quote, the FDA if the this is what they say, exactly, correct. They say, for example on a product made largely flour derived from genetically engineered corn and a small amount of non-genetically engineered sweeping oil a claim that the product quote does not contain bioengineering bioengineered soybean oil could be misleading consumers believe that the entire product or a larger portion of it. Then it's actually the case is free of bioengineered material. So right. That's that's one example of a way in which the label could be a hundred percent, correct. But is deliberately selective in order to create a misperception because whenever something is on a label. It creates an assumption about why you bothering to state that this goes all the way, to example, for example. So if you say that something is GMO free that can't possibly be GMO. That's another type of deception. So example, we talked about as. Gluten-free water. Right. This is the same thing. If you say, this is she non GMO salt. Okay. Well, there's no such thing as salted derived from genetically modified organism or that is a GMO. It's the negative claim deception whenever you claim that something is not something or something is absent it makes it seem like that's a thing. Right. Okay. So other products do have it. So for some examples, I come up with it's like saying this product contains only cruelty free sugar. So what some sugar is not cruelty free. I mean, that's the implication. It's true. It's true or calorie free salt will solve doesn't have calories or you could say these are that free jellybeans jellybeans, basically, I think peer sugar, right? I think like Tressler says that twizzlers frat fat-free snack. Yeah. It's pure sugar. That's. Protein, free and delicious and delicious. I love twins. My go-to movie snack. They're great when I do that sort of thing. So that creates a way of deceiving the truth. Right. You say something is doesn't contain something that nothing contains, you know, it's like if you have a peanut butter and say, we have no excrement in our peanut butter proud. But but are you saying that your competitors? Do have it in their product. I mean, what are you saying Pat yourself on the back on the us? So that's another way to this. This gets to the non GMO project right on Jima project is a non for profit organization that charges a licensing fee to license their non GMO labels. So you could slap it on your food. They basically have to go through a process where they certify that your product is GM free. And then you get to put the label on it. But they will put it on things for which it is not possible for there to be a GMO option like water or salt or things that contain wheat. There's no GMO wheat or there's no GMO tomatoes. So tomato sauce GMO free tomato sauce on hundred percent of it is GMO free. And so the label is meaningless, but it's a negative claim that is meant to deceive. But of course, here's the biggest one, right? And the FDA does address this as well. And that is when you say that something it would be. Similar to saying that this product contains no poison whatever just choose. What point you could save? Yeah. Ours. This is our cynic free. Okay. Is is there arsenic and other versions of this thing? But it's also if you sit you could say that it doesn't have something that is completely safe. But by the fact, that you're going out of your way to say, it doesn't have the thing you're implying that that's a virtue writes a marketing. Yeah. So you're plying that it's not safe. That's up is not safe. So you could say like this contains no Allen, which is like an amino acid. Okay. What hundred percent Alan free? That's that could be true twizzlers one hundred percent Allen free. But that would be does just a way of fearmongering, right scaring, the public. They will. I don't know what that is. But I don't buy parents. I don't want it in my food. I don't know if other versions of competitors have Alan. In it. And so I better buy this product just to be on the safe side. Right. That's what they want the customers to of course, it's obvious. That's the whole GMO free thing is about that's an shell is to create fear about something which is not dangerous, which you shouldn't worry about in order to create this negative claim and create a health halo around products that are free of this thing. That's not a problem in the first place. Sounds very straw Manish. Yeah. It's it's a poisoning the well, it sort of claiming by implication, or by what you're not saying, you know, but it's it's meant to create a market through deception. That's the bottom line. Now, the FDA they totally get it. Right. You read the guidelines, and they completely understand what's happening in the industry. How they're using fearmongering around GMO's to promote products. What they say is they can't say because a law, right? Federal law the United States, they can't say that you can't voluntarily label your products GMO free. But so they say that that can be deceptive. If on the same label, whether it says GMO free or not produced to modern biotechnology, or whatever if on the same label, they imply that as a result of not being produced through modern biotechnology, I'm quoting them now such vegetables, or whatever are safer more nutritious or have different attributes than other foods, solely because the food was not produced using modern biotechnology that right there totally gets it. That's the problem is that you're implying in the labeling that by saying GMO free that you're saying it's there for safer or more nutritious, but the FDA can't categorically ban that. So they just have to say you can't explicitly say on the label therefore, our food is better for you or is more safe or whatever. But unfortunately, these are all. Just guidelines. They have zero teeth corporations are one hundred percent free to completely ignore these recommendations because the FDA simply does not have the thority to enforce them. Or maybe they're just floating. This idea to see how people respond to maybe they they might try to enforce them on some rationale. I don't know. But I suspect they just simply don't have the authority to do it, which is unfortunate. So they I often say the FDA just sent a strongly worded letter. What's the point? I know that I'm not completely up on the daily mechanisms of the FDA. But what the hell are they doing? This is what they should be doing. Specifically like we should be seeing things rolled out like this multiple times a year. So the FDA they do they doing what they can. But remember the FDA's creature of congress. They only has the power that congress directly gives to it. And congress has been defending the FDA over the last decades because senators in the thrall of the Indus industry in the food industry. Whatever have been lobbied to do exactly that. So, unfortunately, this is what we have, you know, many other countries in the western world, the English speaking world have far better regulations the US does because because the FDA has been as been deliberately weakened in this regard. If I make a product I'm going to say contains natural atoms. Yeah. One hundred percent, Tony free. Well, how'd you could put a Geiger counter next to it? I guess. That's. You could sell the guy you're Kanter. Restraining? All right. Speaking of plutonium, although this is. Really ten generally related to speaking of nuclear stuff. How 'bout that? Jay here. How long until we have tabletop fusion. Yeah. You know, Steve it could be not soon. Five ten years. This is a little story about a very small possible future. Fusion reactor. Let's go through it. So fusion power has been in the news a lot because you guys know latest advancements with reactor technology. They're making steady strides with the the larger fusion reactors. I read about it all the time. I'm fascinated by quick way that it works is that under immense pressure to hydrogen atoms will join to become a helium atom. Right. So what happens is they use a magnetic field to hold in the plasma. Which is I condensed hydrogen, and they squeeze it together. And squeeze it together in a squeeze it together. And then eventually the pressure become so much and the heat become so much that these these Adams will begin to fuse. Now what happens when they use a byproduct neutrons are released and an incredible amount of energy. It's damn near like the. The perfect way to generate energy my opinion. It's it's clean in. It's very safe. But these reactors are pretty big, right? The ones that will probably end up functioning or are big they're super complicated. There are more bells and whistles, and switches and knobs and lights and electrical connections and cooling systems and heating everything. It's like just a mass of science fiction. Looking awesomeness on aside today before you? So the big limiting factor with these large fusion reactors like tokamak reactor, which is a Taurus of magnets trying to hold it in place. There's also the Stella raiders which external magnetic fields. But they both have essentially the same problem is that as you get the plasma which is hydrogen atoms stripped of their electrons as you get the plasma hot enough to cause the fusion. They also get