1,594 words · auto-generated from the episode video
1:26:23the ordinary. The fact that there's three there is what all other background space looks like. It's about three things there. >> Yeah. Yeah. Exactly. So, if I were to just like look at a random patch in the sky, I'd see three things in that in that region. But if there's a dwarf galaxy there, I should see a hell of a lot more than just three. Yes. Right. They also simulated what it would look like if there was a galaxy there. And what they found was, you know, on the bottom you you see, okay, what if there's like this many? What if there's a dwarf galaxy that's this big? And they went all the way down to really small dwarf galaxy. >> Yes. >> And they said you would still be able to see something. Yes. >> Okay. If I do the simulation, I'd be able to see something. But I'm not. only
1:27:04>> we're seeing three in real life. >> If we simulate being very bright and very dim, >> we would see 25. >> Yeah, we'd see a lot more, >> but >> but we're seeing three. [laughter] >> So, it's like there is nothing there, guys. >> Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. >> There's nothing there. And and a lot of this is it's trying to like remove it's trying to one provide a repeatable path to say you can look at the same patch of sky and you can do the same math calculations and it's not a red dwarf this that and the third because we've done it and you can repeat it and you would get to the same >> it'd be hard to get time on the Hubble Space Telescope again to look at the same patch of sky but I mean there's groundbased telescope and things like that so you could do it and actually one
1:27:45of the one of the future things that you could do is maybe use the James Web Space Telescope and look for that same spatch patch of sky and get into even deeper stellar mass limit, right? Maybe maybe we're we're not seeing like brown dwarfs or like really cool stars, right? >> Yes. >> That's something that the James Web telescope could do. Okay, so the next thing they did was derive the halo mass >> of this thing. And this is actually kind of cool because usually when we want to derive the halo mass, the dark matter halo that's in a galaxy, what we look at is stars. We say, "Okay, how fast is the star moving around?" based on that I can calculate how much mass is inside the stellar orbit and then from that then I can extrapolate
1:28:25and say okay if there's much mass in the inside the stellar orbit and the mass function of a of a galactic halo kind of falls off like this then I can integrate over that entire volume and then I could say okay the total mass of the of the halo is something like this here I've got no stars >> yeah so how do you >> so how do I what what am I going to do right so so what they did was they went back to that hydrostatic equilibrium analogy and they said, "Okay, if I've got a gas temperature that's 10 4 and I and I and I do it, I can calculate the mass and the mass is somewhere close to 5 * 10 9 solar masses, which is very close to the 10 9.7 that they were showing earlier. Okay, so they calculate
1:29:08this critical mass and it's right at that threshold, which is again very good because that's the whole point of the right of of that theory of like there's this critical mass. Now we've actually found this critical mass and it matches up. >> Yes. >> And just and just to clarify that the point being it's this critical mass where it's it is um >> not going to end up with stars forming because things collapse inwardly and it's not going to end up with dissipation because things are exiting because it's too hot. It's just balanced and we're observationally seeing something that is at that line where there should be that balance >> which and and that's inevitably like it kind of is all pointing to this could be the relic >> because it's in it's in the the the
1:29:49Goldilocks zone for for this dark matter halo concept with no matter inside but still able to maintain structure without dissipating or or expanding. >> Exactly. >> Okay. Exactly. >> Okay. >> And so now the question is how unique is this thing? >> Right. Right. Right. How unique because you're saying this is a new celestial object. That's a tall order. Okay. So here what they've plotted is on the x-axis the stellar mass of the thing. >> Yes. >> And then on the y-axis is the hydrogen mass. How much hydrogen does it have? >> Most of the stuff like the dwarf galaxies, normal galaxies are way to the right. >> The top to the right. They're they're very big with a lot of hydrogen. >> Yeah. Because the point is, if you've got a lot of hydrogen, then usually
1:30:31you're going to have a bunch of stars. >> Mhm. [clears throat] >> Okay. If you've got a lot of intergalactic hydrogen, usually you got a bunch of stars. Here you don't have a lot of stars, >> but you got a bunch of hydrogen. That's why it's all the way to the left. And there's nothing like it. It is. It is. And for people who are listening, and I we really do encourage you if you have the opportunity to to watch the show when you can or even segments because the visuals really illustrate it. Th this is like an order of magnitude >> separated. >> Yeah. No, it's actually two orders of magnitude because the the the the axes are on a log scale. >> Ah, okay. >> Yeah. >> It's it is like so far away from anything else to to the point of is it unique? And it's like, well, it doesn't look at the look at look
1:31:12>> look, dude. It's it's like there's nothing around it, >> right? This is a new type of object and it could be this relic that they've been trying to look for. >> Yes. Yes. >> So, future observations, what are you going to do? James Webb Space Telescope obviously try to find even cooler stars and really rule out that there's no stars there. Yes. Um the other one that I thought was really cool interesting was the deep Halpha imaging, right? This is the idea of really honing in on that hydrogen line because if there's a bunch of hydrogen there >> and it's fluoresing, right? Because it's still interacting with all of the radiation that's in the universe. Then on the skin of that cloud,
1:31:52>> you should be able to see Halpha emission that's more prominent than let's say on the interior. So you should see like a ring around that cloud if you really stare at it for long enough, right? And from that you could maybe figure out the substructure of that cloud and how that hydrogen is like >> moving around let's say or like really clumped together >> because you would map the outside and because you then have you know ideas of how motion and things move in space and then you can sort of project in in simulations. Yeah. >> How would you end up with this? Yeah. >> Based on some of the composition. >> Exactly. Based on all the stuff that's around and you can you can figure out the ionization rate of that hydrogen and the gas density profile. Um, the other cool thing is there's a new array coming
1:32:34up, the Square Kilometer array, okay? It's going to be in Australia and it's going to be in South Africa. It's set to come online in 2027. This is an artist rendition. They haven't made these yet. Okay. But it's going to be massive. There's going to be a bunch. It's going to be VA on steroids. >> This is like way bigger than VA. >> Yeah. Yeah. It's going to be the very large array, but very, very, very [laughter] large array. The square kilometer array. and it's expected to detect thousands of these relics. So, if we can really hone in on how to find a relic using this one that we found, then we could transform the study of these into a statistical science rather than it's a one-off deal. >> This kind of maps conceptually onto the
1:33:15idea of the our previous story where the string theorist created the framework that then was very easily able to be applied to biology in a new category with new data. This is same same. Yeah, this is not different. Different. Yeah. But the idea that past work is helping to lower the barrier. >> Yeah. And that's always something that science does, right? Past work is always good for >> the future. >> We we we love to see Compounding Valley. This this was this was great. >> I thought this was very cool. >> This was very cool. And we are going to have our call out for those who have