Will the Next Space Telescopes Unravel Current Physics?

Your team just added its 67th AI tool and also your 67th security blind spot. The good news, the Vantor agent works like a GRC engineer in the background, finding every app your team uses, scoring the risk and drafting fixes for you. Vantor is the platform used by over 16,000 fast-moving companies like Synthesia, Nando's and Granola, who are shaping the future with AI and staying ahead of AI risk. Get started at Vantor.com At NatWest, we know the power of a family that's got you back. From the small stuff, thanks mom, to the buying your first home stuff. With our new NatWest family backed mortgage, you can use a family member's income to increase how much you could borrow and own your new home completely in your name. Search NatWest family backed mortgage, NatWest. Tomorrow begins today. Exclusions and eligibility criteria apply. Your home may be repossessed if you do not keep up with repayments on your mortgage. Thank you all so much for being here at our wedding. I can't believe I get to spend the rest of my life with a woman of my dreams. Speaking of dreams, have you ever dreamed of tasting all the colours of the rainbow? Because that is exactly what you get with Skittles. Five bold fruit flavours in every pack. Lemon, orange, lime, strawberry and black currant. They're chewy, they're colourful, they're perfect. Just like my wife. So thank you for coming and remember to buy Skittles. Do you want to say that again Becky? I just realised I'm not Rosemary T. Lovely! There's a real possibility that Roman tells us our standard model of evolution of the universe is very, very wrong. We've discovered around 6,000 exoplanets to date, but what we haven't done much of is actually look at what they're made of. Hello, welcome to the supermassive podcast from the Royal Astronomical Society with me, science journalist Izzy Clark and astrophysicist Mrs Dr Becky Smithers. Congratulations! Thank you, I got married like 10 days ago and I'm still on a high. But today it's all about the next generation of space telescopes. I think we say it a lot, but I feel like we're living in a really exciting time for astronomy. In terms of observational astronomy, there seems to be so many ambitious missions and observatories on the horizon. Yeah, definitely. I mean, maybe everyone says this if you lived through Hubble launching, you're like, oh, this seems like it's a great time. It's so ambitious and things. And we know JNBS T was a great time and so ambitious. But it does feel like we're coming to the end of the lifetime or have already come to the end of a lifetime of the first generation of space telescopes. And now we're thinking, okay, that was great, but what can we do better? What do we need to still answer the remaining science questions? And that's where a lot of the missions from ESA and NASA are coming from at the minute. And it does just feel like there's one this year and then there's like a few next year and then there's the 2030s and then oh, we got those look forward to it. In the late 2030s and early 40s, it just feels like the roadmap at the minute for space telescopes is just a journey I want to go on. We're being spoiled and I'm here for it. And Dr Robert Massey, the deputy director of the Royal Astronomical Society is obviously here as well. So this episode is about that next generation of space telescopes. But can you give us a whistle stop tour of the space telescopes that has shaped our understanding of the universe so far? No, it's impossible. There are simply so many. I think there are literally dozens of telescopes that have been launched into space if you look at all the different wavelengths they've covered. So they started properly about 60 years ago with the first Soviet satellite that was set up in 1965 to detect cosmic rays proton one or something like that. But you could also argue that we had kind of space telescopes even as long ago as the 1940s when we had sounding rockets that will be only very briefly would fire detectors above the atmosphere and did things like find X-rays from the sun. So I guess when that happened, people realized there was a real advantage in looking for the wavelengths that don't reach the ground. So X-rays, gamma rays, a lot of ultraviolet, mid-infrared light, none of that gets through the Earth's atmosphere. So as a result, it's a really good idea to put things in space to try and detect them. And it would have been really odd, I guess, imagining that stars and galaxies and things like black holes would not be emitting across the whole spectrum. So there was a real drive to get things into space as a result. And you look at things like X-ray telescopes that went from sort of detecting very blocky areas of emission on the sky to producing really precise maps. And I remember when Chandra was launched in the late 1990s and XMM Newton, and suddenly you had these really exquisite images of objects, comparable to the ones you get from telescopes on the ground. And so astronomers could do comparable maps. They could sit there and they could say, this is what this object looks like in X-rays. This is what it's like in infrared. This is what it's like in visible light. And all of that stuff became possible with space observatories. And then, of course, the reason that, I guess, the telescopes that most of us are familiar with in space, the most famous one for many years, perhaps not the case now, was the Hubble Space Telescope, which has been operating since 1990. So in 1993, after it was fixed, because it was when it was initially launched, the mirror was the wrong shape. And the idea for that dates right back to the 1920s with Herman von Oberth. There was a rocket pioneer and Lyman Spitzer in the 1940s who worked for NASA and took it more seriously and saw it to completion. And it's, you know, Hubble really did define the zeitgeist of astronomical imaging for a long time. So all these things that people would have, these amazing pictures of planets, galaxies, basically everything. And of course, famously, you know, the deep and ultra-deep fields that gave us that visible understanding of how the universe have changed. It's funny, like how you say in the zeitgeist, though, like, if people picture space, they even picture stars looking like they do with the Hubble Space Telescope. Like, the very specific, like, pattern that you get of how the light bleeds