Did JWST Discover Dark Matter Stars?
Vložit
- čas přidán 15. 08. 2023
- Check Out Human Footprint on PBS Terra: • How Humans Are Reshapi...
PBS Member Stations rely on viewers like you. To support your local station, go to:to.pbs.org/DonateSPACE
Sign Up on Patreon to get access to the Space Time Discord!
/ pbsspacetime
We knew that the James Webb Space Telescope would find interesting stuff, especially about the mysterious early times. For example, there are hints that the galaxies we’re seeing are brighter and more regular than expected given the short amount of time they’d had to grow. Well, perhaps no one was expecting that we’d find a completely new type of star-one mostly made of and powered by dark matter and shining as bright as an entire galaxy. Which, by the way, might help us explain those pesky giant galaxies.
Check out the Space Time Merch Store
www.pbsspacetime.com/shop
Sign up for the mailing list to get episode notifications and hear special announcements!
mailchi.mp/1a6eb8f2717d/space...
Search the Entire Space Time Library Here: search.pbsspacetime.com/
Hosted by Matt O'Dowd
Written by Matt Caplan & Matt O'Dowd
Post Production by Leonardo Scholzer, Yago Ballarini, Adriano Leal & Stephanie Faria
Directed by Andrew Kornhaber
Associate Producer: Bahar Gholipour
Executive Producers: Eric Brown & Andrew Kornhaber
Executive in Charge for PBS: Maribel Lopez
Director of Programming for PBS: Gabrielle Ewing
Assistant Director of Programming for PBS: John Campbell
Spacetime is produced by Kornhaber Brown for PBS Digital Studios.
This program is produced by Kornhaber Brown, which is solely responsible for its content.
© 2023 PBS. All rights reserved.
End Credits Music by J.R.S. Schattenberg: / multidroideka
Space Time Was Made Possible In Part By:
Big Bang Sponsors
Bryce Fort
Peter Barrett
David Neumann
Sean Maddox
Alexander Tamas
Morgan Hough
Juan Benet
Vinnie Falco
Fabrice Eap
Mark Rosenthal
Quasar Supporters
Glenn Sugden
Alex Kern
Ethan Cohen
Stephen Wilcox
Mark Heising
Hypernova Supporters
Stephen Spidle
Chris Webb
Zachary Wilson
Kenneth See
Gregory Forfa
Joe Moreira
Bradley Voorhees
Scott Gorlick
Paul Stehr-Green
Ben Delo
Антон Кочков
Robert Ilardi
John R. Slavik
Donal Botkin
Edmund Fokschaner
Chuck Zegar
Jordan Young
Daniel Muzquiz
Gamma Ray Burst Supporters
Robin Bayley
Piotr Sarnicki
Massimiliano Pala
Thomas Nielson
Joe Pavlovic
Ryan McGaughy
Chuck Lukaszewski
Edward Hodapp
Cole B Combs
Andrea Galvagni
Jerry Thomas
Nikhil Sharma
Ryan Moser
John Anderson
David Giltinan
Scott Hannum
Bradley Ulis
Craig Falls
Vivaan Vaka
Kane Holbrook
Ross Story
teng guo
Mason Dillon
Matt Langford
Harsh Khandhadia
Thomas Tarler
Susan Albee
Frank Walker
Matt Quinn
Michael Lev
Terje Vold
James Trimmier
Jeremy Soller
Andre Stechert
Paul Wood
Kent Durham
Ramon Nogueira
Paul Suchy
Ellis Hall
John H. Austin, Jr.
Diana S Poljar
Faraz Khan
Almog Cohen
Daniel Jennings
Cameron Sampson
Jeremy Reed
David Johnston
Michael Barton
Andrew Mann
Isaac Suttell
Bleys Goodson
Robert Walter
Mark Delagasse
Mark Daniel Cohen
Shane Calimlim
Tybie Fitzhugh
Eric Kiebler
Craig Stonaha
Frederic Simon
Tonyface
John Robinson
Alex Gan
David Barnholdt
David Neal
John Funai
Bradley Jenkins
Vlad Shipulin
Cody Brumfield
Thomas Dougherty
King Zeckendorff
Dan Warren
Patrick Sutton
John Griffith
Dean Faulk
![Everything NASA Discovered from James Webb's First Year in Space [4K]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/nbDQEo0uA0Q/mqdefault.jpg)
Matt is so OP he travelled back in time to give us the upcoming episode on Dark Stars early.
Hah. I expected him to say "you actually just watched it!" And maybe joke about keeping up.
he admitted to partaking in the herb
i wonder if he finally discovered the secret tachyon time weed strain and is smoking himself through time to grab wisdom and enlightenment of the eternity beyond our time horizon
Matt is anti-Xeelee
That's the "last" Dark Stars episode at that point. Still looking forward to the "upcoming" one 👀
@@LuDuxCool a Xeelee sequence reference
Astronomy 50 years ago: Stare at tiny dots until you see enough to learn something.
Astronomy today: Stare at nothing until you see tiny dots.
oh god, I am dying.🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Sharing...
1995 was the first Hubble deep field.
So we have been staring at nothing to see what comes up, since then.
Perhaps dzogchen students should get with the times, and start staring at JWST pics instead of at the sky with their naked eyes
😂😂😂
Its crazy that John Mitchell had the idea that stars were so big that their gravity wouldn't allow it's light to shine in the 1700s what a under rated astronomer!
