Couldn’t agree more with your comments. Dr. Becky is a great role model !

The world does not convince women it's not feminine to be smart or scientifically literate. Being versed in Astrophysics, the science of parroting information does not directly correlate to being intelligent. The study and knowledge of a subject or subjects......obviously requires some level of intelligence although it's very possible to have such qualifications using commitment and a well exercised memory. The foundation of science is to question everything but let's just force cram space 'facts' on them because we 'Need' equal amounts of women in every field and those that aren't, are not as useful in future society.......we need every one we can get! Mankind is struggling without more women in SCIENCE! The thing is, there will never be as many women in certain fields, and vice versa. But there is absolutely nothing wrong with that, and it is not just societal pressures but also a natural tendancy toward gaining certain skills ie to attract a mate. There's nothing wrong with being whatever the heck they want and I don't feel like the world (Well at least western world) has done anything but support women and men to have the option to do anything they want to follow, maybe........just maybe women generally don't see a value in the theoretical science fiction of astrophysics. I'm all for everyone chasing their dreams but forced (equality? - As seen in some workplaces with men/women numbers etc prioritised over actual talent or productiveness) is plain ridiculous and not freedom or liberating anyone of the societal pressures in my opinion. Plus your whole post is full of stereotyping........dolls......giggling......which is the problem with society not letting women become scientists right?

@@snitchcore8635 Your problem is your ignoring the social pressures like your not feminine if you do a set activity. Women on a steady basis report on the social pressure that causes them to avoid certain things only once we eliminate these social pressures will we be able to tell what if any biological causes are involved. I agree with you it not helpful to quota improve a work force. But as discrimination did exist and still shows up when you test for it special efforts to train oppressed groups to meet the same standards as white males are still needed. And all jobs must set measurable standards for jobs so that the biased discriminating choice of the boss keeps less qualified white males as perjured. No the point is stereotyping girls who are into girl stuff can't be brilliant scientists causes many of these girls to avoid science. The original point of Dennis Best is anti stereotyping by people telling girls they can't be girly and into science is the problem to be fought. With the massive discrimination in the past and lawsuits still frequently finding irrational discrimination against women it is way to soon to be assuming current behavior in females is purely genetically based. But back on your side of the argument as before refrigeration, when males were expendable and females were not for making a new generation, when females often were taken by other tribes, when females had to have as many children as possible and thus start at puberty whatever age that occurred (12 in ancient world was norm but early developing girls were married younger, with modern life girls hit puberty more at 10) And thus female were always nursing or pregnant it made sense to have them do the work needed in camp and care for young children. So dolls are a primary female instinct and thus the vast majority of doll users will be female, but like any instinct some boys have that instinct and should be allowed to be into it. And a complete matriarchy was formed under the restrictions I just mentioned and this matriarchy still exist today. And many tribes had women warrior who often were as good or better in combat as clearly martial arts development allowed some women to use their physical flexibility and endurance advantages to over come the male advantage in dumb brute violence. After all the best male warriors oftener were not the biggest and strongest male so you can see how women at the top of the female bell curve could beat men for the same reasons the smaller weaker man was beating the stronger bigger men. The need for reproduction though did limit the woman warrior to a small part of the forces. Societies that did not allow women warriors strangely often put aside a similar number of women in chaste things like nuns.

@@RedRocket4000 You lose all credibility when you can't differentiate between your and you're.

​@@snitchcore8635 I think the core of the post was "representation matters", and, if you're going to get all pseudo-intellectual and preach about what science is, you may be interested in Googling any of the MANY studies that demonstrate that society does actively and passively discourage girls from entering STEM. Women have been in STEM since day one, despite being actively discouraged and erased. Without women, we wouldn't have a lot of the knowledge we do now. I mean, equations that are the foundation of physics, for example. Just think of how much better off we'd be if MORE women were encouraged to join STEM (do not combat this with "encourage boys to do STEM, too!" everyone should, but boys are not actively told not to, are not sexually harassed to the point of dropping their career, are not brought to a prestigious conference as presenters only to be followed by some Meninist saying women are too stupid for physics). Science benefits from more perspectives. Without a deaf woman, we wouldn't have sonification. Or maybe I'll just time-travel back to high-school and thank my vice principal for coming to chemistry class to say "girls don't belong in chemistry". I mean, obviously that wasn't meant to discourage anyone, right? Maybe listen to lived experiences before spouting off.

yup. those were awesomly cute

Dinosaur earrings?!?! For the first time in my life, I want to get my ears pierced.

@@IAmAlgolei I love her earrings! I wonder if they have raptor ones as well.

I came to watch then hope there are flat earther responses, I am both a sadist and a masochist as I like to punish myself.

Funny, I actually often skip them... I’m here for the great presentation of scientific facts / theories - no need to play the “cute girl card”

I LIKE THE WAY SHE BOUNCES WHEN SHE GETS EXCITED, SHOW ONE CAN BE SEXXY AND SMART ..