from a very bright object, like that four-pointed sort of diffraction spike, is what people think of when they think of a star now, right? And that's because of the shape of Hubble. Exactly. It's Hubble's signature and it's what our mental images are, like, think of a picture of space. And that's what you go to. And it's only because it's what we've seen. So thank you, Hubble, I mean. Yeah. But also, thank you to, like, the team at Space Telescope who were like, what color, when we color these images, do we color them? You know, like, the blue wavelength that we detect through a filter has to be colored a specific shade of blue in the images. So so much of how we visualize space as well is down to those decisions as well as not just what would look good, but what is human readable and what, like, people who are colorblind could also interpret and all those kind of things. Like, I get goosebumps. I think also there was a real effort to make those images very publicly available, you know, the enormous number of things, the Hubble Heritage Project as well, where they said, well, what do the, what would these galaxies look like if you turned up the brightness and kept the color real? You know, in practice, if you were close to a big galaxy, it would still look quite faint, the surface brightness, but but they took that. And I think that's what captured people's imagination. So making Saturn, for example, looked like it does, you know, that was a really inspired thing to do, even when they'd understood that, you know, that wasn't necessarily what you do to maximize scientific content. Sometimes it was good to have a public image as well. But then of course, we've now got JWST, the James Weber Space Telescope, you know, amazing mid-infrared images looking inside Nebulae, Clasigas and girls, looking at the earliest galaxies in the universe and getting spectra of planets around other stars. And what was it? 344 single points of failure overcame. Oh, don't remind me. A complete triumph, you know. The nerves. Yeah, exactly. The nerves. And then you could talk about Euclid, you know, observing galaxies over the third of the sky, or Kepler that discovered thousands of exoplanets. But there is not time. So I'll stop there. See, it's so exciting. I'm now wondering if, you know how like, you could tell the difference between a millennial and a Gen Z by asking them to pretend that they're on the phone and to see what they do, like, do they hold out the thumb and little finger, or do they just like hold a claw to their ear? It'll be like, draw a star on it and be like, do you draw the Hubble diffraction spike, or do you draw the JWST diffraction spike? Can you be able to tell how old people are? You know, what about the Gen X's? I mean, you know, I'm just going to, yes, just speaking out of Gen X's here. Yes, yeah, but I've got nothing for you, sorry. Points of light, points of light. See, I mean, but even that, just getting onto JWST, Euclid, that's, it's so exciting. But can we take it back a bit? Because what can space telescopes do that ground-based telescopes can't? The, the, the main thing they can do, well, there's two things, right? One is, they can detect wavelengths that don't reach the ground. So it's good for us that gamma rays, hard ultraviolet, doesn't reach the ground, is bad for us to have that radiation come from space. X-rays, exactly. An infrared is blocked as well. So, or a lot of infrared anyway. So one thing you do by putting a telescope in space is you have unfettered access to those wavelengths. You can see the whole of the spectrum provided you have the telescopes then to detect it. And the other thing you can do is to escape the crud of the Earth's atmosphere. So we built telescopes high on mountains to be above as much of that as we can on Hawaii or in the Atacama Desert in Chile, these high and dry sites where the air is really stable. But even better than that is being above the atmosphere. So that is maybe 10 times as expensive. Putting JWST in orbit is, you know, many, many times as expensive as even building the European Large Telescope or the extremely large telescopes is called, is called now. But if you get it right, then the only limitation is your optics. And so you can, you can escape all those things that anybody looking through a telescope on the ground is familiar with. That blurring clouds as well, frankly, you know, you're not going to get clouds and rain in space. That's a really big plus. And that's why we do it. Okay. Do you think that's what they like put on the 1970s pitch for Hubble? Well, you know, get clouds and rain in space. Sold! Now, if you've listened to this podcast for a while, you'll have heard us get rather excited about a space telescope that is launching later this year. The Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope, which NASA says will settle essential questions in the areas of dark energy, exoplanets and infrared astrophysics. So how will it do that? I spoke with scientist Dr. Tom Barkley from the Roman Space Telescope team. The Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope, which we call Roman, is NASA's next flagship observatory. And flagship means the biggest things we do at NASA. The idea is that we are taking the next step in our knowledge of the universe. And so we have done these with telescopes like the Hubble Space Telescope or the James Webb Space Telescope. Next up is the Roman Space Telescope launching this year. August 30th is our plan. But fall of this year is when we're expected to go up. And our goal is to survey the sky very fast and very efficiently and in a way that's never been done before. And so how is Roman going to do that exactly? So we have a large telescope. We're about the size of a school bus. If you look at us, we don't look all that different from the Hubble Space Telescope. With a similar size mirror, we collect light at similar wavelengths to Hubble, visible and in the infrared. But what we do that these previous generations of telescopes doesn't do is that we can look a lot of the sky all at once. And we can move from one patch of the sky to the next patch of the sky very, very efficiently. That is, we can slew the telescope and we can stop on a dime and take images. And so that means that if we're talking about looking at large areas of the sky, we're about a thousand times faster at doing that than the Hubble Space Telescope. So