I looked up John Mitchell and couldn't find anything. It turns out his name was John Michell.
@killer yeah dude I thought that was pretty wild too; black holes are typically credited to Einstein and Schwarzchild some 150 years later
His reputation was damaged by Watergate.
and yet the world couldnt wrap its collective mind around washing up before surgery!
@castonyoung7514 lol my bad sorry I botched the name. Hope you learned something else besides the proper spelling. He had the idea of a black hole he called them dark stars 50 years before anyone else.
Just looked up and read about John Michell. Guy needs more recognition! He predicted black holes in the 18th century and actually conceived of and designed the apparatus for the Cavendish experiment but died before he could carry it out, and then his friend Cavendish finished the work.
Did he draw that blackhole then because that would have been OP
@@ZuluLandGamerexactly my thoughts. Came to the comments for an answer 😀
@@ZuluLandGamer Yeah, the drawing was pretty misleading and the only reason why I googled the name. I assume the drawing was made by spacetime.
TBH science history is full of people like that, for every name you know there are hundreds who did similarly important work.
And predictions are kind of funny. There are actually some ancient greeks quite a while before Aristotle who predicted the existence of atoms and that the universe was full of planets and stars. (Look up Democritus.) But for them it was sort of just lucky guesses based on arbitrary assumptions about the world, there wasn't really any evidence which is why the ideas didn't stick at that time.
yeah idk how i never heard abt him. why weren't we taught? *reads wikipedia, he's described as having black-complexion skin in England*
ah. classic English.
MASSIVE appreciation for the visualisation team. Every video I'm flabbergasted by the quality of these animations. 👏🏼
I'm also really amazed. I would actually love to see a video that's just about their production process.
*supermassive appreciation
ftfy
Couldn’t agree more. 😶
Animations that confuse heads are useless for knowledge.
Here here
The real Matt O'Dowd would have said "How do you think I survive so long, out here...in Space Time".
Missed opportunity indeed ;D
Dark Matter might be affects of wormholes linking areas of gravity
AI replacement confirmed
He was always an AI, but he has been replaced by an AI.
@@Merennulli I'm looking forward to AI-written "AI took my job" articles, myself.
The Webb telescope is awesome. Can't wait to see more discoveries!
Another exceptional PBS SpaceTime episode. This is one of the best or possibly the best physics short form series out there. The density of information is In each episode astounding. Thank you for providing content that continues to push and often exceed my limits of comprehension ability. It's crazy how we evolve over time. Concepts that pushed the limits of my comprehension ability a couple years ago, seem easy to understand to me now. Thanks to PBS SpaceTime, there is no risk of me being left without mind-bending comprehension limit challenges anytime soon.😊 Wonderful job, everyone.
What I love about the universe is that the more we find out, the less we know.
Yea, I'm kinda sad that we'll never know the full true nature of the universe. I don't think we'll ever know it all.
@@CraigHammond We definitely will never know all of it (unless we figure out FTL travel but that seems unlikely).
However as we keep building bigger and bigger telescopes, we'll likely get to know most if not all of the visible universe. Not in our lifetimes by any means, but humanity as a whole has a good chance of unlocking these mysteries (It may require us to become a type II civilization, but no reason to believe we couldn't get there given enough time).
OK arguably not "humanity". The timescales are long enough for evolution to have made us into something different. But whatever our many-generations-future grandchildren call themselves in any case.
the more we find out the more we know! be positive!
Its like living in an unmapped world
The further from home you go, the easier it is to get lost
Things we know we don't know today are things we didn't know yesterday but didn't know we don't know.
It's not that we know less, but that we know more about what we don't know yet.
Or how to sound deep while stating the obvious. :p
It's an attractive idea in its tidiness -- dark stars -> really big black holes --> quasars --> modern galaxies with SMBH cores
DSMBH core = dark super massive black hole core. Lets invent a new term for all of these acronyms. I think we should call SMBHs Sambos and Black Holes should become singular Bo (pronounced bow like the weapon) plural bosh (pronounced bahsh).
EDIT: k dark matter = numa, black holes = bo & bosh, SMBH = mo & mosh. ty for suggestions!
I think it also means that SMBHs end up with a pretty dense halo of dark matter which may cause enough dynamical friction that it solves the "final parsec problem" when it comes to SMBH mergers.
I don't really believe this, but I do wonder if dark matter could turn out to be something really cool like the 'spirits of things' in the sequels to Enders Game he encounters when they invent FTL travel, or maybe just like the weight of the consciousness of sentient beings in the galaxy. I'm a materialist so probably not but would love to find out ;)
@@rocketsocks This sounds like a really awesome solution, and makes me wonder how many unanswered questions in physics could potentially revolve around dark matter.
Although, I'd expect the dark matter halo to collapse into the black hole. Unless the dark matter is in orbit beyond the ISCO, in which case there must be a lot of dark matter there for it to not have been pulled in after 13B years.
@@calencrawford2195 I think calling anything "Sambo" isn't going to go over well for reasons that ought to be obvious 😬
I also like the theory that these kind of stars are black hole stars, so that the pressure in a young universe was too great for the explosion at the creation of a start to push the gasses away, as it happens in modern star systems, but that they stayed close to the star, force feeding it with more and more material until the core collapsed into a black hole while the exterior still remain a star, force feeding the star-corpse to grow bigger and bigger while the radiation of the black hole keeps the star from completely collapsing into it.
