Glass is glass and glass can break

With that being said

Jerryrig reference

Big fan of jerry

*intense metal scraping sounds*

قلنا يا نار كون بردو و سلام

😂 Didn't expect to see this comment here...

MKBHD Continues: ....and I gotta say that its, its "Meahh", its way overpriced, can't fit in your pocket and yeah good luck if you drop it. XDXD

Phone reviewers are way overrated in the KZfaq science & tech community.

Linus: so I hear you need a storage server

Haha

Lol

._. 5 likes? You?

Wut 11 likes but t first comment

Underrated comment

I thought you'd say "I want that" with your goofy expression wtf bobby I'm unsubbing.

Hiiii ....😁😁😁

"Cryo-, um, I don't know the word you use." "Cool?"

Badum, tsh!

I was wondering about that myself. Those Chilean mountain tops get cold!

. .. they cool it artificially

They call them thermometers

That's kindof part of the point of her show. One of the goals of her show is to show women other women in STEM.

Jealous much?

And she still makes things like this 6:44 at least the left one is really into it. Not like she isn't smart... She just isn't THAT smart like the girl on left about physics

@solomon kane What is FAS?

@solomon kane So, you're a poisonous airhead troll who doesn't know what the results of FAS look like then. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fetal_alcohol_spectrum_disorder

Especially the initial glimpse @ 01:58

most women i have known look at mirrors that way

Isn't she ultimately looking at herself in the mirror.

Yeah, all that and brains too. I found one 22 years ago and married her.

@@gl1500ctv I found one 7 years ago and things didn't work out...at the time. So we're giving it another go 🤷‍♂️😁

She doesn't know how to say words

It’s very thick

www.lsst.org/about/tel-site/mirror #thetruthisoutthere also #lookingforcougars ... never thought about lens weight distortion, but I am familiar with term (not so much the physics of) "gravitational lensing"?

Yes, I am wondering too. apart from the potential of the weight to warp and change the surface area, I am curious about the pressures under the amount of weight potentially changing the density of the lens material (Gradients) sufficiently to create distortions. Uniform distribution of the pressure would be required and needed to be accounted for prior to creating the dimensions for the surface area. Just a bus driver myself, not sure if what I said is at all important.

Maybe they can do that in another video.

Yes but in a way, isn't every telescope and microscope for "things you can't see"? :)

There's this photo that someone took of our dark side of space, and you can literally see thousands of galaxies that we would've never seen before! I'll look for it and share it here. The best thing to look at isn't the know, but the unknown Founnd it www.space.com/amp/26118-colorful-hubble-telescope-photo-universe-evolution.html Click the image on the article, literally thousands of galaxies that we cannot see since the because our milky way is too bright That picture makes me feel so small yet so fulfilled

We're building one of the most advanced telescopes ever... What for? Oh, for things you can see.

That sounds useless, doesn't it?

Yeah for dark matter. It’s called dark because it doesn’t interact with light but we can see every minute effect dark matter does have on everything else. Think of seeing leaves blow in the wind. We can’t see the wind, but we know it’s there because we see the tree move :)

Accurate

@@KingJellyfishII Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), political and economic alliance of six Middle Eastern countries-Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Bahrain, and Oman.

"That incredibly smart science nerd girl millions listen to"

That's all you have to say about the amazing engineering and science that she presented? You have the intellect of a worm compared to her. Go back to drinking your moonshine you hick.

@@stevethea5250 That was one of the most random comments that I have ever seen 0_o

Yea forget ants, now we can do people. Well if this doesn't get me on any watch lists nothing will!

Fun fact: The US government used the radiation from nuclear tests to light their cigarettes several miles away. I could totally see them using this telescope for something similar.

@@vizionthing Nah You're okay Doing a lens so large is not a trivial thing Unless you are working with a lot of people and everybody knows exactly what they are doing

Yeah. Probably the light from a single match would be enough for that!

I actually worked at a telescope site where that was a major concern. The mirrors used could focus such a massive amount of light into such a small amount of space that if the doors behind which the mirrors were held were opened they could easily light an intern on fire.

Haha yep

Its a jungle out there....

Gigidi gigidi 🤭

science chicks are all cougars

but the population of cougars have changed...

Considering that the entire competition is a handful of telescopes with decades-old hardware and what's effectively a bunch of amateurs making a handful observations in a night, it's not difficult to generate more data than all of them combined.

Just boasting a bit. I mean, they do need to sell the project to get the funds and they have to stick to their guns afterward.