that isn't just that we're a bit better. We're designed to do this. This is our primary goal. We're a survey telescope. What a survey is, is you want to look at a lot of the sky. You want to look at a lot of objects and you want to determine how common they are and how frequent they are. Yeah. And so what's on board? How does Roman do that? And what is it about that that takes, as you said, our knowledge to that next level? We're equipped with two instruments. Our primary wide field instrument is the one I'm kind of focusing on here. Our wide field instrument goal is to look in the infrared. It's the biggest infrared camera we've ever built. We have 18 detectors to survey the sky here. What we're doing is looking at huge numbers of objects and also looking for rare objects by looking at large parts of the sky very, very deep with extremely crisp image quality. You can both find huge numbers of objects like millions of galaxies, billions of stars, but you can also find extremely rare things that are happening such as things we call microlending events. It's just so exciting knowing what the possibilities are with Roman. What has it taken to get to this point? Why do we need a telescope like this? Yeah. And so we don't do these things likely. We've done a lot of work with previous telescopes looking at large portions of the sky, but when we're trying to do big statistics, we are just simply limited by how much of the sky we can look at and how quick we can look and how deeply we can look. We want to understand the past, the present, and the future of our universe, but to do that, we need huge statistics. And by having relatively narrow fields of view such as we've had on say Hubble and Web, there are more snapshot surveys rather than big panoramas. We're limited on those statistics. Those observatories are extremely powerful, extremely useful, and can do amazing things, but we're designed to do something different. And so just how big are those surveys? The amount of sky that we look at in a single snapshot is about 100 times bigger than Hubble, but because we can survey efficiently, we're going to be doing some of our surveys that look at five to 10% of all the sky. We're going to be doing a survey of our own galaxy that within a month of observations create the biggest astronomical catalogue ever created. Oh my gosh. I mean, that is kind of nuts. That's insane. Yeah, we're in a different space here in terms of data, and it's truly vast. Every day we're bringing down to the ground about one and a half terabytes of data. So more than, I don't know, my laptop's hard drive has every single day from relatively far away, a million miles away from Earth. And then we're processing that data almost straight away, making that data available to all the scientists in the world who want access to this data and allow them to do their science. And obviously, once you do your science, this data volume balloons, in just two weeks of using Roman, our data archive will be bigger than the entire Hubble 30 year data archive. That's how much data we're collecting. Yikes. And I think the fact that you're from the gates saying, get a tackle areas of dark energy, exoplanets and infrared astrophysics, it's like, okay, they are not messing around with this. For you, what are you most excited about with all of this? So my science background is exoplanets. I previously worked on the Kepler space telescope. What Kepler was able to do is teach us that there are more planets in our galaxy than there are stars. Most stars have a planet. But what we don't know, and where we kind of stopped in our kind of knowledge gain is really understanding what the frequency of planets is like in orbits beyond Earth. Right? If you think what Kepler and other projects have done is teach us the frequency of planets out about the orbit of Earth around other stars. But what we don't know is beyond that. And if you think about our own solar system, what defines our solar system other than the Sun really is the giant planets, Jupiter. Our whole system is defined from the very early days by Jupiter. We think we got a lot of our water on Earth because of Jupiter, right? Jupiter had this huge effect on the early solar system. If we want to understand planets, perhaps planets and habitable zones around other stars, we have to understand those planets, but also the environment they're in. And that is learning about the frequency of giant planets, the one of things like out there in the kind of colder regions. And Roman, one of its key projects is to understand the frequency of planets like Jupiter on Jupiter, like orbits, really fill in this gap that we have in our understanding of what other planetary systems are like. For me, that within a relatively short amount of time, we're going from really little understanding of that part of exoplanet parameter space to just answering that question and being able to know the answer. And then another big scientific goal is to understand the evolution of our universe. So can you tell us more about that? This is really where the various space telescopes and their own unique capabilities come into play. So Webb looks really deep. It looks at some of the oldest galaxies that looks the furthest back in time. So that gives us this kind of key data points. Roman, by having this larger field of view, can look at huge numbers of objects at this more intermediate range of times and distances throughout our universe. And these data points are giving us this understanding of how our universe is changing and evolving through time, because distance and time, you can equate the two, we're filling in this gap and starting to understand the complexities. There's a real possibility that Roman provides the data that tells us our standard model of dark matter and dark energy evolution of the universe is very, very wrong. That's a key measurement we can make. How important is it that Roman works along the James Webb Space Telescope? Can you tell us more about that collaboration? I mean, NASA has this fleet of astrophysics observatories, and they're all designed to work collaboratively together. We are a smaller telescope than James Webb, but we have this big field of view. James Webb does the really deep dives. It looks back into the furthest back in time you can go. It looks at the very, very red objects, the very, very faint objects, but it looks at a very small patch of the