Thank you very much Matt, the past couple years I have been watching your videos and you always keep me connected to a world I left awhile ago. Thank you so much!
Matt O'Dowd is the best astronomy and physics educator on CZcams.
Don't forget the team that works hard behind the research and production of every video.
hands down!
What did Neil DeGrasse Tyson ever do to you
what about the kurzgesagt narrator?
These videos are great for recent news and as an entry point, but for a deeper understanding of these topics, I highly recommend the free physics lectures Stanford provides on CZcams--namely the ones taught by Leonard Susskind; the intuition that man has for theoretical physics is incredible.
PBS Space Time always has top quality Space content, That is for sure.
It delivers on Time, as well.
@@itcamefromthedeep 🐴
It seems overwhelmingly likely that Dark Matter is nothing more than Dark Energy a.k.a Inflaton Energy or a residual inflaton field, gravitationally influencing matter?
What do you think?
Looking to add a seasoning but your spice rack doesn't have a lot of space? Thyme.
This channel keeps delivering incredible science content, huge well done to the whole team!
I believe it is crucial to differentiate between scientific theories and settled science. Theories are our best attempts to explain phenomena we observe in the world - they align as closely as possible with observations but remain hypotheses.
In contrast, settled science must rigidly adhere to the scientific method of forming a hypothesis, proposing alternate explanations, and ruling out claims through rigorous testing. With settled science, I can make a falsifiable claim that others can replicate and validate through experimentation.
Concepts like dark matter, dark energy, and black holes are intriguing theories that attempt to explain perplexing observations in cosmology and astrophysics. However, they do not constitute settled science in their current form. These ideas have not been definitively proven using the scientific method and experimental validation.
While theories can provide useful models and drive further inquiry, it is vital to recognize they are not equivalent to scientific facts established through the rigorous methodology of the scientific process. As an empiricist, I believe we must continue testing and challenging our theoretical assumptions against empirical evidence in the pursuit of settled scientific knowledge.
In summary, sound science depends on clearly distinguishing speculations and guesses from knowledge derived from systematic, reproducible verification of hypotheses. We must be wary of accepting intriguing theories as settled truth without sufficient evidentiary support.
I am reminded of Darkstar One, the game, when I truly got hooked on this kind of content. Yes its sci-fi, but the idea / word, Dark Star got stuck in my thoughts since. This information / discovery / theory has further solidified my appreciation for the field in general. As all these videos do.
we are so lucky to have such high quality programs available to us at the push of a button, anytime, anywhere… thanks pbs team!
we are just lucky in general, thank you universe :P
And so many people use that exact resource to try to destroy scientific progress
@@georgeponiris9525 You think that this is 'scientific progress'? This channel is utterly divorced from science and is aimed at people like you who observe the religion of scientism.
@@undercoveragent9889 science isn't a religion. And calling it a religion to try and insult it shows how awful religions are
@@georgeponiris9525 lol Google 'proof of the existence of dark matter' and see how the word 'proof' is synonymous with 'evidence' and 'inference'. lol
You are not equipped with the capacity to 'know' what 'science' is. Dark matter stars are _not_ scientifically valid and your little guru telling you they are is a pied-piper profiting from your gullibility.
By the way, did you miss the COVID debacle? You think the science that said we should vax _everyone_ even while the pandemic is unfolding was not a doctrine that has _all_ the hallmarks of 'religion'? You think the 'wet market hypothesis' was not an article of faith?
You should shut up now and conserve what little credibility you might, if any at all, that remains.
And to think that your vote is worth as much as mine. SMFH!
As someone with a learning disability, I just wanted to say, thank you SO much to Matt and everyone on the team. I've always been so curious about how the universe works and felt like it was impossible for me to get it because of the math, but this show unlocked so much for me. Matt, you remind me of my physics teacher who would spend hours after school every week helping me understand the class material. Almost 10 years later, you've reignited a curiosity and passion for me to learn about science and math (I even picked up a copy of The Theoretical Minimum 😊).
Also, I teach career/life skills to people coming home from Rikers or prison, and I've used a lot of your lesson techniques. Students tell me it's helped and inspired them a lot. I hope you guys get to keep doing this show for a long, long time!
Reading your story made my day
U rule
@@pravkdeyAw thank you so much! u rule too and so does this whole community 🥰
That's really cool.
When they don't present the math and hard evidence of their theories...they are doing you no favors with their "explanations". Keep questioning, always doubt, make the evidence prove itself to you.
Damn, Matt really is a master of space time, he went back in time to make an episode about dark stars just to flex while answering a comment.
Getting to know more about our universe makes me appreciate so much about life and how mysteriously everything was made perfectly. ❤️
This man is really dedicated to casually educating us while in space without space suit
He’s too powerful for the laws of physics, his biology is transcendent to reality
Space suits are for wimps!!1
That's a green screen projecting the visage of space.
A human would not be able to last long in space without a spacesuit.
Also space has very little air and therefore it is very hard for sound waves to propagate.
Space Time and a Dr Becky reference. 😊 my favourite ways to learn about space. Thanks, Matt.
There's a bit of handwaving around the step where normal matter is finally affected. Any particle that a dark matter particle can annihilate into, has to also be a particle it can interact with. So somehow there's a chain of interactions that connect dark matter with normal matter. This whole aspect could use more explanation.