unstable the flow gets very unstable. So that's limiting. Factor that were running up to right now. Which is why you know, some people think it's yeah. It's twenty years away in always will be because even though we're making these incremental advances were still running up against this fundamental problem of controlling the plasma. However, I just unrelated news item today. Researchers are now using artificial intelligence to speed up research into these fusion reactors by essentially now, calculating what structure will optimally control the plasma. Right. That's exactly what we should be using so controlling that flow. So it doesn't get into problems, basically and shut down the reaction. Unfortunately, that's what happens now you can get it to fuse for like microseconds, but the chaos comes into play. So we'll see maybe the time. Horizon will be shortened by these using. Search. Yeah. Some kind of neural net based a al-gharib them. So just to give you more quick sideline information here, this this thing that's happening in the fusion reactor. It's the same thing that gives hydrogen bombs their explosive power. It's what the sun is doing non stop. The sun is a big fusion reactor. And again, these are fusion is safer cleaner more efficient than the vision version of this is what we use today right vision is, you know, even though fishing is great. And it is a great way to create energy. There is danger as you everybody knows because recent things that have happened over the last decade and there's byproduct that's that's hard to deal with. So this technology that we're talking about today. It's called Zeta pinchers e pinch in researcher. Researchers at the university of Washington in the United States have been working on ways to get around some of the the flaws that come with this technology. The tech was initially developed in the early days of of fusion back in the. Fifties. Right. It's pretty cool because way back the way that z pinch technology is supposed to work is that it shoots jet of plasma through a magnetic field that actually squeezes it through a magnetic bottleneck. Right. So imagine the plasma is being forced to go through a very small aperture that could be three or four four feet long say and this forces the fusion to occur, right? Pretty sounds pretty simple. Now, the technology was developed for his e pension was eventually used for the tokamak which Steve mentioned before like the that early work that they did scaled up to the fusion reactors that were working on today. So the work in time that they put into that back. Then was definitely worth it. The researchers at the university of Washington believe that they found alternate method that can stabilize the plasma. And the z pinch device. I thought I should explain to you why the letter z z is on the x y and z if you look at like a three. Dimensional chart it's Z plane, which is a common plane that you would see on one of those charts. Right. So they're just say it's going horizontal. So it's Z what they came up with was that using the concepts taken from fluid dynamics, and this is called sheared Axial flow. They used computer simulations as a proof of concept, and what this means is that the plasma is not static. It's made to flow through the magnetic bottleneck. This is the update that they came up with. It's not just sitting there. They're flowing through and cycling through they had to use a twenty percent duty eighty percent hydrogen mix they were able to hold a fifty centimeter or one point six foot long column of plasma. And they achieved fusion for five microseconds. Now, even though this last lot longer than Bob's typical sexual encounter. It's a very side. Thank you, James, the researches researchers said that it's five thousand times longer than what they can achieve without. Using the fluid dynamics method. Let's huge improvement. It's a proof of concept that there's something happening here that they need to investigate now as usual progress has been made, but nothing on the level where people should start getting excited if they're able to figure out how to make the fusion cycle lasts longer that it's possible that maybe a future iteration of this device could be used if it's small fantastic. You know, the headline is such a joke. Headline was research. Researchers just emigrated nuclear fusion in a device small enough to keep it home, the implication that you could keep it at home just because it's small sorry. There's a a laboratory of wires in connection still hooked up to this thing. Even though it's relatively small. I hate the way they do that not self contained. Yeah. No. But still this is great. And it's good that we're working on different ways of getting to the finish line. Imagine though, it can be fun for a second. Imagine if they could miniaturize this because it is a lot smaller than the tokamak. It could could. Mean that we have reactors in lots of places on a ship for exactly exactly that's what I was going to say. So anyway, it's fun. It's interesting. But this is not something that's going to be in your home. Right. Plus five microseconds is five Baio seconds. Five thousand times longer than you'd expect without this method. But it's still five microseconds worth of fusion happening. It's not anywhere near sustainable fusion. That's generating energy divide five microseconds by five thousand. That's what it was. That's where they were last week. Yeah. Yeah. Unfortunately, it takes a lot of energy to get to that. Right. So the amount of energy that we're putting in is much greater than the energy that comes out of that five microseconds. That's the problem. Lisa last long enough that we get all the energy back plus more. Always wanted to what the makeup of the energy that goes into these fusion experiments, they try and use by obviously that connected to the degrade. It just feels a bit. Phil spit light that teaching. Yeah. I get this sense. Yeah. Well, if they were claiming that they were producing energy. But really it was just the energy. They were pulling off the grid. That's like every free energy device. A lot of times they'll do that. They're really cheating. They have some perpetual motion energy. Don't you don't hear any of these perpetual motion people saying things like, hey, the thing actually like kinda worked for five microseconds. They're saying the joke like they're gonna solve everything. Right. That client. Scientists are like totally transparent. They're not trying to fake it. Because man, you can't fake this. What do you mean? Okay. Let's say you fake it. Then what? Then it doesn't work. We did it. Well, actually, we didn't it's ridiculous. And you're not gonna running a city off of it. You know? All right, James. You're gonna tell us about light pollution in the UK. Yeah. Le- cow. I mean, bringing bringing the news from variety Blighty and. Bright t Brighton. It's like what what is it? The moment is is is ten minutes pasta. Yeah. Right offering the light pollution as we speak precisely so. Yeah. The campaign to protect rural England to recently published a result of survey showing that two percent literally to present of England old Blighty have a truly starry night sky. Not the whole UK us, literally just inland. So yeah, obviously, we pretty crowded to you in the states have a lot more wilderness. I mean, listen the woods most of you. Don't care care care. To carry. I'd say coding to me as well. So. But yeah, the survey people to count the stars in the Orion constellation and when over half fifty seven percent could not see ten stars in the Iran consolations. Normally that's pretty bright. You can make out the bell. You can make out everything else that you can you if you've witnessed deduct sky that's pumping out you so yeah, I'm hoping everyone that listens to this show is experienced truly duck sky moment, and and seeing the Milky Way the bright objects, and you can count just a brilliant blanket of universe. Wholesomeness? But yeah, I I'd really like to know the true effects of of note being out to regularly experienced this like it's like on the effects on people's outlook on life that mood health. Didn't they get confronted with the just the sheer massive nece and majesty of the cause mose? Yeah. It's it's it's a bit of a joke. I mean offficial light at night can row people Besley wildlife with the just the incessant rice rise of LED's. It's just getting cheaper and easier to just flood our entire weld with light twenty four seven. I mean, just doesn't respect and he's reasonable boundaries. But yeah, I mean on the flip side street lights. They offer a great deal of safety. But yeah, what cost cost to society love to see sort of organized shutoff event site turn off events where they light towns and cities takeoff old. Of their lights sort of. I didn't know ten minutes when the conditions right? Just to let everyone guys into the stars. And see what that missing, but. Yeah, thanks to technology. I think this could possibly happen. You know, we know sort instance, my car accidents on the road, we could manage those things in real time. We could look into ways of just making that making light pollution a lot better. And we can reap the rewards. The typically we talked