M73 - Is it really an "object"?

M73 - Is it really an "object"? - Deep Sky Videos

Рет қаралды 82,516

6 жыл бұрын

Messier 73 (aka NGC 6994) has been the cause of confusion and disagreement, as Dr Becky Smethurst explains.
More links and info below ↓ ↓ ↓
Patreon: / deepskyvideos
More Messier Objects: bit.ly/MessierObjects
Dr Smethurst is the Sixty Symbols Ogden Fellow at the University of Nottingham.
Papers mentioned in the video include:
The clashing 2000 papers...
arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0001238
arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0003372
The deciding 2002 paper...
www.aanda.org/articles/aa/abs...
Deep Sky Videos website: www.deepskyvideos.com/
Twitter: / deepskyvideos
Facebook: / deepskyvideos
More about the astronomers in our videos: www.deepskyvideos.com/pages/co...
Support us on Patreon: / deepskyvideos
Made possible by:
The University of Nottingham
and The University of Sheffield.
Video by Brady Haran

Пікірлер: 135

@Oldfaithful61 6 жыл бұрын

Not boring at all, quite the contrary. This video clearly shows us how carefully we should study data and the various conclusions drawn from those data.

@ZeedijkMike 6 жыл бұрын

Totally agree. Or as Stephen Fry/Sandy Toksvig would say. Quite Interesting.

@Indianif 6 жыл бұрын

Quite interesting indeed

@PhilippeChretienBasbrun 6 жыл бұрын

Excellent video for an absolutely boring object! Thanks!

@GnosticAtheist 6 жыл бұрын

There are no other standing theories to explain the data.

@ottolehikoinen6193 6 жыл бұрын

Yes, not boring. Are there catalogues of these asterisms?

@TaohRihze 6 жыл бұрын

You could do them in order, but you selected a more Messier approach.

@BhupinderSinghSaini1 6 жыл бұрын

Yeah, but the videos are just so nebulous, I am okay with this approach

@livintolearn7053 6 жыл бұрын

"Messier approach"...that's it, Im leaving!

@PhilBoswell 6 жыл бұрын

Please accept this congratulatory virtual custard pie to the face…you know that you deserve it ;-)

@debkalpapal2682 3 жыл бұрын

@@livintolearn7053 lol

@Orlin3 6 жыл бұрын

I love having Dr. Smethurst on the video rotation. She's an amazing addition. Keep up the great work!

@jollz4u 6 жыл бұрын

Reminds me of Feynman's quote: "The first principle is that you must not fool yourself-and you are the easiest person to fool."

@PeacefulAnxiety 6 жыл бұрын

Dr Smethurst is an excellent addition to deep sky videos and sixty symbols! It would be awesome if she did a video on galaxy formation.

@dordokamaisu2966 6 жыл бұрын

Agree! But I would also listen to Mike Merrifield 24/7!

@glennac 6 жыл бұрын

And she’s super cute too! 😉

@draketungsten74 6 жыл бұрын

I actually found this to be one of the more interesting videos on clusters.

@unvergebeneid 6 жыл бұрын

Only that it's not a video on a cluster ;) But yeah, it was really interesting!

@evileye1968 5 жыл бұрын

Not boring, it explains how the dispute was finally settled using relative velocity. Thanks for the video.

@guyh3403 6 жыл бұрын

Absolutely FAR from boring. I could watch this for hours. Thank you!

@wabznasm9660 6 жыл бұрын

Brady, thank you so much for this channel and your others, they're all absolutely fantastic. DeepSkyVideos in particular is an absolute dream come true for me. I've spent many hours poring over dry wikipedia articles about Messier objects and then lo and behold, someone's made a peerless video series about them. God knows what's in the water in Nottingham but the folks you interview are some of the most engaging and entertaining educators I've ever known. Your videos radiate human warmth, and it's in no small part due to your editing and interview styles. Thanks again.

@bobcunningham6953 6 жыл бұрын

We normally get who, what and when on these videos. It's is also great to also get why and how, to describe the process through time.

@skinnyjohnsen 6 жыл бұрын

I really liked this video, and I am happy to hear that conclusion!

@drmoynihan 6 жыл бұрын

Dr Smethurst, Thank you for this excellent presentation. As one who received his "Messier Certificate" over 20 years ago, I remember well the consternation around M73. :)

@zanshibumi 6 жыл бұрын

This is a fascinating story! So much information about how these things are being thought about.

@neilwilson5785 6 жыл бұрын

Excellent. I am learning new things.