They actually already have a video about this called "the Higgs portal" or something like that.
It's possible that a Higgs boson can rarely decay into dark matter particles. Which means dark matter particles could annihilate into Higgs bosons, which would then decay into regular matter.
I think that's the most likely mechanism.
This was such a great video. Is it just me, or is his voice slightly higher than normal? Probably just me. Space time is definitely my favourite of all astronomy channels on youtube.
I thought the same thing and searched for 'voice' in the comments and ... voila. and I can assure you that it's not an AI that replaced him, because an AI would have gotten the pitch right. Perhaps he sniffed some helium in the lab. Or marketing found out that he comes off as more sympathetic with a higher voice.
Queue people thinking this will make scientist panic because they were wrong about something.
Queue scientists being super exited because they were wrong about something.
Awesome explanation. As always, thanks for your awesome work.
Yeah I can't wait for the religious fuckwits to go on about how science is once again changing its answer because oh no, how dare we update our answers with new information
cue
A queue is a line of things to be processed. A cue is a stage direction. 🤓
That is something many people don't seem to get. If you know you're wrong about something, that information narrows down the possible explanations for a topic. It decreases uncertainty. Of course you'll be excited when that happens.
Scientist are people and ppl tend to not like change. Even super smart ones. Just look at the defenders of string theory
Have just been reading about John Michell, who was the first to conceive of the idea of a black hole in 1783... Never heard of this scientist until now and he should be one of most famous with what he discovered. Thank you for sharing!
That's because his dark star wasn't really anything like an actual black hole. There was no way he could have figured it out because that needed particle physics and quantum physics, not to mention Einstein's work before they could be derived from theory. His insight into a star massive enough to prevent light from escaping was a brilliant one, but there wasn't much anyone could do with it at the time. He will always get a mention in any historical retelling of the story of black holes, so there is that.
The drawing was mind-blowingly close, too. It's really amazing that Mitchell actually had these thoughts, seeing as we were burning witches not too long before his time.
@@bethanygee6939I was surprised by that too, but I couldn't find any indication that this was actually a drawing from that time. I suspect it's an illustration added by the editor of this video.
Was that the inspiration for his massive hit Big Yellow Taxi?
@@ComaVN Aw, shoot. I should have considered that
I love that one of the answers on the question time of the dark stars episode… is a TLDR on dark stars
Wow wow this hypothesis explains the origin of massive black holes in the center of the galaxies!!
As an aside, I always appreciate when you give shoutouts and nods to other science communicators here on youtube. The wide reach of your platform is great for also elevating other people in the community who are doing great work.
Totally. One of the things I love about true scientists, is that they understand that by sharing information It helps us all. And because they are willing to share information, there are less attempts to monopolize it. And because there are less attempts to monopolize it, our entire species gets to grow and learn faster. There is a StarTalk episode, from about 6 years ago with Matt on it, when PBS SpaceTime was new, and StarTalk was already pretty big. Neil deGrasse Tyson helped get the word out about PBS SpaceTime, and now PBS SpaceTime is bigger than StarTalk and helping to bring other newcomers to the front as well. This is the way. When we share information, we all benefit. Those who don't understand this will never be on the cutting edge of discovery.
I don't think Matt has been replaced by AI but I have noticed over the last few months a change in the audio. His voice sounds higher-pitched and there are a lot of little audio glitches. I thought it was just something weird my computer was doing but I noticed it on a friend's tv as well.
Was just looking if someone else heard this weird highpitch fluctuations oô Someone definitely screwed up the recorrding xD
Good point
maybe his jeans shrank in the wash
Came here looking for this to confirm that I'm not crazy. Thanks! Audio is indeed weird and high pitched.
Might not be their fault. CZcams has been messing up uploads a lot lately for a lot of CZcamsrs I follow.
honestly, I do love the visuals, but with your voice, I really wouldn't mind hearing it on a podcast, just listening to all of this science stuff on my way to work or the city would be brilliant
Amazing find. Thank you PBS Space Time!
Always great content it's fun to watch someone who is so good at teaching and keeping people interested in the edges of our understanding of science...
I have been avoiding these videos b/c much of the time they are beyond my limited knowledge, & while I know you're doing an excellent job of explanation, I do better digesting this info from books, where I can go back at my own pace; hopping back & forth between videos just doesn't work for my head. But this is so interesting, so well done, & presents such a limited amount of material that it totally grabbed me. Besides, what a THING!!! Dark matter stars from our baby universe. Miraculous, thank-you, & now I'm going to go check out those previous videos so I can come back here & do the Q&A! Thanks much!
Great video and very well explained. Thanks for sharing!
This is so cool! Hope I see some of the biggest problems and mysteries in Physics get solved in our lifetimes!
Same! With all of the new space telescopes (and other instruments) coming online now, I'm hopeful thar we'll see evidence of new physics in the next decade!
If that happens, the simulation will collapse on itself
YOU'RE SO COOL. HOW ABOUT THAT?
@@LuisSierra42thank heaven 😂
It's impossible.
This paper really delivers on multiple levels from the way you describe it. It seems like we’re inching closer and closer to a more comprehensive understanding of what dark matter is and how it affects galaxy and star formation.
ooohh...no...it's instead misleading.
As a high energy theorist myself I'd like to say that this is a shining example of scientific outreach and education. This is why publically funded media is necessary. Fox and CNN are only going to tell you how the "stars" on Earth shine and decay but never about the real stars our there in our universe. 👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽
Really looking forward to that upcoming episode on dark matter stars!