about on the show before is that as light lighting becomes cheaper people. Use more of it. You know, just the precisely we were talking about this in the context of like as lighting is cheaper. People will will save money. Right. But actually people increase the amount of light that they use. I've parents said like, oh, yeah. We must turn out that like the outside dole. Like incandescent vogue when I was a kid because it costs too much. Like literally made it then on the on the bills, and they were like, no not gonna do that that obviously like a massive floodlight LED floodlight is like fifteen watts that costs next to nothing. Others got invited to a dark sky conference a lot of. Oh, yeah. Right. Lovely enough. It's gonna work out is kind of right around Australia trip. But. Nowhere. Like, it's like how to drive hours away from any mass transit because that's what you have to do to get a. Anywhere. I experience. My parents was in the outback Australia. Yeah. Oh boy. Next level just community of the child's like in Brighton. You can see reasonable amount. Chalk styles. But it just it just doesn't compare. Yeah. Yeah. Even though we live, quote, unquote, in the woods, real live in the suburbs. So on a good night. Yeah. The night skies pretty, but it's not dark sky pretty because we still gonna glow there's a glow from the nearby cities from where I am from New Haven, and Bridgeport or whatever, and it reflects off of the clouds, for example, you get that. And completely ruined. Your ability to really see what's going on. But the guys have telescopes. Oh, yeah. I do. I do I got one of my garage. I'll even point my binoculars to the sky at times because I have night nightime binoculars for star gazing, and those those are cool. Well, they work. Well, they work very well, actually, quite well, it's amazing. You look through these things, and you see a thousand times more things and you see with the naked eye. It's remarkable ocular astronomy is fine. You could see lots of planets and stuff with that. Yeah. Works really well. But it's also it's one of those things where I just don't see that anything's ever going to be done about it. You know what I mean? Well, right reality help some people who can otherwise never have that experience. Yeah. Sure. We'll get it virtually. But you know, you say the advantages of lighting where we live is just so great. I don't see that this ever going to be enough of a political movement that there's going to be regulations about about. Ebbing I've life agree. It's just one of those ever. It's it's that push of progress. You come like, these sort of things the sort of emotionality of of progress that these things go by the wayside these primal, primal things. Right. Thanks, james. Thank you. Well, if one take a quick break from our show to talk about one of our sponsors this week Columbia University. It's never too late to start a new intellectual passion, right or to to learn about something. The question is would you like to go to an Ivy league university? Well, you can have that education and so much more at Columbia University school of general studies, receive a genuine college experience under the guidance of world renowned faculty and personalized advice from mentors dedicated to meeting. The unique needs of non traditional students students are either just beginning their undergraduate educations or resuming them after taking a break from school each general study student. Has a different story than they've had careers served in the military race families and so much more. And now obtaining an Ivy league college education is their next milestone general study students possessed real world experience and into that experience with research back support programs that inspires a great desire for academic success along the journey to earning prestigious Columbia University degree to discover how you can continue your story. Visit GS dot Columbia dot EDU slash you. Can why oh you see a n full regular decision? Application deadline is June. First apply today. All right, guys. Let's get back to the show. Evan. So come on really another claim for bacteria on Mars. Well, yes, take this seriously. That's the question, isn't it? Should we take this? Seriously. We heard this before fossilized bacteria in meteorite from Mars is proof of life says a new study a new study. All right. So in order to understand the new study you have to understand a bit of the history. So I gotta take you back to ancient history. Right James, nineteen seventy seven we are going all the way was released. I know what I was thinking too. In nineteen seventy seven eight Martian meteorite was found in the Allan hills of Antarctica by Japanese National Institute of polar research mission team, the meteorite was dated as being one hundred seventy five million years old, and it's a sugar tight meteorite, which is composed of ignorance rocks. And it's named after the sugar gutty meteorite discovered in eighteen sixty five in Shegog India and about three quarters of all known Martian meteorites are sure Gatti's as they say. So this particular Martian meteorite with very sensical name of a l h seven seven zero zero five AOL h refers to Allan hills seventy seven being the year this coverage and zero zero five being the fifth simple catalog that year. That's how those designations work. So a l h seven seven zero zero five as a composition similar to rocks and atmosphere gases, analyzed by Ma. Ars spacecraft. We've been able to confirm this recently. And this is how we are a hundred percent sure that these things are from Mars. In fact, the curiosity Rover confirmed the connection between Mars, and these meteorites which have come to earth as recently as Tober two thousand thirteen because the Rover analyzed argon in the Mars atmosphere, and the Argonne was found to be the same as argon traces in the meteorites. And there's your positive connection out. We've talked about this before on the GU about the possibility that there are fossilized microbes within meteorites that have found their way to earth. The most we've talked about in one thousand nine hundred ninety six we're in a team of scientists led by David McKay announced the discovery of tentative bacteria like microbial fossils in another meteorite from Allan hills. That one was the AL h eighty four zero zero. One. That was a nineteen Eighty-four discovery by US scientists who picked up that particular meteorite, and it knighted scientific controversy that really continues today and definitely perked up the ears of the general public, especially when then President Bill Clinton made a public address about the discovery itself. So it definitely became in the public consciousness at that point certainly the scientific community as well. And have never really looked back. It's continuing to to be debated now further. Studies by other scientists have turned against the life interpretation saying that what they've discovered in that particular rock is not signatures of like life, but rather other natural forms not derived from any bacteria or or anything illogical geological. So now, scientists in Hungary have added a new study of the AL h seven. Seven zero zero five meteorite. This is the one that the Japanese researchers discovered in nineteen seventy seven and they say there's intriguing new evidence mineralized and filament like organic material embedded in the Martian meteorite. They've determined that the material in the meteorite is similar to that produced by iron oxidizing microbes on earth. So that's means the presence of bacteria which survived by eating iron rust. So what they did is. They took a thin section of that sample of that meteorite. And studied it using optical microscopy for micro textures, and they found embedded spherical and thread, like structures materials that represent possible bio signatures. I mean, a lot of this is sounding like also what we heard in nineteen ninety six when that announcement came down, but what they're effective, but the new part here is the iron oxidizing bacteria. And in fact, the leads science. Based on the study, Dr Ildiko gay Olea from the hungry. I'm sure I botched that from the Hungarian academy of sciences who was the lead researcher. And he wrote in the paper this comparing recent results in Turkish with other meteorites, it can be raised that that on these similarities the micro Billy mediated. Bio signatures can be proposed microbial mediation by iron oxidizing. Bacteria on Mars, essentially, our study proposes the presence of microbial mediation on Mars, and they also threw in that. There was a strong negative. Delta see thirteen in Richmond of iron manganese and frostless zinc in the shock melt supports Nario. So they're saying that that's another set of data that leads to helps them form their conclusion. Okay. So what do you think of that iron oxidizing microbes? Evidence of and that's what I thought is line of evidence. Yeah. I mean, what's the level of energy in in like said ising process? Like is there does that exist on the literally have no idea? That's a great question. And we need, you know, a chemist. I think to come on sort of that whether you know, how exactly to know how to IMF O S you