The Earth and Moon are like identical twins, made up of the exact same materials — which is really strange, since no other celestial bodies we know of share this kind of chemical relationship. What's responsible for this special connection? Looking for an answer, planetary scientist and MacArthur "Genius" Sarah T. Stewart discovered a new kind of astronomical object — a synestia — and a new way to solve the mystery of the Moon's origin.
Check out more TED Talks:
The TED Talks channel features the best talks and performances from the TED Conference, where the world's leading thinkers and doers give the talk of their lives in 18 minutes (or less). Look for talks on Technology, Entertainment and Design — plus science, business, global issues, the arts and more.
Follow TED on Twitter:
Like TED on Facebook:
Subscribe to our channel:
Why is the video 1111 minutes long!?
+Andrea McKeehan Because it took that long?
Darude Sandstorm confirmed …
11 11 means that the illuminati and the freemasons are behind the flat Earth movement and because flat earthers are so dumb, the intelligent people must be eliminated. Flat earthers will be too easy to govern.
Ain’t sure if this is the true answer, but it’s still a pretty cool idea to talk about. Maybe not in science, but wild ideas are great for creativity.
It’s cool because no one has ever said anything like this before. If someone uneducated said “the Earth and Moon are twins” you (and everyone) would laugh. It sounds ridiculous! But for a woman with years of experience in this field, on top of years of research on this particular theory, AND a career to lose over even just saying this… I for one think that’s pretty fucking cool. She’s not some stoner in a basement talking about conspiracys theories.
+hard mode Well, from a creator’s (myself) perspective. Universe is still a myth, so … it’s cool because more findings (even the unsure ones) create more possibility. Creators can draw the materials from it.
+余博愷 lm not sure you are familiar with the definition or actually common uses of the word “cool”
+hard mode Fine, I go with something like… It’s fascinating. lol
+余博愷 yeah,much better. Thats how scienctist talk
Fascinating. It’s rare that I find myself thinking of the universe in a completely new light.
To be fair. You probably should be every couple weeks with everything we keep finding out.
Well hey with all these different theories and whatnot in place with the whole thing about when the moon was made/formed or whatever, whenever it was, *it* was the completely new light in the universe 😉
+Seraph X2 Yes. But most of them are too abstract, already suspected, or already dealt with in science fiction. So not entirely a mind blown moment. The idea of extreme spheroid planets and synestia, however, is evocative and makes perfect sense.
+joshuapr999 badumtish
It’s not that rare, most people don’t ever think about universe.
I wonder what the flat mooners have to say about this…
Jonathan Lebon that the moon is also flat
They gonna say GTFOH, the moon is a trapezoid
Nothing is real, we are a single bump on a vibration of a single musical note in an orchestral piece being played on a very old record player that always travels in one direction. Lets hope there is a second track.
Earth is the plate and the moon is the cheese. A plate shaped earth, how can you be so stupid? The sphere is so prevalent in our ecosystem
Lol, wtf is this nonsense? +Brian Fletcher
7:15 for the new theory
Rock n roll!!
Thanks
+b z lol … I started daydreaming like 5 times halfway through
Thank you.
Clever women are so worrying
a lot of this was filler, but the theory is interesting.
What is hidden from my view by my own assumptions,,,,so so true
Shouldn’t this be a new hypothesis instead of a new theory?
Exactly… theories are established… hypothesis aren’t…
I wish they didn’t trust computer models so much. Garbage in, garbage out. It’s an interesting hypothesis. But it does seem to me we can’t verify it until we see one in reality.
@Kenneth Lau Thou art nay ye useth thy original form of the language, does one not?
Even scientists use the word theory as laypeople do.
The most common description would be “model”. Actually, she studies many outcomes of giant impacts, combining laboratory experiments with numerical simulations. A talk available with slides on the Web is titled, “Growing Planets by Giant Impacts: A Diversity of Outcomes”. The giant impact hypothesis is of course the currently most accepted model, but what she has done is to study in detail the physics of it under a wide range of initial conditions, which form a continuum. The idea is to find which range of initial conditions reproduces the observed result in the simulations, applying results from experiments and physical theory, and then to determine the probability of that range having occurred.
Can’t wait to see what armchair scientists in the comments have to say about this actual scientist.
There was once a great scientist in an armchair, it had big wheels too
+SottoB love that for us
+Jaylyn Beck Yus
+Ori Desi She’s only a theoretical scientist….
This doesn’t seem a lot different than the typical Theia impact theory
True the only real difference is what happens between the impact (and to a degree before it) and the formation of the moon. Though it is a pretty important difference.
But that’s just a theory. A game theory! Oh, wait…
astronomers were tired at looking at the moon for 24 hours so they called it a day
7:15 if you want to skip all the “Foreplay” 🙂
Hehehe
+Adesh POZ Thanks ! The talk was still a waste of time, so I’ll spend that 7:15 min being appreciative of your comment.
And that is why I should read the comments before watching the video…
By the time the buildup (filler) was done I had lost interest. She then did not have enough time to explain her hypothesis so I do not have a good understanding of her point. Points need to be presented early and then explained, not the other way around. Sorry.
I’ll take ‘How to turn a 45 second talking point into an 11 minute Ted Talk’ for $1000.
Hugh Orr “… it took me two years to figure this out and I can explain it in 45 seconds…. I quit science.”
Ah!!! I am so happy there’s new theory. I was bored of the old one to be honest.
This is 85% generic filler. I’d expect this on a CW show not a Ted talk
Start at 7:17, you won’t miss anything. Watch 9:40-10:30 for summary presentation.
This is not really a new theory but the Modification of the Impact Theory.
So the Earth got smashed, had a baby form inside it and that baby was the moon