I love this show! My gratitude to Matt and all the team over at Space Time. Also love the tradition of each shows last two words being space time.
You thought I wasn’t gonna be able to find a way that I’d be able to end this episode on a note that acknowledges the endless amazement and wonder to be found, in the boundless and mysterious world of space time. Phew!
The more I learn about space and quantum mechanics the more I don't even know how to ask a question about it.
It's mind boggling and wonderful and fascinating as well to see just how incredibly complex all of this really is.
It's because there are more and more scientists making stuff up as they go along in order to secure their jobs and give themselves a whole avenue to study. Without something to research, there's nothing to study, thus, nothing to fund, so they can't afford to live. Not to mention the prestige they garner from it. Too much these days are theories built upon theories, and far too difficult to experiment because today's technology is still too limited. Can barely see an atom now, and yet they've gone so far as to claim there are things called quarks? Where? Because you measured something? Whatever it is they think quarks are isn't what they actually are, especially because we can't see them.
Dark Star is a very early low budget scifi film Directed by John Carpenter, that's not essential right now but it is worth a watch
Another great video. Keep them coming!
It would be interesting if this can help constrain the mass (and other properties) of Dark Matter.
If I recall correctly, the cosmology uncertainties are quite large in these high-z objects. If that's the case, I'd actually expect the inverse to happen first. If the stars are consistent with current DM constraints, then they're still dark star candidates. If not, then it'll probably be concluded that these high-z objects are more likely not dark stars but some other kind of object. Hopefully JWST keeps finding these high-z objects so we can further constrain their properties, which is what we really need if we're going to use them to further constrain the DM mass range (which I believe is *very* large).
@@michaels.3709 That makes sense since they are so distant. I hope further study with JWST can crack it. If not I wonder if a follow on instrument might be able to address it.
@@michaels.3709 Yeah.... We should build a bigger Infrared telescope. This time in a cold lunar crater that doesn't get any sunlight. Just a huge observatory on the moon.
@@shipwreck9146 How cool would that be! The Artemis missions are going to be such a big step towards projects like this. I'm not an astronomer or an astrophysicist, so I don't know exactly what kinds of advantages a lunar observatory would have, but I know it'd be the first observatory of its kind and those types of devices tend to lead to significant discoveries!
@@michaels.3709 I'm not an astronomer or astrophysicist, but I have a physics degree, and have studied way more about astronomy than I need to know.
I haven't heard any talks of a lunar infrared telescope, but I've heard lots of talks of a crater on the far side of the moon being used for a radio telescope. The shape of a crater is the perfect place for a massive parabolic dish. And on the far side of the moon, it would have minimal interference from man-made radio signals.
I'm super excited for our future on the moon.
You know it's astrophysics when acronyms have acronyms in full forms
Best PBS lines ever: "SPACE IS SO BIG THAT WE RAN OUT OF COOL NAMES YEARS AGO"
This has to be the most amazing mind boggling channel I love it even though I don't know everything about physics
thanks for another hit of science - something in the audio sounds off though, and also Matts actions look sped up too
Last several videos sounds very wierd and unnatural
This and a new Kurzgesagt, my bedtime viewing is complete. Thanks in advance for another thought-provoking video.
And Arvin ash and Veritasium!
Kurzgesagt lost my interest a while ago when they got some information wrong in one of their videos about space, and another where they confused millions/billions when talking about stars. I remember it made me think they dont have the background knowledge on space, but they just researched it right before the video. Which is fine, but if you want more consistent information I found it better to listen to someone that doesn't necessarily have to do research and read a script they wrote. Like PBS ST, Dr Becky, launch pad astronomy, SEA, cool worlds, or other actual professionals/expert
You do a fantastic job presenting this information. Much appreciated! 😁
Neat! Also, the “emmiting light but not a star” sounds almost like a quasi-star, which is a large black hole that’s acretion disck holds the hydrogen in a sphere, but eventually the quasar stops, and the rest collapses.
Is the audio sped up? It sounds like when broadcast television speeds up a TV show by a few %.
If so, why would you do this? Listen to the difference compared to the one 9 months ago (or other older videos) on the nobel for quantum entanglement and this.
It improves runtime for the algorithm with minimal loss incomprehension. All hail youtube metrics.
Dear Dr Matt thank you for another amazing video but the news keeps talking about the potential discovery of 5th force so I was hoping this would be something you touched on so we could get more information & less hype.
I'm usually watching these late in the evening when they are released, but lately I can never remember what they were about in the morning.
I would love to see an episode exploring candidate mechanisms for dark matter annihilation.
Dark matter is nonsens.
It is pseudoscience at best.
The james web telescope has been so useful already. Makes me worry about space debris
It's a long way from Earth so no risk of orbital debris. Micro meteors are a risk.
@@simontmnmicrometeors are a type of space debris, no?
@@Alex-js5lg Depends on your definition of 'debris'.
It's already been hit by micrometeors, and it will almost certainly get hit by more. Odds are it will get many years of good data before too much damage is done, but destruction from space debris is its ultimate fate unless we're insanely lucky.
It was designed with micrometeorites in mind. The telescope has an expected shelf life (quite a while), so just enjoy the ride until we get even better telescopes up there!
