March 1, 2015 11:33:58
March 24, 2015 13:35:38
Jeff Dzado Wait...I thought the closer you are to the planet, the faster you had to move to keep missing it. You're saying the velocity of the Soyuz is SLOWER than the velocity of the ISS? I fully understand that the Soyuz is orbiting Earth more quickly and 'catching up' to the ISS.
March 24, 2015 17:45:46 · Reply
Paul Spooner Awesome video! Just one problem though. At 7:34, the visual annotations mention that Soyuz is moving slower, but orbiting faster. But in actuality, the Soyuz is both moving and orbiting faster, and the ISS is both moving and orbiting slower. Then at 9:02 you make the same mistake, only in the voice-over.
March 24, 2015 17:50:49 · Reply
Trevor Madge I think he said it correctly... Soyuz is moving slower at about 17,000 miles per hour and the ISS is moving at about 17,500 m/h. But, because Soyuz is closer to the earth, the distance it needs to travel to go around once is smaller than that of the ISS, so it gets around it faster.... Soyuz is moving slower but orbiting faster.
March 24, 2015 19:54:34 · Reply
Paul Spooner Your numbers must be off. If both orbits are circular around the same body, then the smaller one will have the higher velocity.
March 24, 2015 19:57:06 · Reply
Trevor Madge If both are orbiting at the same speed (1 "lap" every 90 minutes) than the one with the larger orbit would be travelling faster because it needs to go farther. Just because they're orbiting the same body doesn't necessarily mean one is faster than the other. In this case, they said that Soyuz is travelling around 17,000 m/h and orbits in 86 minutes, and the IIS is travelling around 17,500 m/h and orbits in 90 minutes.
March 24, 2015 20:06:47 · Reply
Paul Spooner You have understand geometry correctly, but misunderstand orbital mechanics. Bodies simply can not orbit at whatever velocity they like.
March 24, 2015 20:08:35 · Reply
Trevor Madge You're probably right that my understanding of orbital mechanics is a little off. I decided to do a little reading and I've been looking at the equations here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular_orbit If I understand them correctly, as the radius increases, velocity decreases and orbital period increases. That seems to explain why the ISS is taking longer to travel around the earth, but it doesn't explain why it's travelling faster. Maybe it has to do with the difference in mass between the Soyuz and the ISS? That's the only other variable in those equations. A larger mass would require a higher velocity.
March 25, 2015 14:59:09 · Reply
Nils R Grotnes Galileo disagrees...
April 20, 2015 22:04:44 · Reply
Evan Hagerty I would disagree with you Paul;what the Astronaut said made sense, although it was a bit confusingly put. One way to look at it through the simplified equation (V^2)/r=9.81m/s^2, which shows that as the radius of orbit increases, the linear velocity of the orbiter increases. Another perspective is that in order to increase the radius of circular orbit the ship must fire a rocket (twice) with the force of this acting in the same direction as the velocity of the ship. The first burn increases kinetic energy, then this is "traded" for gravitational potential energy as the rocket orbits to it's slowest, farthest out point, and then the kinetic energy is increased once again until the orbit is circular. The confusing part is that while increasing the radius of orbit leads to a higher linear velocity, it leads to a longer orbital period. Sorry if I've misunderstood your perspective on this. I found the video fascinating, and I can tell you did too, so cheers!
March 25, 2015 02:49:05 · Reply
April 1, 2015 06:51:34
Austin Burnham At the end my wife said, "Oh good they sleep on the right sides of the bed." (That means the same side of the bed that we sleep on) Another great video; you have a wonderful family.
April 2, 2015 03:52:49 · Reply
Sergio I Montserrat S While I do like babies, I didn't sign as patron here to watch them. So, I've not seen this vid. But what I see above bothers me: "NOTE: THE DOLLAR VALUE SHOWN ON THIS PATREON PAGE IS WRONG. THE ACTUAL DONATED MOUNT IS MUCH LOWER THAN THIS!" How are we supposed to consider this declaration as? What's its purpose? Of course, nobody would know for certain unless they were explained the charging process and the commissions that money passes through, diminishing from the grand total given in the left of this page. I do know roughly how much is taken from the money because a different creator used to sumarize his Patreon income in his blog. And the money that both the charging agency and the Patreon site take is not outrageous. Expressed my displeassure for your note, Justin, I'd now like to ask you: What is your purpose in writing that note? What is your intent?