right, right? Exactly. I think it raises a lot of the same questions that scientists had twenty three years ago when the nineteen ninety six announcement was also made and is is this enough is this enough to affectively move the marker saying, you know, microbial life to possible microbial life. The fact that this new piece of data has been basically discovered, I don't know possible. What does that mean? Right. Where you know. It's it's. I think it's still in the realm of sheer speculation, and we have to wait to hear other interpretations. And obviously other laboratories are imagine going to conduct the same test to verify the results to see that it is there. But also doesn't really get us any closer to try to make some kind of definitive statement. And I think the fact that back in nineteen Ninety-six. I I remember when President Clinton talked about this. And it was a big deal. You guys remember? Yeah. I don't think we're going to have anything like that again this time around, but it just goes eight. Oh, you that. Yeah. Exactly. The continues the debate continues. The study continues do seem to be various camps here. But I think so far those who are taking the skeptical approach are being the most prudent at this moment. Yeah. Yeah. I think so by the way, I was looking it up Evans. So there are three main types of meteorites that have features in common that have been linked to Mars the biggest. Group is the Shergar tights. But then also the knack lights in the Chesapeake nights. So some of those features are the type of minerals its oxidation. And also, it's the fact that they at some point in their past. They were magma they were melted. So you need a large enough body to melt the rock, it wouldn't happen in a small asteroid, for example, that was sort of one of the first Ave. Yeah. There's something different about these meteorites the, and they sort of group them together. And then eventually they were able to make that link to Mars itself. And yes, three quarters of the meteorites that we've discovered so far are in there the short tight category. And that's just based upon the details of exactly what kind of minerals are found in there in what what forms, but it was it's interesting all the ways in which they although different lines of evidence by which they said, yeah, these are probably from Mars, and then it was the definitive connection was when they were able to compare it to to data that we got back from the pros. Yeah. They talk about the nineteen Ninety-six announcement sort of being the precursor in almost the relaunching and reinvestment by by NASA in going back to Mars to try to find some more definitive answers on. Yes. Remember that? So in a way, you know, even though we don't yes, we don't have any definitive answer. We cannot come to any conclusion based on this. But it did cause things to go into motion that did get us. You know, Rovers Landers and observers satellites and other things all around Mars, which is you know, we've had great success ever since. So that's a plus I wonder if it also contributed to our obsession with going to Mars which kinda displaced going back to the moon for a couple of decades. And now, we're sort realize. Yeah, Mars is too. Big a goal, man. We should just go to the moon. And now, we're refocusing our efforts on the movement. I wonder how much the life on Mars bug as it were. Delayed had our. I think that will never know. Will you need to dispatch enough to just set? See see how he goes about tomorrow or I will say seven so Bob speaking of microbes, what am I going to be able to have a microbial, computer? Wow. Yes team. I think you're like this one researchers have created the most powerful computer like human cells using our friend crisper cast nine they made bio synthetic dual core sell computers is above about these more like MAC or PC false dichotomies. He false dichotomy all their limits. This this marks a giant step towards creating powerful bio computers to among other things to do things like monitoring, our health and even cure diseases, potentially. This is one of the news items that I think is for for even for science communicators. Like, oh, yeah. This is a little bit of a blip. Oh, that's cool next. But I think at some I think in the future we're going to be watching some timelines. And I think they're going to this announcement will be on that time line for key technologies and industries that came into its own in the twenty th century. And this is one of the things that could really snowball into massive industries. So this this blip if you will was created by e h Zurich, the Swiss federal institute of technology in so bio computers, we really haven't discussed them much over the years. I don't think of bio computers can come in many forms, generally, they're they use biological molecules like DNA and proteins to do what a computer does right. Take input process and store and provide output pretty simple right in this case, it can do all of that. With the information that's provided directly from biological systems. And from within them as well. So not to do this the model or template that that biotechnologists us are the obvious one that's provided by our digital world. Right. Are you pick with his computers and chips, which used things like logic gates to process inputs, and they create circuits which output signals e when inputs a and b exist, for example. Right. So that's that's the model that that biotechnology is kind of basing itself on a lot of instances so bar Teknologi can create these circuits biologically in cells using protein, gene switches, but this is very inflexible, though, only very simple programming can be used. It's the only thing that's really practical. If you want to do something like complex computations, it's it's almost impossible. And also, it can only slowly deal with inputs typically inputs in this instance, I mean like metabolic molecules not electrons. But you know, things that you will find that sells deal with so, but cells can actually they're not they can't possibly be as fast as electrons are are managed within digital circuitry, but cells can process these metabolic molecules, very quickly perhaps one hundred thousand different metabolic molecules, every second imagine this imagine a self dealing with that every second of. But the thing is we've never come close in any type of bio computer set system. We've never been able to come close to reaching that so y- alert computational capacity one hundred thousand per second. But now with this technique, we think we may be able to reach that the researchers at AT h can now use biological components to make a flexible core processor or CPR. Of sorts that can deal with different kinds of programming. And it's based on a modified crisper cast nine system and community late all the Arna based inputs that we want. So it's not just as know one at a time, but we can kind of do this in parallel and do lots of different types of of these inputs that we want and so the modified cast nine protein, we've talked about that before that's really the core of the processor here. It uses as input. What's call the guide Aren a and guide. Our does it helps express a specific gene whose job it is to what to create a specific protein. So we're creating with this with this type of setup what we're doing is. We're creating specific types of proteins on demand based on the type of input that comes in. But even more than that what they've done is that they've created for the first time a dual core processor in a cell using crisper cast nine components from two different bacteria. So that's. Like really super high level. You know, what you know what they did here. It's really kind of difficult to drill down and understand exactly how this thing is working. But that said, I think we have very little idea all the applications that this can lead to it's kind of reminds me of a virtual reality. I'm sure we're all going to be walking around with authentic reality glasses in the future. But exactly what we're going to be doing with them as much harder to predict but regarding these bio computers, I think I mean, it's pretty obvious that what we know that what they should be able to do is they can be used to detect metabolic products or chemical messengers and react to it in specific ways. Right. Very simple. You do a detection. And then you, and then you process that information, and then you react to it and in specific ways, so with the buyer computer will be able to do is create molecules to perform something like further diagnostics, go boy, this is something's going on in this person, and we need to diagnosis more. So it could actually create. These specific molecules to determine its get more information about what's going on. Or if it really gets a good handle on what's going on. It could then potentially create pharmaceutical substances to treat the problem. So think about that, you know, you detect what the problem is. And then actually create some of the medicines that would be needed to actually deal with it. And of course, can't cancer detection and treatment. This is Martin Fu-san Egger. He said imagine a micro tissue with billions of cells each equipped with its