@michael.a.covington 3 жыл бұрын

What Messier and the Herschels did was preserve identifiabilty. If a new catalogue is to supersede an old one, it should contain all the objects in the old one even if some of them have been shown not to belong, simply so that they can still be identified. Messier did this with M40, which he knew was a double star, but someone earlier had reported it as nebulous. He himself said that he wanted to include objects that had been previously claimed to be nebulous, even if they really weren't, for the sake of identification.

@RonJohn63 5 жыл бұрын

M73 is *not* boring. The "humanness" (confirmation bias, different people interpreting the same data in different ways, etc) involved in researching it makes it interesting.

@av-ji9qy 4 жыл бұрын

Hi Dr Becky Excellent video.....just a beginner looking at the stars......truthfully to me everything looks the same......keep us informed I watch you other videos also

@Adamas97 6 жыл бұрын

I wish this channel would post move videos. They are always so well done and interesting. I also miss seeing all the people in them. What is happening with everyone? How is there own research going? Have they published any papers lately?

@mokopa 6 жыл бұрын

In a way this video is one of the more interesting of the series. Boring is interesting when interesting gets boring.

@WiredUp4Fun 6 жыл бұрын

Radio podcast trophy from Mr & Mrs Grey at the end there 👑🎉 congrats on winning the trophy Brady

@1mctous 5 жыл бұрын

I noticed that Herschel's catalog had elements in the right hand column, presumably from the absorption lines they could discern in the spectra. How ironic that this disproved their proximity.

@logicalfundy 6 жыл бұрын

Maybe it's just me, but solving a long standing mystery isn't boring.

@gumunduringigumundsson9344 6 жыл бұрын

Yeees!! My all time faveourite channel strikes again ✅✅✅✅🍀🎩🎆😃

@lindaisenegger163 4 жыл бұрын

What would be cool and really rattle comfort zones...you should start a Debunked Boring Science series...entitled DBS...I personally would luv it...cool arguments just hanging on to history :)

@originaljuan 5 жыл бұрын

I didn't think it was boring; it embodied everything that science is! it took three hundred years to confirm that it wasn't anything! that's the beauty of science! in any other human field of knowledge, not just theology but law and philosophy and a bunch of other stuff, the attitude at the end of a "project" is 'I better come up with something definitive, then I'll get my fame and it'll be settled and that'll be that!', whereas in science, its all about the actual truth, over your fame and over having it be settled and moving on. in science, the attitude is always 'I can't make a definitive positive statement about this, so I better pass the question along so that it gets solved one day, because if I make something up, sure I may become famous, but it'll be easy to show that I made the answer up and the ridicule will be even worse, and the question will still go unanswered!'

@sirenbrian 6 жыл бұрын

I'm curious why the teams used the first method at all, checking the colors, instead of the speeds. Is one method usually easier/better than the other? Did they have a particular reason for choosing that method first?

@vanhouten64 5 жыл бұрын

I like M73. Interesting little object and easy to find near M72.

@debbie74dj 5 жыл бұрын

Could you do a video about Tabby's star, please ?

@ragnkja 6 жыл бұрын

Messier's catalogue was just a list of things he'd checked that turned out to not be comets, so it makes sense that he'd include it while John Herschel wouldn't include it in a catalogue of nebulae.

@treeboy83 6 жыл бұрын

even when its boring, it isnt, i learnt about how scientists can keep things going even when its not there just because somebody else saw it, i know thats probably gone away alot but good to see how it used to be

@morbid1. 6 жыл бұрын

I see famous microphone, well deserved trophy :D

@Tara_Li 6 жыл бұрын

To be fair - when they were displaying the the star field, I *thought* I did see some nebulosity around the lowest of the four stars - @1m10s and @2m00s - pretty circular, so my first thought was lens effect, but then it looked off-center, so I wondered...

@philorkill 6 жыл бұрын

This. is. GREAT!

@SharpAssKnittingNeedles 2 ай бұрын

This might be the most powerful of all the Messier series videos! Definitely a very strong commentary on the scientific process snd how it can go wrong

@sansamman4619 6 жыл бұрын

you shouldn't have said it's boring now I feel like a numberphile nerd because I enjoyed it so much!

@SaccoBelmonte 6 жыл бұрын

What do you guys think about this whole Thorium reactor thing? That'd make a great video.

@bertiewooster4043 6 жыл бұрын

Boring? I learned something new so how can that be boring?

@derschmiddie 6 жыл бұрын

It is traditionally associated with chess board makers, sellers of onions, manufacturers of plaster images of small religious significance and people allergic to pewter. Also Rincewinds birth-sign.