sky. Whereas we look at all of the sky at once. One of the things that allows us to do is we can survey all the sky, we can collect a small number of very interesting objects, be it extremely faint galaxies, the highest redshift galaxies out there. We can find the candidates and then James Webb can spend the time studying them in great detail and taking them deep, precise measurements. But there are going to be many, many ways that we do this. We're finding these objects, we're finding these statistics, and then James Webb's going to do the deep dive. One of the things I'm most excited about Roman is giving us opportunities to find things that we didn't expect to see. Thank you to Tom Barclay from NASA. We love Tom. Yeah. Also, every time I just say, we're going to speak with NASA, I mean, I get it for the European Space Agency as well, but just speaking with space agencies in general, I'm like, tell me what you're doing, tell me everything now. Anyway, so obviously, Roman is a massive thing, we're very excited for it. And then just a few years ago, we still had that excitement for the launch of JWST with this 6.5-metre primary mirror, origami folded into a rocket and launched out. But we actually haven't done a web check-in for a while. So, Becky, what have been some of the latest discoveries? Oh, I've been smashing all the records, JWST, it feels like. It seems like we get like a new, most distant galaxy known every few months. It's just constantly giving it to us. The MOM-Z14 is currently the galaxy that holds that title. It's at a red shift, so its light has been stretched by a factor of 14.44, which means the light has been traveling for 13.4 billion years before we detected it. So we're seeing the galaxy as it was when the universe was just 280 million years old. And that's really exciting because it's right in the window of the 100-300 million year time frame when we think the first stars were born. So we're really with JWST, we're getting to that first stars, first galaxies, those promises that we heard all in the run-up to the launch in 2021. So, yeah, it's very exciting. Also, last year as well, I remember in December, there was the announcement of the most distant supernova that was ever detected, and that was spotted with James Webb as well. And it came with a gamma ray burst and all sorts, and that was about, I think, 13 billion light years away. And again, super exciting because you see a supernova, that means that material has been thrown out into the universe, so you can see what stars were made of back then. And again, you're getting back to this first generation of stars that formed in the universe. And of course, we've still got all the exoplanet discoveries coming thick and fast as well from weird planets that we don't even know where to put them. They seem to be in their own category now. And then also, atmospheric detections as well, there's still arguments raging about whether there's been a detection of dimethyl sulfide in the atmosphere of the exoplanet K218b. Why is that specifically something that's exciting? Yeah, so dimethyl sulfide on Earth is only produced by bacterial life or by us in industry. I mean, it could be that it points to life in the atmosphere, or it could be unknown chemistry. Either way, you're going to have some excited scientists somewhere, right? You're going to have some excited chemists, so you can have some excited astrobiologists. New things are happening. Yeah, there's arguments either way, but there's also arguments about whether that detection is even real or not, because doing this is incredibly difficult. Like you say, you know, like, oh, it's the tiny amount of starlight that passes through the planet's atmosphere, and then you isolated it, and ta-da, there's a fingerprint of molecules in the atmosphere left on it, except isolating that tiny bit of light is incredibly difficult. The signal is incredibly weak if your atmosphere isn't very thick. So really, we only get the strongest signal from like big, thick Jupiters, not like the, you know, getting towards Earth in mini-neptune-sized planets that we'd really want to do this with. And also, you know, a molecule might leave its fingerprint on the light, but it might also blend with another molecule's fingerprint, which is all degenerate and different. So it's very difficult to do, which is why, you know, people have been struggling. I think a lot of people are waiting for like the trappist one data for a long time, the system of seven planets. They're all sort of like Earth-ish size. They're all rocky planets, we think. But if they've got incredibly thin atmospheres, then this, I think, is just what's taking the teams so long to analyze the data, because there just could be not even just nothing there, but no signal there, or just signal barrier noise that's very difficult to pull out. So hoping there'll still be something soon, because I feel like they've just been every year of JDST, they're like, can you just give us another few observations so we can just keep adding to the signal that we have? Yeah. Well, we'll be hearing more about like how we detect atmospheres in exoplanets. Can we come back to your area of research? Because how can the partnership of Webb and Roman push that forward as well? You stand in black holes, obviously. Oh, definitely. I'm so excited for this, because I mean, Roman is doing a wide infrared survey as part of one of his things. So usually with a telescope, it's either like, is it just a work course that's doing a survey, you know, kind of like Rubin and Euclid and things like this, where it's just kind of like, I'm going to observe this bit of the sky and then this and post it, stamp it all up and just slowly build up a big picture. Or people are applying for time to do their specific science on it. Roman is a bit of a blend of the two, which is very exciting. So the infrared survey is great because it'll have a big field of view, which means it can cover a large area really quickly and help you build up a map of where all the galaxies are very quickly, and also the properties that you can observe with Roman versus any other telescope. So you can build up large samples and identify galaxies, especially that have these active supermassive black holes that I'm interested in, the ones that are growing, right? So the material spiraling inwards towards them, you know, is glowing because it's so hot. You