own dual core processor such computational Oregon's could theoretically attain computing power that far outstrips that of digital supercomputer and using just a fraction of the energy. So what are we going to see beyond this? I mean what what's the future of this? I think the more short term that will see here instead of Ducor. We'll start seeing multi core computer structures being implemented into into human cells. And of course, you know, if you go from dual multi core, we know from our own. Digital computers that that's going to offer even more computation ability. And and who knows where where this is going to end. I mean, this is really a really think this could spawn whole industries, but it's always fun. When you talk about processing like everyone thinks of computers, but actually a lot of things other than running a desktop processors. Can do. Well. Yeah. I mean, it's interesting because that you say that because of this Martin said that another interesting, quote, I wanted to say he said this cell computer may sound very revolutionary. But that's not the case. This human body itself is a large computer. It's metabolism is drawn on the computing power of trillions of cells time immemorial these cells. Continually receive information from the outside world or from other cells, processed the signals and respond accordingly. Whether it's by emitting chemical messengers triggering metabolic processes, and it's true. And I love how he closes. And in contrast to a technical supercomputer this large computer needs just a slice of. Bred for energy. And this is kind of what we're doing with these bio computers were just kind of like creating our own little bio computers in the body to do what body's already doing, but in which more targeted efficient away, then even millions of years of evolution have afforded us. Yeah. But I agree with you. I think we have no idea what the Athol applications are going to be. But that's kind of exciting. Like how's this going to play itself out? We don't know what new technology that. We don't even can't even imagine right now is going to spawn from this. That's cool. All right. Thanks J. Who's that noisy time, right? Last week. I played this noisy. Pretty weird. Isn't it? Would you go stick? It is what the hell is that? It's my dog. Molly begging for food is one of those like wis Lee sort of things with the road about Minu. Slide with. Remember what my clue was last week. This is. Yes. Data turned into music from something quake's. There isn't a bad. Guess. Right. That's the best. You can. Okay. Cool. Yes, they listener named vista tutti. That is a cool name wrote in and said, I think the data rendered to sound is respiration and heartbeat. That's a really provocative guests. Because if you listen to back to it it has that rhythm. Listen. A good guest is not correct. And this list also wrote in and said, the pronunciation of the Australian bird the EMU, right? That's how you spell. It is it's EMU. It is. We were wrong. We are sorry to everyone that lives in that part of the world. Another person wrote in and said who is Keith Harrison said hyrax recognizes noisy right away in this person happens to be the winner. And keep said it's the data from the Hogan's hut. Clayton's you guys. You're about this to Hogan's sure. I guess say probe which was carried by Cassini to tighten and send it through titan's atmosphere. The noisy goes along with the beautiful set of graphics that depict altitude rotation rate acquisition of images and various other events. You know, they got the name for the probe from Star Wars. Shay. Any? So listen one last time now that you know, that this is a probe entering into into titan's atmosphere. Really cool noisy. Unique. I dare say sure so that noisy was sent in again by this her name cat breads, zeal Resel. So thanks for that. That's really fun. I like those some of these interpreted data noises or really spectacularly cool. So I have a new noisy for this week. And the noisy is. Sounds like he's that he's eighties character that had to this block face. And he was like. Yeah. Yes. Max. That was. That new noisy by the way was sending by listener named Bob Benedict. Thank you. That's a really cool noisy. I'm looking forward to letting you guys know what it's about. So listen if you heard any cool noises this week night yelled at everyone last week. I did I yelled at all the listeners to say damn it. I know you heard something cool, and I got some really fun noisy. Now. You know, I'm particular about these after be just right for me to play them on the show. So if you send something in and I don't use it, please don't get upset. I'm just being very particular because we wanted to show to be as good as possible. And if you have a guest of what this week's noisy is you could write me at W T N at the skeptics guide dot org. Stephen. Yeah. I gotta tell you. We've got a great turn out for the no show which were doing George Trow on the twenty sixth of this month. I'm very pleased. We've got a lot of good people coming. It's got the numbers increase as the day goes on because the show runs from noon until ten pm. So it's an all day thing. Those people that are showing up at noon that bought tickets for the larger going to be having. Lunch with us. But we still have a ton of other things going on that day. So if you're interested in going, you can go to no show event, bright dot com. It's not too late. And we're going to be there hanging out all day. And don't forget about nexus to eleventh to fourteenth in New York City. One of our speakers this year is our keynote speaker is Carl Zimmer if you don't know who he is. He is an excellent science communicator, author of many books, if you haven't heard lecturer before you're in for a treat Carla's awesome is author of books such as she has her mother's laugh, a planet of viruses evolution making sense of life and others. So come to nexus. We'll of course, the she'll be there. We'll have you having a state show private show and an extravaganza and there'd be lots of other cool stuff going on. All right. Let's move on to some emails. We got a lot of follow up on our flying car discussion, which to me is indicate. That people wanna talk about it. I also blocked about it. And there was so much feedback. I had to write a follow up. And there was a lot of feedback to that. So I just wanna quickly encapsulate. I think what the net result of all this feedback. And all this discussion was the idea was that we brought up last week. Is there any scenario in which flying cars might actually be cost effective because that is certainly a barrier to their adoption and the conventional wisdom has been well, it's so much more costly to fly than to roll along the ground that they're never going to be cost effective. They're always going to be just a rich boy's toy. But this analysis it no there are some situations in which flying car can actually be energy-effective in there for cost effective and those include situations in which the trip is fairly long like over one hundred kilometers because it's more efficient than the Senate, and ascending descending. And then also if there's a lot of traffic, or if there's a lot of geographical obstacles to ground transportation. They flying cars could actually be more energy effective, and they can also be massively more time effective, and we all know how valuable time is. But the authors accused thing which I admit was the weakest part of their paper. And I was not impressed with they said if you compare a fully loaded flying car like three passengers to the average passengers travelling ground cartridges one point five seven then that also makes a flying car more more effective in comparison. But yeah, that's an apples to oranges comparison. They were trying to make a point that you. Yeah. If you if you car pool, you know, when the flying cars that could be more effective, but just forget that that was below got distracted by that point has nothing really to do with the core of what they're saying. Which is yet traffic geography and distance. If you have those variables one passenger to one passenger that a flying car can be more effective than a gasoline car in almost as. Cost effective as an electric car. Let your cards will still beat the flying car unless you have a really horrible geographical choke point or obstacle to drive around a lake where you have like a bridge. It's continue our to get across the bridge traffic, or whatever so horrible like that. So the question becomes then are what are the scenarios in which what's what's the Nishi? Where is the point car going to be adopted? And I broke it down further when I was writing about it. I said there's really three things to think about there's trip efficiency. There's ownership efficiency. And then there's societal efficiency so very quickly. So we only talked we really only talked about Trivet visionary. That's is. Getting from eighty be is going to be time and energy efficient to drive or to fly. And I gave the parameters for when flying better for ownership efficiency. Like, should I buy a flying car or should I buy the ground car, and I think for the foreseeable future buying buying a flying cars, not really going to