@garethdean6382 6 жыл бұрын

Sadly, due to being dismissed he has now not officially ever been born. This may cause some problems.

@mal2ksc 6 жыл бұрын

Would those be all onions including yellow, or just white onions, which you couldn't get because of the war?

@michaelsommers2356 6 жыл бұрын

Here is the 2002 paper on arxiv.org: arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0111601.pdf

@littlebigphil 6 жыл бұрын

I imagine there's a statistical analysis which could give a number to how closely they follow the pattern.

@kevinfrederick8999 6 жыл бұрын

The spikes on the stars are from the telescope . I have made a design that does not have those defects my largest has a 20 inch primary mirror Thanks for the clips

@zubmit700 6 жыл бұрын

Do we know of any star(s) in the milky way that have zero velocity relative to the sun? Like you and another car with the same speed, x m from each other and if you remove all reference point it looks like both are stationary?

@garethdean6382 6 жыл бұрын

I don't think so, which is sort of expected. Only stars at our sun's distance from the galactic center would be expected to have the same orbital speed and even that neglects things like the spiral arms. Anything else would be a temporary coincidence. (Exactly zero, moving slowly relative to the sun is more likely.) It's possible there are some stationary relative to the sun but I've not seen any in the literature.

@tomcan48 4 жыл бұрын

*M73 is a Small server by Lenovo configured with i3, i5 and i7 processors. With an i7 processor, it will really light up!*

@nathancoulombe6313 6 жыл бұрын

One Shift Two Shift Red Shift Blue Shift

@garethdean6382 6 жыл бұрын

The same object, the same data, but crucially there was a human choice made as to 'these stars are part of it'. Even the slightest bit of subjectivity so easily alters results.

@michaelsommers2356 6 жыл бұрын

Are you sure about "the same data"? I haven't read all three papers, but I'm pretty sure the 2002 paper had data unavailable to the others.

@pugnation 3 жыл бұрын

So, If it is debunked now, will it be removed from the catalogues? Not boring at all!

@pifdemestre7066 6 жыл бұрын

What is a reasonable speed ? for example the earth has an orbital velocity of about 29km/s and Mercury has an orbital velocity of up to 59 km/s so if looked at the right time from the right position we could imagine seeing one at +59km/s and the other at -29km/s. Of course those stars are much further from each other, so probably the expected velocity should be slower. But what would be a reasonable value?

@michaelsommers2356 6 жыл бұрын

The "problem" here is not with the velocities per se, but with the fact that the stars have very different velocities. The differences are too great for the stars to be part of a bound system. Note that the 2002 paper also looked at distances and spectra, and found that all the data are inconsistent with the stars being part of the same system.

@pifdemestre7066 6 жыл бұрын

@Michael Sommer, that is exactly my point, someone could see a difference of velocity between earth and Mercury of 88km/s which is comparable to what is seen in this cluster. Of course Mercury is much closer to the sun than those stars are from each other. On the other hands the total mass of those stars is bigger than the sun (I guess it does not compensate for the distance, but you need to do the computations).

@michaelsommers2356 6 жыл бұрын

The Earth and Mercury are not stars in an open cluster; they will have different kinematics. Also, as I said before, the 2002 paper also looked at distances and compositions, which showed definitively that these stars are not associated with each other.

@yz4901983 6 жыл бұрын

Albert says its all relative

@anernits 6 жыл бұрын

that microphone, thou...

@brettkuntze8997 6 жыл бұрын

I thin the best time to view Orion Nebula is 3-4 am just ahead of the rising sun . The nebula looks so fresh right out of the oven! August is the month ..

@erictaylor5462 5 жыл бұрын

Wasn't the Messier Catalog created to provide a list of objects that are not comets? Perhaps M73 was include because it was mistaken for a comet.

@LardGreystoke 2 жыл бұрын

True. But subsequent lists had a different objective. "M73" didn't qualify.

@davidmurphy563 6 жыл бұрын

Small point. I think it is fairer to label what happened cognitive dissonance rather than confirmation bias. Although I'm probably splitting hairs.

@Nersify 6 жыл бұрын

So it means that bias it's open to interpretation and it's subjective in this case, just to underline.

@Mekratrig 6 жыл бұрын

If it's not a real cluster, why can't it be dropped from the catalog?

@MrCHINBAG 6 жыл бұрын

Subbed

@f4u5t00 6 жыл бұрын

If the first method for determining if a set of stars is an open cluster is so inconclusive why use that method at all and instead look at the red shift straight away?