I think that’s the reason why I addicted to her...

Children are not in my future, but I do dearly hope someone's taking their kids to watch these and talk about them. As part of the discussion, getting girls to see this *could* be them, and they are no less cool for being smart, and getting the boys to see smart women. Same with YT "Physics Girl." I think the outtakes are an important part of seeing the very human side of what it means to be have a Phd in Astrophysics or any other area of STEM. Reality really doesn't give a damn for one's gender. Reality just is, and it is there to be discovered!

Andy Romaq Smith Absolutely. Movies and TV do a huge disservice to girls by portraying female scientists (and make ones) as boring “thinking machines” without humor. Dr. Becky is a real rôle model for girls who may be thinking of going into STEM. Sigh, if I was only 30 years younger... (And better looking... and smarter... :) )

​@@EtzEchad It seems that is what "sells" at this time. www.dailydot.com/parsec/black-widow-toy-ultron-motorcycle-replaced-captain-america/ still pisses me off.

I’m always coming up with words I like better than the technical jargon 😂

@@DrBecky Thank you. My trade has quite a bit of jargon specific to it. It makes it fast and easy to get your ideas across to others in the trade but it take some effort to speak so that the majority can understand what's being said.

Yeah! Lumpy, bumpy... However it was so amusing, and reminded me: "bubling, mumbling band of baboons" from one of Harry Potter movies that I lost the track of what was said just right after that. Had to rewind to get that part about the Pluto. I think, after such inspiring moment of amusement there should be some irrelevant moment of plateau for listeners to unwind, and get back into attention.

I see no Whovian has entered the conversation yet... Don't worry! I'll fix that for ya!! Wibbly wobbly timey whimey!

@@Avery_HikariBeat me to it.

Moon: 7.347 × 10^22 kilograms Earth: 5.972 X 10^24 kilograms So, if Dr. Becky did the math in her head, she was pretty quick and accurate. Poor Moon... :)

and to think god made that just for us

Don't forget that top, like whaaaat?? I couldn't take my eyes off it, I want like 7 so I can wear it everyday. Dr. Becky should set up some sponsored links for all the sweet geek chic she discovers.

@@GelidGanef 2nd'd. I need that shirt.

I love her brain and the words that come out. GLad she is sharing her passion.

@@cawfeedawg not just sharing it, but sharing it in a way that other people can easily understand and partake in it. it really comes out how cool the subject she's talking about is and that just adds to the interest

Watching on a small screen: what are the dots? Star fields?

Yes, the enthusiasm is key

The word _planet_ is often used in different ways, to mean any object that revolves around a star, or even around any other object. You need consider the context it appears in. The distinction between asteroids, moons, dwarf planets and planets isn't as important as the classification of stars, I think. The smaller objects are classified more based on where they are and how they formed.

So it would appear to be a very faint red variable star.

I can imagine a star bouncing a few times, maybe, but see no reason why an oscillation would be kept going.

Unless the oscillation was caused by proximity to a massive orbiting object that caused temporary modulation of local gravity!

The HOT JUPITERS!

@@superdave54811 Perfect! My wife and I keep waiting for her to start sporting a ring. She's too cute and too smart to stay single!

Well they didn't used to think people would be stupid enough to get it wrong. And earlier than that it was so clearly painted there was no need, even for the dumbest of possible humans.

@@markhackett2302 how about instead of shaming the audience for trying to learn, you acknowledge that someone who's uninformed but seeking knowledge doesn't have the knowledge yet to determine what's a real image, what's an edited image, and what's an artistic dramatization, especially when popular media and bad/oudated science communication muddies the waters? nobody was born knowing any of these things. we have to learn it, and part of learning in old, iterative, difficult, and sensationalized fields is dispelling misinformation.

Thanks! 🤗

LOL! Great idea!

It was cute.

LORD NO! GOD PLEASE NO! She is going to KILL US ALL! *CUTE.exe found* exeCUTE ...mass extinction level event initiated...

Waiting for meteor earrings. :)

Damn you’re right! That’ll teach me to leave in the random Spider-Man thoughts I have whilst filming

Since it is pure fantasy shouldn't that be better some like quadritium, or fourtium maybe? Ya know - 'unobtainum' kind of thing.

@@MrPzyt or Chinesium perhaps?

@@bulwinkle No. Because Chinesium is a real thing. I also follow Big Clive. ;-)

Came here to say this.

Etsy! Link is in the description 👍🥰

Dr. Becky should write an astrophysics children's book!

"Lumpy, bumply, bobbly kind of objects." When you spell it right, it's iambic pentameter. 4:50

That's almost like a Monty Python sketch line

but where to get that t-shirt?!?!

Etsy! Link in description 👍

That's a penis

It looks like two humanoid figures, but remember it's an artist's impression so are we surprised?