be tenable as your only source of transportation. I think I could only see it as as like an extra thing. Like if you have if you ever if you're a two or three car family, one of those vehicles could be a fine car. So if you have the option of using the ground Carwyn that's more efficient and the flying car when that's more efficient that would make sense. But of course, I think the ownership efficiency gets largely rendered moot. When you consider striving autonomous. Yeah. Fleet based not ownership base. And Uber's already looking into developing flying cars for for their services. So you were just when it's like oh God. The weather's perfect. But. Traffic is terrible. I'm gonna just going to hire an Uber flying car and get to get to where I need to go and a third of the time or a quarter of the time. I think that's probably where it's going to be used, and it's very much going to be this. I think at least for the foreseeable future. But again, the key is this is a niche where it can't fill in make sense where the when the situation is ripe and two services available. People will pay for it services available, and I think that could actually be a viable business model, and which case that that's sort of Lagan for a flying car industry. Societal efficiency is if we add flying cars to our all of the other travel options that we have will that be a net benefit negative or neutral in terms of just overall energy expenditure and travel efficiency, and that's a really really hard question to answer because they're so. So many moving parts there. There's a lot of discussion about whether or not it would reduce traffic. And I think the evidence basically says we don't know. But because you know, how you really test that there. There are suggestions that adding public transport if you consider this like a four an additional form of non road based transport it does reduce traffic in those corridors where you're adding the extra options, but we don't really have the resources to give us that answer your batting against physics. Right. You'll you'll still going to have these propeller based dry light drone based things that will just be going or making absolute racket. Like, there's nothing that you can do against that. Like, how many people are going to just be like, no, I don't want that. Do you think? Yes. People brought up the noise factor. But we know that that that you can you can engineer silent helicopters, right? Sounds like a skeptical myth like can you really do that? Like you've seen it. I remember you saying that the CIA a week and make sonnet, but that sounds just completely to Chris. Well, that was the claim that was the claim that was made. Not necessarily silent. But at least that will be one question. Can you make them quite enough that they are not noisier than gasoline cars? I think if they're electric go along they have to have to be electro, yet people grow up a lot of things like, you know, the blow-back when they take off Atlanta. Yeah. There's going to need to be an infrastructure didn't need to be places where you take off and land and where they get recharged. Absolutely. But as they get incorporated, the infrastructural adapt. I mean think about all the infrastructure we needed to add just to introduce cars to society. It was. Massive this. I think would be less. It'd be lesson presents the big advantage of flying cars. You don't need roads or rails tunnels or bridges place. It just. Some. So maybe that's it. You just need a little just a big enough space to safely land and take off. Yeah. They are going to need to communicate with each other too. So don't accidents bump into each other, by the way. Safety exactly safety came up with like. Yeah. But we're talking about will these eventually be adopted like fifty years from now when you have completely sell flying flying cars that are communicating to each other and the grid and over the internet, and they're just basically flying themselves. They'll stay out of the ways of airports. They'll be at the right altitudes, whatever they'll be perfectly safe. So if we can't crack that I don't think that's going to be the limiting factors the bottom line the safety because I think that we'll just have the technology to do that. I think the one I think probably the most valid point that people raised saying that that that would limit the adoption is weather because any flying thing is not going to be good, especially really lightweight vehicles flying relatively close to the ground closer, then say airplanes, it'll be flying much higher because they lose all their efficiency. If you make them go super high, right? That's cost effective goes out the window. There were going to be flying. I see them as flying from rooftop to rooftop or garage, top two garage top in cities and locations or from your driveway to a garage or something and staying up of obstacles, but not any higher than they absolutely need to go. But the problem is that that is inherently dangerous because you're flying technically the near two obstacles in any kind of weather could make it really dangerous. So how viable is a transportation option where there are days when it just can't use it. You know, there's too much wind wins over certain number of miles per hour. The entire. Tire fleet is grounded. Right. I mean, just can't use them that that's that's a good point. That's significant limitation. All we could say as well as technology advances, and the engineering and the software and everything it's better the days in which you'll be able to use them will be more. And again, maybe it'll be really great in cities that have very few windy days. Just have good weather for whatever reason to sorry. All of these points point to the conclusion that it will have a certain niche, but that's it. It's like the segway. It's not gonna replace walking. But there are people who are gonna use it into certain in certain circumstances that'll be advantageous in those conditions. I mean, just the potential advantages when you can use there be can be huge. So sure it will. I don't think it's going to replace the family car. I don't think we were saying that it would I think it will be an additional option that will get used when it's adventitious and there are situations for which it's energy efficient time efficient and can be safe and convenient. I think that's the bottom line will ever come to pass. Who knows? I don't think we can say that at this point. I think I'm closer to thinking that it will with this most recent analysis that was really the only point I was making love to see it like can you? Imagine it being literally. Next door having pulled next door that that's that's the problem is is sort of nimbies, and I would probably be one of them. I have to say. Yeah. Who knows it might be zoning issues. You know, you might need to have a certain amount of space around your helipad or whatever it before you use. It might be like owning a horse. Not everyone's going to have it. But if you have enough property, you could do it who knows where they're just might be that you have to drive. You know, how you like you could drive to a place where you then get on the bus or the training thing. Yeah. You just drive to a garage. And then you take that is easy to get to. And then you take the flying car from that point past all the congestion into the city or whatever. And then you think one leg of your trip. It could be it could be useful original, thanks to everybody. Who wrote in about that? It's time. Sure. We'll get more feedback. I consider to be an interesting thought experiment because that's really all it is at this point. Okay. One quick name that logical fouls. It kinda sitting on this one for a few weeks. This one comes from Chris Beck, who writes, I have the feeling that simply using the phrase, quote, unquote. Big pharma is somehow a logical fallacy unto itself. But I can't quite categorize it. Can you help? What do you guys think? What kind of logical fallacy is big journalism. I saw I saw this in the show notes. And I thought it deserved a bit more expanding like it was really humble humble post from the. Yeah, I got the feeling that. I mean, I feel like that when I how on earth. Do I even as a technical person? Pause paper. That's not even even close to the failed. The I even interested in. But when you think just by invoking big farm, are you committing a logical fallacy or is it does it. Depend big. I'm show, you know, very well stave like big big, quote, unquote, big pharma has problems it has to is the human endeavor with the question that becomes what are you implying something when you use that phrase? Right. So the one that's a straw, man. Right. If you're saying that you're distinguishing big pharma from this notion that the pharmaceutical industry is beyond reproach or they're perfect. No one. I think says that. So if that's your claim that that is an implied claim here than that is a straw, man. Right. Yeah. But the first thing that occurred to me was that it's poisoning the well right by saying big pharma. It's it's the equivalent of a personal attack. And that you're trying to taint the industry with the implication that it has more power than it does that it somehow