Uff, this is the first episode i needed to rewatch like 10 times to understand. Good stuff =)
I love love love this channel! The way complex information is explained and presented as brilliant. Also Dr O'Dowd's accent makes it sound like you sang the James Wood telescope❤ makes me smile everytime. On top of the fact that he'd brilliant.
I am a big fan of physics, even though my field of expertise is far from this. I always found it is mesmerizing for me to figure out how things work, and upgrade our understanding of our reality, little by little.
Dark matter is no even wrong.
It is untestable pseudoscience, conjured up out of nothing.
I hope the early universe still has a lot of fascinating phenomena to reveal to us
I love how you can go into such intricate detail about something we're not sure exists, would be from 13.4 billion years ago - and is that far away. Genius!
It sure is! It's wonderful! There are some really smart people out there.
you, anton, sabine and joe scott holdin the science youtube community together rn
In an earlier episode you covered the topic "Could Axions be Dark Matter". So could Dark Stars be formed with this Axion-based Dark Matter?
The Axions discussed there had wavelengths in the order of 10,000~100,000 light-years, unlikely to have any effect on the formation of structures the size of a star or a solar system. Axioninc dark matter of much smaller wavelengths could do that, but having Axions of such small wavelength would beat the purpose of the whole 'Axionic dark matter' theory, if I recall correctly.
@@Mohammad__M__ Great point,
I'll need to watch that episode again, but I was wondering if Axions could be their own anti-particle.
The more new channels I see from PBS, the more I appreciate the ones like Space Time that have been around since the days of reason and common sense.
Is something wrong with PBS's new CZcams channels?
Awesome video!!! Fantastic job :)
I’m always extremely impressed by how you are able to communicate this type of information to the common person who is not a physics student or physicist… enough for someone who is not to be able to understand and follow along. It’s why I love this channel. I’m absolutely fascinated by all that is quantum physics and mechanics as well as astronomy and physics as a whole. Thank you for making it easy enough to follow!❤❤❤
I'm with you, lady! It's wonderful to watch these videos, and follow allong (as good as I can..), even though I don't have a degree in physics.
Have you read Carlo Rovelli? It's worth a try, atleast since you're interested in physics.
Not only a fantastic episode on a potentially very exciting topic, but one of the more epic Q&A sessions to boot.
Dark stars are a fascinating idea, and the hypothesis suddenly leads me to wonder if self-annihilating dark matter in the Milky Way's halo might be the source of the cosmic rays which seem to be coming from every direction in our galaxy.
Self annihilating dark matter producing cosmic rays is actually an established theory: there wouldn't be enough for it to explain all cosmic rays we see, but it could certainly be producing some. It's one of the ways we're searching for dark matter: predicting how much radiation would be produced by all known sources, then searching for an excess beyond that which could be due to dark matter.
It's called "Indirect dark matter detection" (as opposed to direct detection and collider searches, which are the other two dominant search methods) if you wanted to do some reading.
This is the most interesting news I've seen in a while. Very exciting
I hope this mystery about dark matter and energy is solved in my lifetime.
Hurts my head thinking about it. The more I think, the less sense it makes to me
@@quark-soup care to elaborate
nothing should hurt your head. if possibilities are endless than almost anything is possible.
@@TimberStiffy_ thinking isn't free. Brains need energy. When you think, you burn glucose. When you think really hard for a concentrated amount of time, your brain's glucose levels drop to dangerously low amounts. This can cause a headache.
There will just turn up new mysteries nobody understand anyhow, so it does not matter
"Dark matter" is the ancient ether.
Scientists hate the name "ether".
To their ears, "dark matter" sounds scientific.
Too much Star Wars, Darth Vader (dark father) and dark side of the "force" (dark force).
Do supermassive black holes at galactic centers (or any black hole, really) also trap dark matter? The event horizon is a surface area, so any dark matter particles that are oscillating back and forth through the center of the cloud, as the illustration suggests, would inevitably pass through the event horizon and be trapped there by the gravity? If not, then dark matter is even weirder than we thought.
That’s a very interesting question. I’m thinking perhaps not because galaxies don’t seem to have evidence of large accumulations of dm surrounding bh’s. Having said that, I’m wondering if perhaps there might be some novel interaction, or lack there of, hereby even if dm crosses an eh and goes into a bh, might it be possible that due to how weekly dm interacts with gravity, maybe it isn’t even possible to add the dm’s mass to that of the bh because it might not get compressed at the centre of the bh, instead just passing through and continuing on its way, back out the opposite side from where it entered. In this way, maybe dm doesn’t have to go faster than light speed to exit a bh because it isn’t ordinary matter, so perhaps gravity doesn’t manifest the same way for dm as it does with ordinary matter.
Really great question/concept though mate! Btw, an eh isn’t actually a surface area as it isn’t a surface or physical thing at all. It’s just a concept, not a physical object. Of course we can talk about how big they are and attribute an area to them but they don’t have any physical properties as such.
If there is one thing dark matter deffently does it's gravity, that how we know it's there after all, so yes, they should be plenty of dark matter in supermassive blackholes. Theoretical you can make a black-hole entirely out of dark matter.
Apparently particles going at just the right angle to hit stars or black holes dead center is super rare anyways, so it's more likely that they just orbit forever, and never bump into enough things to lose enough energy to fall in. Since DM barely interacts with anything, vs regular matter that light up as they form accretion rings.