@@snitchcore8635 Bro, don't disrespect images taken by the Hubble Space Telescope by calling them artist impressions. A lot of hard work and real science went into capturing that actual image of the universe we live in. At most, some of the colors may have been enhanced to better represent the different gasses present, but that by no means deserves calling it an impression, which implies that it would be entirely fabricated.

Quite possibly. That object a quarter of a million miles from here frequently moons me.

@@azdgariarada THEY ARE ALL FABRICATED AND PHOTOSHOPPED.

Jeeez that is not what she said. A planemo is not a brown dwarf. Pay attention...

​@@blazer666del Read again, I didn't say the two terms were referring to the same thing, only that one sounded more refined than the other.

@@IveJustHadAPissIf that is your logic So does fluffy or velvet or pistachio sound better than brown dwarf....your reply makes no sense. Stop back peddling...

@@blazer666del Please don't talk about poor logic when you're the one making an erroneous inference from an implication you _think_ I've made. As for your examples, none of the three were in the video, nor bear any - even tenuous - relationship to each other in any context. Ultimately, I know what I meant. Secondly, you're not a a mind-reader. And thirdly, creating a specious argument on the basis of false equivalence - context vs no context - just makes you look incredibly belligerent and stupid.

@@IveJustHadAPiss lol my point exactly...obviously scarcasim is something you fail to grasp so I won't use it in future....

I think we should kick Scott manly out of the solar system. , Get on the Pluto bench ...

Mike Stevens, no I like his videos.

Not sure if intentionally mimicking Dr Who or just that British

@@darthmortus5702 I'm going with both :-)

Dr. Becky has a beautiful, alluring accent. Cheers, Russ

groan!

ChrisBrengel You’re welcome. Here all week....

As of May 29, 8:02 pm EDT, it's now 654 up to 0 down! Fred

Honestly, what if their theoretical Dark Matter and Dark Energy do not exist? Which is what I believe. There is no tangible evidence, none that has been sampled, none has been seen, does not interact or have a force of collision, yet has so much gravity? I say it is impossible for it to exist.

@@bosstowndynamics5488 , Effectively, your answer makes no sense and is not related to my statement. Photons are well established. Dark Matter is not. Gravity requires mass. Mass requires substance. This Dark Matter has no mass, as I stated, it does not interact with collision. I am stating, that expansion is a false claim also. If you understand time lapse photography, photography of deep field galaxies, you might understand that we would see that fast expansion that is described. That expansion would be seen as blurry images to streaks. Just as we have star trails with time lapse photography of our sky, we might be able to show this with a faster than light expansion. So, no, my insight on this is not weird. It is normal. Believing in something that is nothing is what is weird.

@@superdave54811 you got schooled. Now apologize.

@@flamethrowercandle2354 Nope. I did not. He brought up an example of something that collides with things and can be observed. Neutrinos are proven. Dark Matter is a fiction. Try again. Stupid to ask someone to apologize when you do not know the facts.

@@superdave54811 i think its stupid to say dark matter is fiction. It could be wrong but to state something as false without knowing all the facts is not smart. It is a theory and has never been presented as fact.

Jupiter is at the lower end of the planet/star scale ("...between 1 and 10 times the mass of Jupiter..." 11:47) and does, in fact, emit infra-red & microwave light; www.giantworlds.org/meetthegiants/seeing_the_unseen.php In some radio wavelengths it is brighter than the sun phys.org/news/2014-09-jupiter-radio-frequencies.html

HAHAHAHAHA

Thanks! 👍🤗

Dylan O'Donnell ~ your video 'On The Nature Of Daylight' by Max Richter [nov 23 2013] is a great video to . Brand new guitar , it's a beautiful rendition . I still keep it saved in favorites bar . Thank you . "Dylan O'Donnell everybody"

@@garyschraa7947 Hey thanks Gary! That's one of my fave old videos too... glad to hear someone else likes it too, cheers!

Dylan ~ You're welcome . It came out excellent I was really stuck on it for a while . (wont let it go either haha) Your wife's violin work came in so subtle . No , I thank you . Cheers

Not sure I'd call a gas giant "safe", but their satellites might be habitable if a little cold.

@@MarkTillotson Oh, I'm not talking about living on or colonizing them. I'm talking about using them as raw material. Scoop up what you need and move on. A gas giant is fuel and eventually metals for a very very long time, to power and build millions of habitats over eons of use. As far as I'm concerned, planets have 2 uses. Either they are luckily fit for a terraforming spot to grow new wild life and see what eventually evolves, or you strip them down for ingredients to build more spacefaring civilization. In our solar system alone, we have mercury, venus, all the asteroids and dwarf planets, and most of the moons, plus uranus itself as entirely disposable commodities. Chopping them up for redistribution just makes the rest of the system orbits more manageable. We can drop enough of the scraps onto mars to grow it into a planet worth terraforming, with a proper working core and so on. In my opinion, lumps of dead stuff floating through space have no ecology or conservation value. Life first!