April 5, 2015 05:57:24 · Reply
Jedidiah Francis Thanks for sharing Destin.
April 6, 2015 17:22:32 · Reply
April 25, 2015 02:05:28
Sally Haylock safe Travels,and Blessed Journeys
April 27, 2015 14:22:36 · Reply
Fox Sawyer i ride my biiiiicycle
April 27, 2015 15:56:46 · Reply
Charles Bradshaw I found one of these bikes in a theme park in New Zealand ...I found bang-bang control worked well(2/3 meters after a day's practice), but if i went too long without a switch my brain flipped to my regular bike linear controller. Results were ... humerous. Thanks for sharing !!!
May 4, 2015 08:18:53 · Reply
April 30, 2015 04:46:02
Nick Vahalik Really, really cool. This is a GREAT way of visualizing something that radio operators have to consider every day: VSWR (Voltage Standing Wave Ratio). With VSWR you're dealing with RF frequencies that are reflected back at a transmitter due to an impedance mismatch on an antenna at the end of a feed line. So instead of the power that should be going to your antenna that power (or some portion of it) comes right back at you, creating standing waves on the feed line like you see here in the video. Since AC power (really any frequency) can be shown as a vector, you can "do math" on them. In this scenario, you've got nulls in between two opposing vectors that are *in phase* and the peaks and valleys are added together and grow accordingly. In the radio world, you're dealing with kilo-volts being sent down a coax feed line and if you send down a kilovolt and let's say, 70% of that power is reflected back to you in-phase, those spikes can exceed the voltage rating of a cable. So instead of a drop of water exploding as in your video, this voltage spike can burn through your coax, cause fires, damage equipment, and otherwise ruin your day.
April 30, 2015 14:32:36 · Reply
Dr. Richard Beekman ENJOYED IT. KEEP UP GREAT WORK!
May 1, 2015 01:58:17 · Reply
Weatherlawyer I have a difficult one for you I can't prove this is not just coincidence but when a weather system steps off the Eastern coast of North America A significant earthquake occurs in the Aleutians. This has a reciprocal that before a weather system arises a seiche is initiated in the ocean in which the next tropical storm will occur. The epicentre will be in the region where the storm peaks and lie on the storm track. As proof of this two or three related earthquakes always occur with the demise and a blocking Low will contain two or three parallel fronts. I only know for sure they occur with the North Atlantic but am pretty sure they do the same with the North Pacific. Could you twist the arm of some seismologist to see if they can follow this idea with whatever is required.
June 1, 2015 12:03:21 · Reply
May 8, 2015 21:59:25
Travis This video is Awesome! Started watching a couple of weeks ago after I saw the Backwards bike video. These 2 videos have me hooked and I really just want to say thanks for everything you do. I would also like to agree with Levi on everything he said. First time I got chill like that in awhile. Thanks
May 14, 2015 20:00:11 · Reply
Weatherlawyer Your man needs to take lessons in communication techniques.
June 1, 2015 18:35:36 · Reply
May 28, 2015 18:52:13
Geoffrey Lee That is incredible. Gives me so much more respect for archers.
May 28, 2015 21:32:48 · Reply
A. Ron Carmichael This is MOSTLY correct. The failure to consider the lateral sliding of the bowstring OFF OF THE FINGERS, which determines which way the arrow is going to flex, and which way the back end of the arrow is going to MOVE, actually altering the initial trajectory (direction of travel) of the point of the arrow, is EVERYTHING about determining whether archer's paradox exists or not. With the compound bow demonstrated, the archer uses a mechanical release that completely ELIMINATES the lateral slide, thus at no point in the arrow release is the arrow aimed OFF of the target as it is when an archer is holding the string with fingers. The paradox is not that the arrow does not "hit" the riser, the paradox is that the arrow IS NEVER POINTED AT THE TARGET BY THE ARCHER WHEN AIMING through a sight. As far as "being smart enough to know which way the nodes are flexing so you can hit the aspirin, just move the archer back 4 feet, changing the distance so he (one of the world's most distinguished and excellent demonstration archers) has to completely readjust his aim. He can do it but it will take him some shots to home back in. THAT IS THE PARADOX: NOT THAT THE ARROW DOESN'T HIT THE RISER/BOW, BUT THAT THE ARROW SHOT IS STARTED OUT AIMED COMPLETELY TO THE SIDE OF THE TARGET, YET STRING SIDESLIP (from the fingertips) CAUSES IT TO BE POINTED DURING A FEW MILLISECONDS DIRECTLY AT THE TARGET. THAT is the paradox. That the shaft flexes in nodal behavior so that the nock and vanes avoid hitting the bow (which his large feathers do NOT do) is a function of TUNING, selecting the right spine as it relates to the archer's release technique, the weight of the bow, the point weight, even the nature of the limbs of the bow and the surface of the archer's finger tab.