can't always see that because of dust, but if you look in the infrared, you can see through the dust. So Roman, with doing an infrared survey, will be incredibly powerful to just kind of be like, here's where they all are. Some of them were hiding and things like that. And then once you know where they all are, you can then do all the detailed follow up that you want to do to answer all the specific questions you have. And that could either be with Roman itself in optical or in infrared, you know, in the same way that we use, for example, the Hubble Space Telescope now, or with JWST for infrared follow up, and specifically for JWST for the IFU on board. Love IFUs. It's got an integral field unit, right? Essentially, it's basically, you know how we can either get an image of something or we do what's called a spectra, where we take the light from something and we split it into its rainbow and we get a trace of how much light each wavelength is coming from an object. We can do that, but at every single pixel in an image with an IFU. So it's either a spectra, every pixel or an image at every wavelength. And it's just like all of the information, you know, you're just like, shut the front door. This is too much like, what? So it's incredibly powerful tool. And the fact that JWST has that is very, it's great, right? Because you can get things like velocities from IFU. So you can see how things are moving as well as knowing what stuff is made out of and how energetic things are. So when it comes to black holes, moving energetic things, right? Understanding how it's affecting the galaxy around it. It's a complete game changer. But JWST is such a narrow field of view. It doesn't do discovery very well except for, oh, here's an image we took and here's the most distant thing that we can see in it, you know? It doesn't do that sort of like find all the things across the whole sky, which is where Roman and also the likes of Euclid and Rubin and things like that are going to come in as well. Yeah. And I think this also just goes to show, like, you know, when Hubble launched in the 90s to where we are now with JWST, how technology has really pushed that and how much information we can get is frankly mind-blowing. Also information we can get from space as well. Like the bandwidth. You know, when you try and download a large file on your computer, how long it takes? Can you imagine trying to do that from space with the deep space network? You know, back, you know, 30 years ago, that would have been, you know, a very slow process. So the fact that we can do this with a survey telescope, like a big workhorse that's just constantly imaging is incredible. Got the idea. You've planned it all through. The start-up needs starting. The next move is you. With support from that West and this thought we impart, you could do great things. Don't wait. Just start. With the range of accounts, including our metal mobile account, NatWest has helped tens of thousands of businesses get started in the last year. Search NatWest business accounts. Tomorrow begins today. Over 18s only. Specific accounts and services eligibility apply. Source NatWest January to November 2025 data. Your team just added its 67th AI tool and also your 67th security blind spot. The good news, the Vantor agent works like a GRC engineer in the background, finding every app your team uses, scoring the risk and drafting fixes for you. Vantor is the platform used by over 16,000 fast moving companies like Synthesia, Nando's and Granola, who are shaping the future with AI and staying ahead of AI risk. Get started at Vantor.com. So in the grand scheme of space, studying planets outside of our solar system, what we call exoplanets is a rather new field. The first exoplanets are only discovered in the mid 90s and there are a fleet of new space telescopes that are now pushing our understanding of them. Ariel, short for atmospheric remote sensing infrared exoplanet, large survey, is a mission from the European Space Agency that is looking at the atmospheres from planets light years away. I spoke with Dr. Chris Pearson, head of astrophysics at RAL space in the UK, who are overseeing the assembly and testing of the mission's instruments and equipment. Ariel is a kind of medium sized space mission. It's not massive. It's a mirror that's about one meter across and it's a spacecraft that's going to be launched around the end of the decade with the European Space Agency. Ariel is going to look at the atmospheres of alien planets, what we call exoplanets, and find out what these atmospheres are actually made of. I always think studying exoplanets is fascinating and bizarre because how can you study the atmospheres of planets that are so far away? They're in totally different solar systems. So how does that work and what is so special about other exoplanets that we can't understand from looking at our own solar system? Yeah, so that's right. I mean, exoplanets are planets going around other stars. So they've got their own suns. They're tens of light years away. So they're completely unreachable by spacecraft. So we have to use space telescopes to look at them. We've discovered around 6,000 exoplanets to date, but what we haven't done much of is actually look at what they're made of. And this is what Ariel is going to do by observing a planet as it passes in front of its own star. So as the planet passes in front of its own star, we call it a transit, that starlight will actually pass through that thin layer of the atmosphere surrounding the exoplanet. And as that starlight passes through the atmosphere of the planet, we can actually use that starlight almost as a fingerprinting system to see what chemicals are available in the atmospheres of these exoplanets and find out their composition. Oh, it's so cool. So you have 6,000 exoplanets to choose from. How do you choose which ones you want to look at and which ones you want to understand, you know, this fingerprint and their chemical composition? We're going to look at about a thousand of these exoplanets in general. So it's a fair portion of exoplanets that have been discovered. And what makes Ariel different from, for example, what the James Webb Telescope is doing, James Webb is fantastic. It's only looking at a few of these exoplanets. So like the low hanging fruit, as it were, what we're going to do is we're going to take a complete census. So we're not going to