When your CCD has orders of magnitude more pixels than anything possible up til then, and you extrapolate for 10 years of uninterrupted survey going automatically. The thing is, that it is a survey: they are not looking for anything specific at that stage, just make a better map of everything. - Would have been interesting to know the amount of hard drives they will need for that... (- now I imagine a big “Elite Dangerous” update in 10 years^^ - or astronomers using “Google Universe” like tourists use “Google Earth / Maps”)

When you look at something like the Hubble and all of the incredible images it has produced, it is pretty impressive to think they are going to surpass everything it has ever done, in like a few months.

Michel Schweinsberg well it doesn’t “surpass everything” - the claim was for the amount of data, not the magnification. Telescopes are built for special purposes, and this one is a survey telescope - looking at larger patches of sky regularly (picturing the whole southern hemisphere every 3 days for 10 years iirc). - edit: deleted my wrong statement as I stand corrected.

Classic..

And that single lifting point ,,,

I worked at DOE we had alot of old forklifts some from 60s.. We handle nuke stuff also. All inspection and good.

It is much easier to lift an X Wing than a lens like this. This is covered in Lifting Stuff 203 of Jedi Training.

what are you trying to say? it sounds like you are just a massive bigot against forklifts..

Indeed. "Humungous "is another scientifically accepted unit of measure.

@@vk2ig yes. And both are among the most universely useful units of measure in fundamental science. ESPECIALLY if it is about the universe.

Zztuf well, I appreciate your comment

... Years of planning and hard work are about to become a reality. How would you feel if the crucial moment of the project comes to life?

@@linusaltmann2657 as an expert procrastinator I wouldn't know

Oh yes it's just cute how excited these small scientists are, squabbling about in their lab coats. That is a very patronising comment. Of course they're passionate. What they are passionate about isn't some small deal either. They are passionate about more important things than most people.

@Lilith Not what I'm saying

I thought the same thing. But as far as I know is not possible to see them from Earth with any telescope

Focusing would be the biggest issue. Telescopes are made to focus on big and far things

There is something like theoretical limit for resolution based on wavelength, distance and aperture. I am pretty sure, that the thing with golf ball or the moon lander is not possible. But I am not sure, may be somebody can tune in?

My back-of-the-napkin calculation of 320nm (UV wavelength) / 8.4m (primary diameter) x 360,000km (moon's perigee) yields a ballpark resolution of 14 meters. Online telescope resolution calculators yield slightly larger results (~24m). Wikipedia lists the angular resolution as 0.7 arc seconds (median seeing limit) and 0.2 arc seconds (pixel size). The latter yields a resolution of about 350m at moon distance. Seems way too broad to resolve a regulation golf ball.

I don't understand why people are saying it's not possible when the girl in the interview literally said they'd be able to see a golf ball at the same distance as the moon. If they will be able to see a golf ball at that distance and resolution, why wouldn't they be able to see *larger* objects *on* the moon?

Because reality is that astronomer physicists are loons. They don't actually contribute anything to society and most of the "facts" and "findings" aren't true they are just imagined possibilities for purpose of funding and belief system.

@@anotherguy1260 So, let me guess,.. One dumped you, huh?

@@yunclehead haha

F in the chat for all fellow engineers

​@@fridayimp7784 engineers always neglected feelsbadman

actually there's a lot of science to be done just to build most of these kinds of instruments. It's one of the biggest wins in basic research, and why experimental physicists think theoretical physicists are wankers ;)

@@fridayimp7784 F

"hey, we have this idea that theoretically works, and we've already hyped it, please build it on a tight schedule" ^ what I imagine engineering is like

hahaha nice!

God has the option of getting lasik surgery done

God is perfect and needs nothing. Repent and turn to Jesus to save your self for all of eternity.

Jay does god not have a sense of humor?

@@MrJhuang999 some people can't get lasik.

@@MrJhuang999 nah he does, it's all through the bible, but sometimes it's a bit hard to make out until you end up in the particular situations he puts you in

stop hitting on her in youtube comments she's not gonna see them loser

listen to the great advice from a champ like Ritvik and spam her pm instead

What's the difference between an engineer and an experimental physicist?

@@noahwilliams8996 One directly enables the other, whereas in the other direction the relationship is indirect.

@@VitruvianSasquatch But don't experimental physicists design and build experiments?