May 30, 2015 02:38:23 · Reply
Smarter Every Day At 2:45 Byron says "The first thing that happens is the arrow bends from the pressure of the string". He shows a lateral motion while explaining this.
June 1, 2015 03:42:04 · Reply
A. Ron Carmichael oops, sorry - I just noticed, I am citation (9) in the wiki references he posted, which refers to something I first posted on a website I maintain, in 2001. http://www.texasarchery.org for more info (and hundreds of photo examples of archers' releases). Highspeed video examples on the TSAA facebook page as well, I think... 600fps and 1200fps examples. Ron
May 30, 2015 02:50:32 · Reply
June 3, 2015 17:42:52
John Markus Add this to your site: document.getElementsByTagName('iframe')[0].src+='&autoplay=1';document.getElementsByTagName('iframe')[1].src+='&autoplay=1'; If you have the video already preloaded once, it should sync.
June 5, 2015 00:26:23 · Reply
Adam Ingle Amazing presentation! The Scientific Method CAN work on YouTube! HA!
June 12, 2015 17:08:07 · Reply
Tibor Schiemann Guys, I know my comment is a bit late, but this rocked! Just the idea of producing two perfectly synced videos from both hemispheres is awesome, not even mentioning the perfect execution or fun you always manage to convey to your audience. I'm glad I'm supporting you - keep up the great work!
June 19, 2015 10:46:55 · Reply
July 1, 2015 04:50:57
Maarten Daalder What is also amazing is that the Dragon capsule was sending telemetry after the breakup. It was suggested that if it had been the manned Dragon 2 capsule on top of the Falcon the humans inside could have opened the parachute and survive the explosion.
July 1, 2015 16:39:09 · Reply
Adam Ingle Fantastic video and insight, Destin. Thank you!
July 2, 2015 16:43:57 · Reply
August 1, 2015 04:05:54
September 1, 2015 04:50:04
Earl D Yates Thanks Destin! While I hope that these Scientists are able to find a way to stop the spread of this disease, there are some far reaching implications. This is the first time that I've ever heard of a cancer that is contagious. If a strain of cancer can become communicable among Tasmanian Devils, there is a possibility that some strain of cancer could mutate and become contagious between humans. So, helping to find a cure for these rare critters may in turn, help to prevent a similar outbreak among the human species.
September 3, 2015 21:33:43 · Reply
September 10, 2015 20:05:11
Brian Antonelli Awesome video, thanks Destin! Call me crazy, but I would love to see a video just on how you produced the radar. :)
September 15, 2015 16:01:41 · Reply
Jason VandenBerghe This was AWESOME. And, it might seem like a little thing, but thanks for the Patreon shout-out. Somehow made it real that we're all doing this. :P
September 22, 2015 10:04:24 · Reply
Andre Alforque Thanks for this tour! Definitely helps put the station into perspective.
September 22, 2015 23:53:27 · Reply
October 1, 2015 05:00:56
i❤computers Already my fav epi!!! I say that cause POVs were a big thing among the maker community. Heck, we even added them to the spoke of our bikes (www.ladyada.net/make/spokepov). Seeing that moving average visualized and graphed and applying a POV video effect on that high-speed footage finally brought to light the illusion makers were exploiting all these years :D
October 1, 2015 11:22:24 · Reply
Kyle Sayers Super awesome video! What I love about Destin is that he's learning with us. It's not a lecture that glosses over a bunch of stuff, but a real human who gets excited, just like we do. Keep doing what you do :)
October 2, 2015 02:18:00 · Reply
View all 12 comments
Marius Wlassak perfect
May 10, 2015 22:50:21 · Reply
JMJ Reminds me of the sling shot guy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ieWrWLjii0
May 15, 2015 15:15:10 · Reply
Zagerais hi I Zagerais artist Illustrator I work artam girls and others you can hold on me patreon.com/zagerais I hope you like it :3.
July 7, 2015 15:05:10 · Reply