Intresting question. Assuming dark matter is some kind of particle, it should get trapped inside a black hole and over time we should observe a very slight change in the mass or rotation of the galaxy but because dark matter is so spread out (so only a very tiny fraction of a fraction of a fraction gets inside the event horizon) it could be practically undetectable.
Another reason that i find this question interesting is that if dark matter particles can self annihilate we should observe miniscule spikes of unexplained radiation near massive objects like black holes. (One without an accretion disc preferably)
But i do not know, i am not a physicist and maybe dark matter is so weird that even black holes cant stop them.
Yes, since dark matter interacts with gravity, it could be trapped inside a black hole. However, regular matter orbiting a black hole, as it become denser, grow hotter, since it interacts with himself (pressure). Heat is radiated away, energy its lost and its orbit get lower and lower, until it eventually falls into the black hole. Dark matter on the other hand has weak interaction with himself, and so the aforementioned mechanism is much less likely to happen significantly, and then it is more likely to stay in orbit around the black hole indefinetely.
Great content from Matt, again
I'm going to have to listen to this again. This is fascinationg.
It seems like if dark stars are real then dark matter can't be fuzzy, since then it couldn't be localized in such a small area.
Dark matter is definitely fuzzy. That's an observed aspect of it. This has to give a mechanism for de-fuzzing dark matter, which it hypothesizes is a gravitational extreme over a broad area. (As opposed to black holes that are a gravitational extreme over a small area.)
Dark stars are extremely diffuse compared to normal stars. We already see dark mattter annihilation in much more defuse halos.
Could the cloud dynamics simply be analogous to dynamical friction rather than self interacting Dark Matter? Essentially, the Dark Matter gains momentum and puffs out (like boiling) condensing down the matter and creating galaxies and thinning out the Dark Matter we see today.
How does something which only interacts via gravity, and very weakly at that, manage to produce any kind of friction? That would be the complete opposite of a weak interaction…
Love the JWST related content!
Great vid. Keep the hard work.
Matt must have got a new mic, his voice sounds way different in this video compared to others. Great video as always!
They are speeding up the video. Doesn't sound good to me.
What a time to be alive! 🤩
2 minute papers fan?
Hello fellow scholar, I get that reference@@incoprea2
It just feels so unreal that JWT is out there fully operational working better then anticipated and giving scientist insights that a few years ago we only could have dreamed of.
However, I can‘t say anything in particular about the quality of the discussed paper since I haven‘t read it.
Interesting that the extreme densities of dark matter inside the dark stars was insufficient to create a black hole.
Maybe that's how black hole stars form
Might be wrong in understanding, but it seems with the self-annihilation property, the object is kept in equilibrium with the energy from dark matter's annihilation keeping the matter from collapsing into a black hole.
If it self-annihilates, would that mean then that dark matter cannot form a black hole on its own? It would annihilate itself and reduce its mass before given the chance.
A couple things about that:
First, the density of dark matter in a dark star is only extreme when compared to our speculative observations of dark matter in the modern universe. By our best estimations, dark matter is currently rather diffuse, so even a slight concentration of it would seem extremely dense in comparison. Even in the theoretical dark star, dark matter only makes up a fraction of a percent of the total composition - the rest being hydrogen gas. We only need enough dark matter in the dark star for them to be able to interact with -and annihilate - one another.
Second, I think you may misunderstand a few key components of the video and of how black holes and stars work. The density of the dark star, even with it primarily being hydrogen gas, is definitely sufficient for it to collapse into a black hole, but just like with a normal star, if internal forces are sufficiently powerful, they can neutralize the pull of gravity which prevents the density from getting too high. In normal stars, the energy released by nuclear fusion is the mechanism that prevents their collapse, and similarly, the annihilation of the dark matter within a dark star would do the same.
Reasons I think are that the dark matter (1) is still intrinsically relatively puffy & (2) doesn't get super dense at the center because the regular matter (which is what's doing the inward pulling) stops contracting due to its heat.
thats because dark matter only has a weak interaction force, its not strong enough to fall together and the energy of the annihilation forces everything outward
Thank you. Always informative & you are certainly upping your comedy game.
Thank you very much PBS, I always enjoy your lectures, they are so informative, under the very best in youtube, it´s a honor to watch them!
After the discovery of giant black holes (quasars) and full-grown galaxies that existed at the beginning of space and time (what we thought until now was the beginning - the Big Bang), we are now coming to new theories and maybe even standard models...
Either these "Methuselah stars and galaxies" are from a previous universe or our cosmos is a quiet a bit older than we really thought (maybe 16 - 20 billion years old)...
The next generation of even more powerful space telescopes will show us the truth of the truth and perhaps give us an approximate explanation for dark matter/energy...
Do Axions fulfil the criteria to be potential Dark Stars?
No
Sadly no, their wavelengths are so large they can't form anything that small. (An odd use of the term 'small'...)
@@garethdean6382 What do you mean by wavelength? 🤔 Axions aren’t real, physical matter/particles. 😱
Wavelength,t he wavelength of the particle involved. IF axions are real they'll have a mass, a very low mass which produces a correspondingly large wavelength, but a mass all the same. And even massless photons have a wavelength relating to their energy. In QFT the only way to avoid having a wavelength is to not exist at all.
Would it possible to differentiate a dark star powered by the annihilation of dark mater from a quasi-star powered by mass falling into a black hole? Also, would it be possible for a single star to be both a dark star and quasi-star at the same time, or are they mutually exclusive?