look at, you know, one particular type of exoplanet, we're going to try and cover everything from these big gas giant Jupiter type exoplanets down to some of the rocky planets that we see in the universe around us. And so how does it work? How is Ariel going to do this? On board, it's got its little telescope, it's one meter telescope that collects the light from the exoplanets. And that light is fed down to some special detectors inside the payload of the spacecraft. In particular, we've got a spectrometer called EIRS. And the spectrometer will split the light from the stars that we received and the planets we receive into its composite colours in the same way as a prism breaks the normal light into the colours of the rainbow. By doing that, by looking at this spectrum, we can actually identify particular chemicals like hydrogen or helium, carbon dioxide and even water in the atmospheres of these planets. And it's that spectrograph, it's kind of like that fingerprint scanner, right? It's the thing that looks at this light and it tells us what is in there to help us understand what's going on in each of these exoplanets. But it's a really interesting time for exoplanet research because Ariel is not the only space telescope that we've got or that's in development that's looking at exoplanets, right? So tell us more about how this is part of like our much bigger step forward in studying exoplanets. So we have to remember that exoplanets is a really, really young field, right? It's really taken off in the 2000s where we've had this fleet of spacecraft that have been launched, things like the NASA Kepler mission that was launched in 2009, KEOPS, which is a European mission, launched in 2019, another NASA one test in 2018. And then we're looking forward to PLATO, which is a European mission, launched January next year at the moment, I think. But all of these telescopes, they're discovering new planets, right? So they're adding to the tally of the number of exoplanets that we have discovered. What makes Ariel different is that we're not going to discover new planets. We're going to take the planets that have been provided to us by these fantastic missions that have come before, and we're going to actually do the chemistry on the atmospheres of these planets. So we slot into this kind of framework in terms of like doing the science rather than doing the discovery. And what surprises me about Ariel is that this mirror that's collecting this information actually isn't that big in the grand scheme of things. So how can it take all of that life that is coming from such a distance to find something as detailed as a chemical signal of an exoplanet? But this, looking at these exoplanets, they're all relatively close, astronomically speaking. So it's not about having a big mirror. What's important for Ariel is actually having a stable environment, because when we're looking at the chemicals in the atmospheres of these planets, we don't want to mistake them for things like, you know, atmospheric contamination on the earth, or even wobbles in our instruments, for example, that may actually mimic the chemicals that we're looking for in the atmospheres of these planets. So it's not about size of mirrors, it's about stability of the instruments for Ariel. Okay. So what's the current status of the mission? We've just actually completed a very important phase in the mission. We've just finished testing literally last week, what we call the structural model of Ariel at Rale Space. Now the structural model tells us that everything we're building fits together properly, but we've also done some testing in our National Satellite Test Facility. That includes things like acoustic testing, where the satellite is blasted with low frequency base from these loudspeakers and amplifiers to simulate some of the violent conditions of launch. Similarly, we put it on a big shaker table, which again, shapes the satellite, which again, simulates the launch. And also we've done things, what we call, central mass testing. So again, it sounds quite simple, but we have to understand how the mass and the weight is distributed around the spacecraft. So it doesn't go rolling off uncontrollably. So we need to know how this spacecraft is going to move in space as well. So all these tests have been happening at the moment. We've literally just finished it. We're now ready to move on to the next step, which is going to be to include more of the engineering, the electronics onto the spacecraft in the next version of the model. Gosh, there's so many different parts that you have to test and test and try again and make sure that it all comes together. Once it gets to launch and it's out there for you, what are those big questions that when it comes to XO planets that you really want to understand? Sure. So once we've launched, we enter the operations phase. And that's actually what I'm involved in with, with Arial. So my team is developing some of the data analysis software that's actually going to process the data from Arial once it's launched. So what we're hoping to do is to understand this whole family of XO planets that come in all different shapes and sizes. For example, if some are a Jupiter sized object, some are more Earth-like, some are like Neptune. And what we're finding is that the planets that have been discovered, we don't necessarily have parallels or similar planets in our own solar system. Yeah, we have gas giants like Jupiter, but these live quite a long way away from our sun. We're discovering these hot dubators that whizz around their parent stars. Some of them in less than a day, so their year actually lasts less than a day. So this is like Christmas coming once every 18 hours on these planets. So there's some truly, truly weird objects out there. And Arial is built to understand what they're made of and how they can exist in the environments that they are. And this episode is looking at the next generation as well. So not only do we have Arial and how that's partnering with all of these other space telescopes looking at XO planets, there's also the Habitable Worlds Observatory, which is another thing in the future. So can you tell us about that as well? And how is that pushing this field of research? What the Habitable Worlds Observatory is going to do, and this is a telescope that's going to be launched in the mid to late 2040s, so a long time away. It's going to have