@piranha031091 6 жыл бұрын

Measuring the red shifts of multiple stars requires much more observation time.

@f4u5t00 6 жыл бұрын

That's fine but what is the point of a fast-but-highly-imprecise method? What is the purpose of it? Why would results from it be worthy of publication, especially in this field?

@rupertrooksby 6 жыл бұрын

Who said the results need to be worthy? As currently practised, all that really matters is the paper is published. If the data looks insubstantial, just smear the numbers with some half-understood stats work. Old fashioned and outmoded notions of accuracy or reproducibility are considered as both extravagant and wasteful. Get it weakly peer-reviewed and then published, job done.

@solank7620 6 жыл бұрын

But wait. Can't stars in an open cluster have different velocities and directions...? If stars have different velocities, does that actually imply they aren't in an open cluster? I'm not an astronomer obviously - why can't stars in the same open cluster have different velocities, and be headed in different directions?

@michaelsommers2356 6 жыл бұрын

Stars in an open cluster will have different velocities (note that velocity includes both speed and direction), but since the cluster is a bound system, the velocities will be similar. The Odenkirchen and Soubiran paper found the dispersal in velocities to be very high, too high for the stars to be a bound system. Note that they also looked at distances and spectra, all of which strongly suggested that the stars are not related to each other.

@aakksshhaayy 6 жыл бұрын

My favourite messier object is the Andromeda galaxy

@guest_informant 6 жыл бұрын

I don't think she's (necessarily) describing confirmation bias, *I think she's describing peer pressure* The story of M73 is more like _The Emperor's New Clothes_ where everyone agrees and no-one dare disagree. That's peer pressure, isn't it? In confirmation bias you have a preconceived outcome, you seek confirmation and ignore counterexample. In this case they were (ostensibly) neutral which means there was no preconceived outcome* about what they were going to find they, but then they agreed with what everyone else had said. There are technicalities, and this is a youtube comment but I think that's right. I'm saying *Peer Pressure not Confirmation Bias* PS I wonder if peer pressure will lead to everyone saying: Don't be daft, that was confirmation bias :-) *Sort of

@auto_ego 5 жыл бұрын

Dr. Becky really flares my corona.

@supahfly_uk 6 жыл бұрын

You named it after a motorway nice

@BryanSeigneur0 5 жыл бұрын

"Miles apart." No. "Millions of miles." Still no. LOL

@flamencoprof 6 жыл бұрын

Science: - Not the "right" answer, just the best answer we have SO FAR! Scientist: - "I have proven this!" Interesting post showing how the two can differ. Many "facts" I was taught at school in the 50's and 60"s have been revised, but that doesn't deter me from preferring to follow the scientific method.

@NeonsStyleHD 6 жыл бұрын

Stupid question. Isn't it possible that Messier did see nebula, but it has been dissipated since then?

@maxratzlaff8333 6 жыл бұрын

NeonsStyle considering in astronomical terms a short time span is hundreds of millions of years....no

@LardGreystoke 2 жыл бұрын

His telescopes, by today's standards, were not that great.

@WillPittenger 4 жыл бұрын

Why don't they compare the distances to each of the stars? There's only 7 to compare.

@floodychild 6 жыл бұрын

She reminds me of Kirsten Dunst.

@AVMamfortas 5 жыл бұрын

The science is settled.

@jpphoton 6 жыл бұрын

excellent intellectually honest communiqué to the greater community outside of science on cases in point. good show tally ho!

@ottolehikoinen6193 5 жыл бұрын

Add Caldwell objects

@KattarJ 6 жыл бұрын

So Hubble couldn't be of any help?

@LardGreystoke 2 жыл бұрын

Hubble has far more important things to do.

@multiverse2301 6 жыл бұрын

If anyone know more about stars space or deep space universe then please contact me we will discuss about daily basis im dam crazy exiting to know about universe ... thanks

@mightyfinejonboy 6 жыл бұрын

2.34

@hyfy-tr2jy 6 жыл бұрын

is it just me or does this university have some of the hottest female scientists?