Black holes have an accretion disk that shows up in the X-ray spectra... and polar jets.
Dark stars never collapse into a true star so why couldn't it collapse into a quasi-star instead of an instant black hole? Apparently it has hugeee amounts of gas, right so it shoullddd be possible... Were both probably missing some important info on how both of them work lol
@@kayakMike1000 A quasi-star is a hypothetical star with a black hole at its core, so there would be no x-rays coming out and the jets would not be visible at such a distance. If you want to know more about it I recommend the "Black Hole Star" video from "In a nutshell".
"You'll just have to trust me and be impressed anyway" is my new favorite line from this show.
This video was particularly pleasing
I believe we have found unusual gamma rays emitting from the sun that are yet to be explained. Is it possible that there could be some kind of tie-in here?Could some significant amount of dark matter be present within the sun, and perhaps indeed in many stars?
If you have a process that can reduce the momentum of DM within the sun AND a weakly interacting form of DM then it could certainly eventually become trapped within an orbit inside the sun. The trick then is to get the concentration high enough by either continuing to slow the DM and/or accreting DM to explain the high energy gamma rays via annihilation. So you would first need to propose a mechanism inside the sun to reduce DM momentum. Then you would have to calculate the expected rate of annihilation from the candidate DM flux and from that then the spectrum of high energy gamma rays produced. If that spectrum matches the observation then Bob's your uncle, Nobel prize! Good luck.
@@John-zz6fz That annihilation also needs to happen outside the sun as well, otherwise the gamma radiation would get downconverted into blackbody radiation.
This is speculation of a speculation of another speculation.
Answering the dark matter star question at the end of the dark matter star episode felt really inception-like.
Galaxies look so much like whirlpools. Whirlpools form everywhere in chaotic fluid flow (unfortunately for those in Tornado Alley). Maybe the early universe had regions which moved in a circular motion that served as a template for galactic formation.
Sounds like a really similar hypothesis to the Black Hole Star hypothesis, where super massive stars may have formed black holes at their core due to the sheer mass they were composed off.
Not very similar... Black hole stars would undergo fusion, behaving much like a normal star, while these dark stars are hypothetically powered by esoteric dark matter interactions
I was just writing a comment where I asked if this could be the mechanism that formed the early supermassive black holes and while I was writing it you said that this would be a neat explaination for exactly that. As if you where answering in real time.🤯
Spooky action at a distance or something like that, I'm not a physicist.
Always stay for the comment responses. Some great questions and insights, and Matt will do the deep dive to find that one paper to mention!
Couldn't it be possible that JADES found the first evidents for another assumed type of early universe Star, _the Black Hole Star?_ A Black Hole Star could also explain all the aforementioned observations. It would have absorption lines instead of emission lines, it would explain the origin of SMBH and it would create the insane amount of light necessary to travel through time and space to get recieved by JWST.
Dr. Becky has done a good job of explaining how the particular choice of JWST observations performed at least up to a few weeks ago is really non-ideal for determining red shift, because it relies on general color rather than spectra. JWST also has the ability to take spectra, but at least as of those Dr. Becky episodes I have seen to date (granted, I'm a few episodes behind), the spectral results have not come in yet. So the supposedly extremely distant massive galaxies may actually be not so distant and not so massive, rendering the question of supposedly inexplicably rapid early galaxy formation a moot point.
Dr. Becky who. Cite your sources. I don't know why people hate dark matter so much.
There’s a paper that seems to back up the notion that in binary star systems the MOND framework better fits the data 10.3847/1538-4357/ace101. It would be amazing to see if this could lead to a refinement of new theory for gravity.
No, that paper is highly speculative, the evidence is flimsy at best. Their "observation" did not work out in the 0.1 nano meter per second squared range. The latest MOND hypothesis offer no explanation for all the other observational evidence for General Relativity. It is just sensationalism and clickbait.
It'd certainly be interesting if it could be expanded from the special case of certain star systems to the entire universe. Theories often fail when they're forced to go from a special case to a general one.
So far only one small group is proposing this hypothesis, their evidence is flimsy at best. For example, 0.1 nano meter per second squared acceleration due to gravitational interactions is too small where the uncertainty of this measurement could be an order of magnitude larger.
Dark star is just such a great name
The most valuable thing I got from this video is discovering John Michell! What a brilliant mind, but so unknown.
0:44: 🌌 The James Webb Space Telescope has discovered a completely new type of star powered by dark matter and shining as bright as a galaxy in the early epoch of the universe.
3:36: 🌟 Scientists have discovered candidates for dark stars, which are super bright objects that may be powered by dark matter.
5:33: ✨ Dark matter particles self-annihilate, releasing enormous energy and preventing gas contraction to form a true star.
8:30: 🌌 Dark stars and galaxies are speculative but intriguing objects that can be distinguished through their spectra.
11:36: 📺 PBS Terra has new science shows, including one about how humans are changing elephant evolution.
14:44: 🌌 Gravitational waves can be lensed and are subject to gravitational lensing by large masses such as galaxies.
17:00: 🌌 Dark matter is likely to exist as a separate entity from regular matter due to observations of its separation and the inability of gravity alone to explain its behavior.
Recap by Tammy AI
Great to see John Michell getting credit for being hundreds of years ahead of his time. Thanks for trying to educate us Doctor O’Dowd.