a much larger mirror, probably at least six to eight meters in diameter. And this is actually going to directly image something like 25 Earth type worlds that live in the Habitable Zone. So, you know, where liquid water is, and therefore life may exist around their parents stars. So it's an absolute monster. It's not going to do so many planets, but it's going to do this small number of Earth type worlds and try and find, for example, the signatures of possible life on these planets around their parents stars. Thank you to Chris Pearson from Rilespace. This is the Supermassive Podcast from the Royal Astronomical Society with me, astrophysicist Dr Becky Seathers and science journalist Izzy Clark. And I want to bring back space book club. Because you've written an interesting book and you want to shout about it. Yeah. And also, we used to do this so much and then we've all just been busy. And then I was like, hang on, I haven't asked you guys what you've been reading. So what you were reading is? Oh my God, I never go first. Okay. Well, so I've been reading Radio Universe by Dr Emma Chapman. I love that. Yeah, we've had her on the show before. I think when she had her other book, was it First Light? It's this book, which is like a love letter to radio astronomy. There's not many who would write that. I know. Exactly. There's a lot of people in Australia where they're like, Blah, radio astronomy, it's such a stupid unit and it's really annoying and it doesn't act like a normal telescope with beam size, not telescope size. And Emma would write that book. Emma would write it. It's so good because it's so accessible. And it takes you through obviously Emma's sort of experience of becoming a radio astronomer, but also the big kind of turning points and the big questions that radio astronomy can help us understand. And I just think if anyone kind of feels a bit unsure about the radio spectrum, it's a really good starting point. And it's just like, yeah, that lovely mixture of storytelling and science. So yeah, big recommend for that one. Do I have a book just like that as well? So I was very lucky. I got to read a little preview of a book coming soon because I get to these things now and I'm like, yeah, this is about life. I got to read a preview of Catherine Heyman's new book, who is the astronomer royal for Scotland. Oh, she's great. She's written a book called, she is great. Yeah. She's written a book called How to Design a Universe, the Science of Real and Virtual Worlds. It's not out until September, so you will have to be patient for this when I tell you it was great. I obviously loved it. It again did that really cool blend of like science and storytelling, but really, especially from sort of Catherine's perspective of like her experience within the field as well and how she came across various different topics. And I just really enjoyed it. It's so immersive and joyful. Like it's, you know, it's the kind of way that I think I would have loved to have been taught this way back when, you know, because it just, yeah, I love it. Nice. We'd love to wait till September. And Robert, what about you? Yeah, I should say about she, Emma's just been elected to the Council, the RAS and Catherine were working with really heavily on fighting the astronomy cuts, but that's a little aside. So she is, I don't know how she has the time to do all that she does actually. She's quite extraordinary. But yeah, I've got two classics, which I hope is okay, because I was thinking about books I've read a lot recently and they're two things that are really helpful for people that want to find things in the sky. One is called Turn Left at Orion, which is by a guy, Consommanio, who is the head of the Vatican Observatory. You know, most of us didn't even realize the Vatican had an observatory, but it's really nice, accessible, you know, and then a very similar vein hidden treasures by Stephen James O'Meara, who's an amazingly talented amateur astronomer who just sees stuff, you know, he famously, before the Voyager missions, he saw spokes in Saturn's rings before they were discovered by Voyager One. And they're both great guides because they tell you what things actually look like, they tell you how to find them. So I think if you're one of those people that's just picking up a pair of binoculars, trying to find your way around the sky, or you've got a big otterscope, or even in some cases, just looking for things with your eye, that it's just a really nice way to find things. They cover the whole sky as well, northern southern hemisphere in case you've got, you know, this is some southern hemisphere this time. So I can strongly recommend them as those sort of really intuitive classic guides for finding things. Oh, that sounds good. Because I feel like a lot of stuff when it's covered in the news of like something's happening or find this in the sky, it often comes with so much hype. Exactly. So it's really nice if it's sort of just very down to earth, like this is what you'll see, is safe, I think. Exactly. Sometimes these things will be smudges, but they're a smudge 20 million light years away, you know, that's the price of a pay. Smudge? Yeah. I've always smugged people on. It's a smudge. Been raced towards smudges. I think maybe haze is a better word I've decided. Smudge is a bit, yeah, does sound a bit like it's an oversight. And actually to go back, I got to interview Emma at a book event for her. So I was interviewing her about her book to a nice audience at Waterstones in London. And someone asked a question that I thought was really good. And I'd love to get your thoughts on this. Then they said, what books would you recommend for someone who was just getting into astronomy? And it kind of stumped me. So I'm really putting you on the spot by just now passing this over. The problem is, it's all I think about is the book that I had when I was a kid with all these fact files. And I'd have to look up like who wrote it because it was just called space. And it was just, it was the most beautiful illustrations on each page of like, here's one every planet, here's one stars like galaxies. I'll tell you what's actually one that I think is really great for that is Will Gator's book to the universe, which is just beautiful watercolors, but talks about every page as like a massive, you know, part of our night sky. So whether that's galaxies, black holes, and then it dives