@@noahwilliams8996 My understanding was that a few of them design the experiments in collaboration with a few engineers, then a lot of engineers design the actual experimental devices, construction people build the whole thing, and experimental physicists come in at the end again to operate the device and interpret data. Often there are technicians at all stages.

Howard Wolowitz finaly seeing his day

Say only people who have no clue.

He should have added"...to idiots."

@@Wistful77 If you have to add that, I'm sorry, but the level of advancement you are thinking of is not sufficient.

If magic existed, and it would follow rules, then science would just study it and it would cease to be "magic".

Magic, especially "Vancian" magic, is practically studied (well, discussed and ruled at length) in RPG of DnD and fantasy literature. So you could say it does follow rules.

@bigbadb10 ecectly my point.

Not for me. It looks like a lie.

Surveillaince cameras in the '60-s had extreme size films made for them (for SR71 e.g.)

Joel Courcelles I think the Cougars she was referring to was the sort that wears Leopard skin print underwear......in the urban jungle...

I guess you could say that the things they will be looking for in the cosmos will be as rare as a cougar in the jungle...

They're widespread in South America even more than North America, so you will find plenty of cougars in the Amazon for instance. Though I think the name "puma" is more commonly used for the southern populations.

Joel Courcelles well, I usually see them at my local grocery store

Are you a fellow biologist like me?

*Guy Normus* the long Lost relative of *Hugh Mungus*

@@Avaruusrangeri, I hear he's married to Minnie Scule

@@JNCressey: and his brother? Mike Roscopic.

Thats what she said

Planet 9, here we come! ;-)

Ofc she does!! She's at the forefront of astronomy!! She has one of the most badass jobs in the world.

JWST is the only thing I've been amped up for enough to check out their website every few months, it's going to be so lit.

But now it is 2022 and the schedule has been delayed to december 2023 (probably for not wanting to call it 2024)...

That's from fortnite

Travis Scott good he's from fortnite

Yeah that was a great movie

@@withatreat184 fortnite was so popular that they actually made a real life Travis scott

David Lowery plenty of people would be embarrassed to own a Lambo, it’s not American after all...

@@beegum1 what are you talking about? the original comment is about cougars not existing in the jungle wtf?

@@beegum1 what are you even on about LOL ?

@@xxxy912 literally my thoughts XAAXAXAX i was re reading first comment to see if i missed something XD

@@beegum1 🤨

*( ͡o ͜ʖ ͡o)*

Ahaha

😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 👏👏👏👏👏👏👏 😎

She did say that!

I was in the pool!

She does have big eyes

shhh

Do you know where they where manufactured?

@@waltergrimm7161 It looks like they were designed by the LLNL, made by Ball Aerospace and Arizona Optical Systems and coated by Safran-Reosc

Absolutely!

It can get impure as the time goes on and there so many factors that can affect water when used as lenses..

@@biobabper123 if it does get impure we could replace it but i wonder what factors could affect it

Fifty years? I remember the first time I saw a one-megapixel astronomical image. In fifty years, the technology that makes the LSST look primitive will look primitive.

Most deep space images you see are "digitally enhanced" and the real image doesn't give us any real information on what's going on out there. Most of what you hear about deep space knowledge is made up fairy tales designed to get more funding. When I say "fairy tales" what I mean is that there's large gaps in-between data that we are able to collect and what we can learn from it and you won't get more funding if you're honest answer is "it's too blurry to make out what kind of landscape it has and the data is to inconsistent to use any modern technology to answer any questions about what we are seeing". If you don't believe me you can find it in fine print on NASA official website on any planet picture they post that isn't blurry and also isn't Mars.

@@anotherguy1260 Lemme guess. Flat-earther?

@@cormyat07 so anyone who you disagree with must be a flat earther? No I actually do some digging into things I hear. NASA website admits to digitally enhancing pictures and raw photos are usually blurred. NASA has also released concept pictures on articles dubbed "new images" but if you read the fine print then you know it's not an actual picture.

@@cormyat07 can you tell me what advancements Astronomers have contributed to the betterment of society? And yes I mean besides making telescopes.

That's going to take a lot of photoshopping to add in the footprints and everything we supposedly left on the moon. It was staged, right? LOL

I mean, you could, but from the sound of it, you'd be buying some very very expensive replacement sensors, since the light of visible stars can overcome the focal field.

@@jamesburleson1916 As you can see in the video, they have the sensors in normal light, so there is no way starlight will damage the sensors. What she's probably talking about is that the sensors saturate at low light levels.

being able to see something at all, versus being able to finely resolve its details is a whole 'nother story.