@shakesmctremens178 6 жыл бұрын

inorite

@chooseyouhandle 6 жыл бұрын

it's an illusion, their intelligence makes them seem hotter than they really are

@strangersound 6 жыл бұрын

Intelligence is extremely sexy and that's no illusion. ;)

@dougieh9676 4 жыл бұрын

Not just you. She’s smart and eye candy too. ♥️😍❤️

@ImSidgr 6 жыл бұрын

Brady's dad hat 😂

@hugoise367 6 жыл бұрын

The speed diferences might be telling us that some sort of explosion would have happened in between them, and so they are expanding away from it in all directions, some toward us, some to the opposite direction, and others sideways. Not saying this is a definite fact, just pointing out the endless plausible causes one could come up with to explain the observations. That said, we should not be rushing into conclusions without openly considering, debating, and rethinking our ideas together, and not individually in a competitive way, just to,prove a point. The only thing we will be is proven wrong sooner or later. That's just waste of theme, resources, opportunities, and especially it puts fellow researchers fighting each other in a useless war, instead of working harmoniously for the sake of knowledge.

@JeSuisUnKikoolol 6 жыл бұрын

That's not how explosions work in space, at least to my knowledge

@michaelsommers2356 6 жыл бұрын

The 2002 paper also looked at distances and compositions of the stars, and found that there was no reason so think they were ever part of a single system.

@Darxide23 6 жыл бұрын

Astrophysics Kirsten Dunst

@jwarmstrong 5 жыл бұрын

On the first date you explain Messier 73 and they don't run from the table - luck is on your side...

@davidtickner80 6 жыл бұрын

Astronomy boring? Perish the thought.

@jetzeschaafsma1211 6 жыл бұрын

That's not what confirmation bias is, though.

@beardollars 6 жыл бұрын

Please elaborate.

@akilghosh 6 жыл бұрын

Dr. Becky Smethurst seemed to be so excited in her first video, well now stuffs are turning out to be boring for her.. Hmmmm

@jerrygundecker743 6 жыл бұрын

Much ado about, well, let’s call it a lot of gas.

@LardGreystoke 2 жыл бұрын

The stars didn't know each other from atom.

@jefflucas_life 6 жыл бұрын

I say yes, its a small cluster of stars.

@chrissscottt 6 жыл бұрын

The method was clearly flawed.

@mickeypopa 6 жыл бұрын

She had me at m-m-m-m-millions of miles! 😃

@vaderdudenator1 3 жыл бұрын

😍😍

@meesternadim 6 жыл бұрын

Hi guys i am mexican

@Itssilentcat 6 жыл бұрын

Mimikyu

@MRconfusedboy 6 жыл бұрын

she looks like mary jane from spiderman movie

@davidb2885 6 жыл бұрын

0:07 Next video

@Binyamin.Tsadik 6 жыл бұрын

Reminds me of the climate change debate :D

@alexandrugheorghe5610 6 жыл бұрын

Can't focus. She's too gorgeous. :(

@DeepPastry 6 жыл бұрын

That's not confirmation bias, that's not what the original list was for. Original list is stuff that's clearly not comets, yet might be confused for comets. Everyone else is putting in everything from historic lists. And they're all adding the footnote "no neb". So the only confirmation bias we are seeing is hers.

@ragnkja 6 жыл бұрын

The fact that two papers using the same data and the same methods could get diametrically opposite results is a pretty strong indication that at least one of them has to be biased by something.

@DeepPastry 6 жыл бұрын

The Messier catalog was just a list of things that could be confused for comets that weren't comets. Messier started it and had friends add to it so they could more easily find comets without having these "not comets" messing with their searches. (Additionally you have to understand the quality of equipment) The list is of historic importance, which is code for you leave everything on it. That's not bias, that's just accepting that history happens. There's a few things that are not "nebulae" on the list, which is why those later lists say "no neb" they are saying it's not a nebulae, it's just on the list. The two recent papers has one saying they don't think it's an open cluster and the other saying it appears to be a very old and nearly dispersed open cluster, that's not them saying it's clearly a tight open cluster. And it would still stay on every list possible, because the history of the field matters. Two papers using the same data to come up with different conclusions is just science being science. A third paper using a completely different set of data to better answer the previous discourse is just science. Claiming the third paper proves confirmation bias isn't science, it's its own form of confirmation bias. And the object would still stay on every single list because the history of the field matters.

@EebstertheGreat 6 жыл бұрын

I agree with everything you are saying except that this video is somehow an example of "confirmation bias." She is just misusing a word. She is not biased to confirm a belief she already held while dismissing evidence to the contrary.

@charlesbaker7703 5 жыл бұрын

@@DeepPastry wish there was someway to highlight your reply. It sums up the situation perfectly. "Science being science" and building on historical data and why that data was originally collected (nebulosity not comets).

@LardGreystoke 2 жыл бұрын

It isn't a thing so it doesn't belong in a list of things.