involved in some big conspiracy that everything is one. It's like it's one monolithic industry, which it isn't. You know, these are individual companies may be working even against each other. It's a sense essentially conspiracy Ma. Angering right. Yep. By by implication, to sometimes we call this more like gambit, then a logical fallacy what it means. This is like the big pharma gambit or the toxin gambit where you're you're throwing out a concept that is mostly poisoning, the well, but you're trying to imply a lot of things often some kind of conspiracy with that statement, there's deliberate baggage that you want to to go along with it. It's the baggage is feature. Right. It's not a it's a feature not a bug right power, and malice, basically, I think the two two implication of big big bowed room of chortling executives. Just like ha ha ha again, one over these people like that typical view and also that the entire industries in on it. Yeah. Everyone their empire. Thanks for that question. Chris will everyone we're gonna take a quick break from our show to talk about one of our sponsors this week linked in when it's time to make a higher for your small business. You of course, you wanna find the best person that you can for the job. And the odds are that that person actually is on linked in right now. Lincoln jobs makes it easy to get matched. With quality candidates using the knowledge of both heart skills and soft skills to match you with the people who fit your role, the best people come to Lincoln everyday to learn an advanced career so Lincoln understands what they're interested in and what they're looking for. So when you use Lincoln jobs to hire someone you're matches or based on more than a resume, your matches based on skills and background. But also interest activities and passions matching let you quickly get a group of the most relevant qualified candidates for your role. So you can focus on the candidates. You want to spend time talking to and make a quality higher. You're excited about so post a job today at Lincoln dot com slash skeptics and get fifty dollars off your first job post. That's Lincoln dot com slash skeptics, terms and conditions apply. All right. Let's get back to the show. It's time full slowing all. Each week. I come up with three science items or facts to heal and one fake, then I challenged my panel of skeptics to tell me which one they think is the fake James just for you this week. I have a theme. Are you ready? Is it? The theme is astronomy pretty big theme. Just tell you that category. My knees. I'm was was quite astronomy based. Yes, I'm happy with that. All right. So we'll see how you do with these three items here they are item. Number one. Astronomers have observed a super flare from our son ten times as powerful as the Carrington event, although safely pointed away from the earth. I did number two. Astronomers report the confirmation of seven x planets with periods greater than fifteen years the longest greater than forty years and item number three new measurements. Find that. While mercury's. Outer core is molten. It's inner core is solid and about the same size as the earth's or right James as our guest rogue you get to go first gods. This. So. Yeah. So the start of observed to play for about son. I mean, ten times more powerful. It doesn't matter like the arc. It would have to like the carrying event is sewn like it was going to come to us. Like, yeah, I've got to buy that one. Really? So the report on the confirmation 7-x planets with periods greater than fifteen years, the longest greater than full t- is the thing that I struggle with that is that I mean, some of those things those transit tree methods stuff. So so I mean, how long have we been looking at this stuff like full two years? I what kind of confirmation. Do you need from that to be honest. I don't mean that that's a might come back to that one. Okay. So new measurements. Find that while net crease I'll always moat in the inequalities solid. I literally have no idea how that would. By mean would happen. Strange things happen at sea. I don't know. So it's definitely between between those last two. So I'm just going to have to put my Nikko down as you would say. I'm going to have to go for the career out to cool because that just seems that seems pretty pretty intense reckon that they've done some Thome foodery with the with the exit budnitz, but that career out to coal in it. Yeah. That sounds strange to me. That's the fiction. Yes. All right. Evan. Oh, boy the Carrington event. Oh my gosh. I love when we talk about things related to this. But they observed a super flare Marsano ten times as powerful I've been trying to keep track of these news items as they come out. I didn't hear about this. I know a few years back. There was one that was a flare that miss the earth by a couple of days, I think it was pretty darn close. So these things do happen ten times as powerful as the Carrington event and safely pointed away. I did not hear this next. One strana report the confirmation of seven planets with periods greater than fifteen years. Wow. The longest greater than forty years. I don't know much about these periods and how extreme or within the norm. These things might be. So I don't have a good frame of reference here on this one. And then mercury. Okay. So the outer cores molten the intercourse solid, but about the same sizes earth's. I always thought mercury. The special thing about mercury's core is that compared to its size. It has the largest core of any planet. And I also recall what is it the messenger craft has gone to mercury and picked up a whole ton of new data that we didn't even come close to knowing about mercury before we've learned a lot about mercury in recent years, which leads me to believe that that one's actually gonna wind up being the science. So therefore, I'll put my ten Pence down on that is a dilly. Dilly, British currency, right? Crumbs. I say, but yeah, whatever why don't. Not much science. Informing me on my decision this week. It's more or less. What did I hear? What didn't I hear? I thought it would have heard something about that Carrington event. Because I always have my ears and eyes open for Carrington event like things I didn't hear it. So I think that was the fiction I think Steve you made that up. Okay. Jay, I will take these in a randomized order. So the last one about the about mercury's outer core is molten. It's inner core is solid in about the same size as earth's. I don't see any reason to think any of this is wrong. It makes sense that mercury's out. Our core is molten. It also makes sense that there is something solid inside. And I just don't have any reason to doubt that it would be roughly earth size going to the second one here about the the seven Exo planets with periods greater than fifteen years longer greater than forty years. I don't have much to say about that one. So I think the first one I agree with with Evan number one ten times as powerful as a Carrington event. Yeah. I know that that that would have made massive news unless it literally just came out very recently, which I know Steve likes to do they call this a super flare, by the way. Did you know that? Yeah. Actually did know that I don't think that there are super flares that are ten times the size of the Carrington event hands down. I just don't think they exist. So I think that one's a fiction and Bob with. With start with three here. The the big thing here is at the core is the same size as you're sure that that's like what the hell's going on there. But if you consider that mercury perhaps that means that mercury is the result of a planetary collision that basically stripped away, the outer part like the crust and mantle or some of the mantle of a planet and left just the core the planet. Maybe maybe that could explain it. But it doesn't sound too crazy to me the second one the planet orbital periods. It's seven fifteen and forty years big deal. I mean, yeah. Yeah. They they have long ears. That's doesn't sound too. Crazy. Yeah. It's the first one it's a character have been one that strikes me as odd. I agree with Jay that I'm not even sure the son Ken produce, a super flare tent in order of magnitude more powerful than to carry an event, and I'll go with Evans reasoning as well. That would hurt about it. I wouldn't say I have a an alert for Carrington. Maybe I should I'm gonna tonight that this. Yeah. This is doesn't sound too. Believable that big. So you guys were leaving poor guest out in the cold. Oh, but. Seconds. It takes to spray the with something. I dunno. You know, something that I let's start in the middle with number two since you all agree with that one is trying to report the confirmation of seven planets with periods greater than fifteen years the longest greater than forty years. You all think this one is science and this one is science. Yeah. There's so much stuff going on it's hard to anything. But the idea here is the periods are surprised. Right forties. Big it takes a long time to confirm Exo plants with long periods because they have like if you're using the transit method they have to pass in front of their star three times, which means it's at least