I doubt it will ever be aimed at the moon. They're after bigger game. Or rather, smaller game.

Yeah, and Derek from Veritassium too.

More data does not meanbetter in every way. This telescope will produces lots of data, because it takes an image every few minutes with the largest CCD ever built (about 3000 megapixels). This is very usefull for its intended purpose i.e. detecting changes in in the entire visible sky by imaging all of it every 3 days. However most other telescopes perform much more specialized tasks to which the LSST would be entirely useless. USing your example of the Black hole event horizon picture: The minimum resolvable angle (i.e. how small is the smallest thing you can see) of this telescope is not actually particularly impressive compared to other single telescopes or as you mentioned multiple of (in the examples case Radio) telescopes working together. Side note: this telescope also does not perform spectroscopic work beyond a few color filters. Most of modern astro physics is based on Spectoscopy rather than imaging. None of which is to say that this will not be an impressive and usefull instrument, well outdoing anything in its *class*.

Projects like that collect a lot of data about a very, very tiny area. This is collecting data on the entire visible sky. It's like staring at one thing under a microscope versus going up on a mountain and seeing all the way to the horizon. But also the precise definition she's using to quantify an amount of data is kind of ambiguous. And the EHT was a collection of radio telescopes, this is optical.

I am used to hearing "sharpest" when lenses are discussed.

or if you are not sure "most crisp"

@@factChecker01 crispest image, sharpest focus. However, I've heard "sharpest image" in more recent years too. Language changes.

Jesus, dude 😂

All THIS and BRAINS too!! thump, thump goes my heart

If you are an audiophile, try making your own speakers, design and build them from scratch. A challenge but something you will love if you are an audiophile.

Bruna Nqm make sure you spell lenses right then

@@momos2790 lol I don't need to bc we don't speak English in my country

👍🏻😁

Bruna Nqm did you pass?

@@Maxumized 9/10 :)

you can stay for Cougars but the Lenses are going to the Southern Hemisphere where they're called Pumas(actual species name). .. so I suppose you'll be lonely.

Physics girl is a cougar. Yumummmmmm

Yeah Michelle

When you mix astronomy and physicists that's actually all you get. What we factually know and what you have heard about our findings in space are so far apart you probably wouldn't want to believe it.

Your mums. S a cool children’s

We all have childlike curiosity , you just grew out of yours.

@@missionpupa Nah I'm getting a physics degree In every experimental physics class I become a child

Children**

I have been wondering what the massive rockets Elon Musk is planning to build will do for the space telescope situation. Surely we will get something massive up there which will dwarf anything else we have even planned atm

The Webb telescope will be that powerful, if not even more so.

Achoo! Oops sorry!

By the way, here's a 20 million dollar bill.

I know of someone who accidentally dropped a spanner onto the primary mirror of a 2.3m telescope once ...

For the space vampires of course

Chilapa of the Amazons mirrors are more for specific, narrow ranges and this is for wider field.

Thats just a flattener lens for that giant mirror telescope. Not "a camera lens". This is not a clickbait video because the girl don't know whats she is talking about.

It is a mirror telescope. But you need something to capture the image from the telescope no? This is the lens for the camera doing that

@@maheepsingh3612 No you don't need anything else. Main mirror of that telescope works same way like lens in camera lens. Just google how mirror telescope works. You can take pictures with that telescope without those lenses. Lenses in this video just makes the picture better than without. And I bet they aren't biggest lenses in the world.

Hence the Chilean mountaintop location….

Mountain tops helps. But the larger the mirror, the more it will average out atmospheric distortion.

No x) The Moon is WAAAAY too bright for that telescope 😅😅 even the new Moon is probably brighter (from Earthshine) than most things it wants to be looking at :D

@@EcceJack I assume they can control exposure time, so that shouldn't be a problem.

@@StraightOuttaJarhois There is a formula for aperture vs. solving power, and this is not big enough. Hower you can see the shadow of the bottom of the lander with the legs with a big amatuer telescope, like 18" or so.

@@StraightOuttaJarhois I think with concentrating a tennis Court's worth of light, you have quite a bit of heat at that point if not pointed at the void of space.

@@Tore_Lund but they can see a golf ball at that distance apparently? The resolving power is a function of the main mirror (the one that had to just fit through the tunnel) but I can't be bothered to find the formula and work it out. 😜