like twice its orbital period. So we would have to have been observing in exit planet with deport with a period of forty years for eighty years to confirm it with the transit. So clearly, that's not the method. They were using this is the Euler telescope E U L E R. I don't know if it's supposed to be that way think. That's right. The US. Neagh a or if you're not supposed to pursue pronounce that initial ISM or or an acronym astronomy department, and their uses are actually this is one of those situations with the press release was just not good, and I had to go to other supportive material to find out what the hell they were talking about. So what method was actually used to find these planets? It wasn't the transit method. So goes, it's hard to really nail this. I think what they used to actually detect these planets was the radial velocity method and the Euler telescope, and the chorale spectra graph, which is the specific instrument that they're using has been able to increase. Bob, check this out the accuracy of the radio velocity method to within a few meters per second. So this is basically determining how how fast it's moving this could allow the detection of plants which with with a mass. Small neptune's. But but you can't but there's a limit in terms of like how much you determine about them. Although there was a recent study found trying to do some background research to figure out what the hell they're talking about here using this telescope, astronomers are developing methods they can confirm the the orbits of planets as well as their mass and their distance with just one pass. So with either just wanna transit or with or with. The one nation. So this reduces the time significantly that it takes to confirm certain extra planets. Sure. But with these extra planets, so again as best as I could tell because they didn't just flat out state it in any other material. I could find a had to piece this together, they used radio velocities to confirm it, they exist. But now they are targeted for direct observation now that we know these planets with their we could then try to observe them directly because they are big enough and far enough away from the parents or that we might be able to do that. That makes sense cool short multiple methods and to back up each other. And to get more information about these individual extra plants, but these these most recent crop of planets of Exo planets were the result of twenty years of continuous observation. This is sort of the big news about this at the Euler telescope has been continuous us four extra planet discovery for twenty years. And it's these long observation that has allowed the confirmation of these planets with such long periods toured of ours. Cool very very cool. We have we have confirmed over four thousand extra planet so far without. Without? That is just merest smattering of all in our lifetime. Very cool. All right. Let's go back to number one is trying to have observed as super flare from our son ten times as powerful as the Carrington event alot safely pointed away from the earth. James, you think that this one is science everyone else thinks this one is the fiction, and this one is the fiction. I couldn't couldn't slip a super flare pass you guys. So the strana did recently observe a super flare ten times more powerful than the Carrington event. But it was on a nearby star wasn't on our star. What is it ten times bigger? Wow. Ten times more powerful and other. Character event is still the most powerful confirmed super flare or coronal mass ejection from our own star pointing at the earth or not. So it would be news. If our star belched out something that big it would be huge news. Nothing never has either has to be observed or would have had to hit the earth, and we had the evidence of it. So, you know, a big one thousand years ago to one pointing away from the earth belts from the sun. Who the hell knows we have no way of knowing that this is kind of irradiating for me because I literally went to a sonic submission at the sons. In London and that was mentions of all the Carrington events. And I deny said security on it. Knew something bulleting. Danger. This was so this is for the what's really interesting about this because we've seen bigger super flash from Xhosa right from other stars before. But what what's interesting about this one is at a came from an ultra cool star. That's almost the same sizes Jupiter. This is just about as well if you can get and star. Yeah, it's almost Brown dwarf. It's almost sub. But they saying this is a stellar. It's a small star. It should be really cool. These really ultra cool stars shouldn't be putting out flares like this. So what caused young don't? I don't know. Young stars are very active, but yeah, very tiny. Could it be some sort of swelling swallowing event like it to some sort of mess? It didn't. It didn't know just observed. There's like no note. I don't think there's a collision. There's maybe we'll learn more about this in the days ahead. But that's the information. I have available to me right now. But yeah, there was of this another another star not are not our own. But you're right by magic ten times a Carrington event hitting the earth now wipe out wipe out our technology. Yeah. Even even military, shielded technology, we'll probably fried. So all of this means that new measurements. Find that. While mercury's. Outer core is molten. It's inter-court is solid and about the same size as earth is science. This is an Evan. Did you read this one because you pretty much nailed it? This is the messenger orbit messenger probe which is doing gravity measurements of mercury. And it's the gravity measurements that allow you to determine things like what the middle of the planet how it's structured, right? So like the. Earth. Right. We have a core. And the core has an outer liquid core. An inner solid core. Now, the outer core and the inner core are made of the same material mostly iron nickel. So do you guys know why the intercourse solid and the outer core is liquid Steve subtly? Title foces, imagine. How about just the pressure? I mean pressure about got it. Right. It's the pressure off worse. Does this have made thing to do with the sabre core lightsaber I want. No does not have. But right. Yeah. It's all about pressure. So basically it's hot enough. This still the core is the inner part of the planet. That's hot enough still to keep iron nickel molten. But as you get far enough down it gets solid because of the pressure. So the question is why does mercury had such a damn big inner solid core went into lot smaller of a world than the earth is. And I think the bottom line is we don't know could it be could murky be the product of a collision where the outer part of the planet. We stripped away. I don't know that out. They didn't say one way or the other at my theory could be but you intrigued to see side by side of the earth. And mercury mercury is teeny. It is to the earth like moon sized almost. Yeah. There's no moon. That's no moon. Find Vulcan Kumurk hamburgers. Interesting little world there. But it's crushed is solid. Doesn't have tectonic plates. The smaller. You are the more quickly. Your crust solidifies, and you lose your geological activity make sense. All right. Well, good job guys. James? It's hard being. I it's hard your first scientists fiction. So I feel you I feel you. And it's totally in the middle of the night. Wording, very very on. Thank you very much facing me. Thank you. Awesome. Hey, don't get ahead of yourself. Give us the quote. That's right. Got a quote, the bottom line is that humans are very bad understanding probability, everyone finds it difficult. Even I do we just have to get better at it. We need to learn to spot when we are being manipulated. That's the key when we're being manipulated David Spiegelhalter. He's the Winton professor for the public understanding of risk at the university of Cambridge. And I got this from an article in which he was interviewed from a couple of years back. And we talk about this quite often. In regard to skepticism dip, the understanding of risk most people grossly over end relative risk, right? Where board her? That's right. And those and those who know that people have a poor understanding this use that sometimes to their advantage, right or fear monger about GMO's or whatever all ties back does. Yeah. All right. Thank seven. Hey. Thank you all for joining me this weekend. James joining us. It's been a lot of shame. Great James, thanks for joining us until next week. This is your skeptics guide to the universe. Sceptic's universe produced by S G, you productions dedicated to quoting science and critical thinking for more information, visit us at skeptic skied dot org. Send your questions to info at the skeptics guide. Or if you would like to support the show all the work that we do. Go to patriots dot com slash skeptics guide and considered becoming a patron and becoming part of the community our listeners and supporters. What makes issue possible?

James Hart FDA researcher United States Evan bernstein England Steve Bob Brighton President Bill Clinton software engineer Paris congress Tony free UK Europe Silicon Valley Australia