into the planets on some space telescopes as well. Like it's just a really nice book. It's aimed at kids, but I actually hadn't thought of that, actually. So yeah, mine was, I think mine was maybe not exactly a coffee table book. It was possibly aimed at kids, but I do have a coffee table book. There's the book called Cosmos by DK, which I did the forward for a few years back. That's an excellent book because that is, is very much a coffee table book. It looks fantastic. It's got images from all the space telescopes. It's accessible for kids. If they just want to look at the images and read a few of the captions, but it's also accessible for adults because it's got more of an explanation of how the images were obtained, what the images are showing as well. It just looks, it looks fab. It's got a great cover as well that just looks absolutely great on a coffee table. Well, fingers crossed that one person is listening. Now I can finally answer this question. And I think I'd guess I'd go with like, you know, there are really nice stargazing guides that come out each year just telling you simply what's around. You can obviously find this stuff online. You can use AppScizlerium and so on, but there is still something quite good. I think about a short two or three pages telling you the highlights of the month, you know, the way that we try to do each month, but I still think it's a really good thing. What is that bright thing in the sky? Oh, that's Venus, you know, that's Jupiter. This is just learning those basic things and fucking, you know, again, finding that sort of intuitive feel for the sky. I mean, there are, you know, there are loads of other books. I was just, as we were talking about, this was looking left to my bookshelf and thinking, I've got rid of a lot of my beginner's books, but they're, I mean, my friend Anton Van Ploy wrote Simple Stargazing some years ago. That's pretty good. You know, depends where you want to go really. There's books on relativity on the moon, you know, on exploring the deep universe, all of those things. I think it's just, it's just diving in really. You just have to go for it and think, what subject do I really want to find out more about? Because there are, there are lots and lots of books on this stuff. Yeah. Well, speaking of diving in, shall we get onto some listener questions about space telescopes? Let's do it. I think my cat pit might join us at some point because she's absolutely yelling outside the door. Tell us what you think. Come on. I'm just a listener question. Okay, Becky Fiona12 on Instagram asks, are there any telescopes being built for launch after the Nancy Grace Roman space telescope? Yeah. Yeah. I mean, you've got to remember Roman is the big NASA flagship mission. So this is why you will hear a lot about it. You know, if you're thinking about big NASA missions, it's going to be Hubble, Webb, Roman, right, is the roadmap, right? But then after that, the next step along the roadmap is in the really long term, I'm talking like the 2040s is the Habitable Worlds Observatory, HWO, which you might have heard Chris mention before. This has got one of those IFUs, you know, the integral field unit that takes a spectra every single pixel in the image or an image every wavelength, however you want to think about it. And its mission will be to directly image Earth like planets and Earth like planets systems in orbit around stars. And the reason that you would want an IFU to do that is then you can also get information about their atmospheres as well, that you don't have to wait for the planet to pass in front of its star so that star light passes through the atmosphere and you detect that tiny signal, you should be able to get it through like reflected light off the planet from taking a direct image. We massively need to like develop the contrast technology to do this, like because, you know, these planets are tens of billions of times fainter than their stars, right? So we need to be able to get down to that kind of level of sensitivity in a telescope. So that's a long way away. In the meantime, NASA will be launching its near Earth object surveyor in September 2027. So next year, that's going to search for hazardous asteroids using infrared light. So the big thing about asteroids is to spot them, you have to see the reflected sunlight off them. But what if they're really like dark? What if their surface is made from material that doesn't reflect a lot of sunlight? Or if they're really small, you're not going to be able to detect them very easily. So using infrared up in space means that you can detect sort of like their natural infrared glow. And so you can hopefully detect any that are hiding somewhere from us because there are like less asteroids than we necessarily expect from models. So we think this is this is why and just helps with the tracking and the, you know, the Earth not being in danger from something. Thanks. And then for ESA, in the near term for ESA, you've got Ariel, yes, but you've also got ESA's Plato mission, which is set to launch in January 2027. That's also an exoplanet mission. It's going to search for, again, Earth-like planets around sunlight stars. This time it'll do it by transit. So waiting for the planet to pass in front of its star. It's specifically going to focus on sunlight stars and dwarf stars, like they're smaller than the sun, and try and look at them for really long periods of time because previous missions that have done this, it's been fairly what we call short cadence. So you detect planets that say pass in front of their star every month rather than once a year, like Earth would from like over the sun from somebody else's perspective. So that's what its real focus is. Then for ESA, I'm very excited about the Advanced Telescope for High Energy Astrophysics, or Athena, as we're all referring to it as. There's an X-ray telescope, and it's set to launch in the early 2030s. I'm very excited about that as a black hole person because materials sparing around black holes close in X-rays. So yay, black hole detections with Athena studying stuff with X-ray telescopes, which we have a few extra telescopes. We put Chandra, X-mem Newton, you could maybe throw Swift in there as well. A lot of that though is outdated technology, the 90s, the 2000s. So Athena's going to revolutionize that side of things. And then if we're thinking really, really long term, I don't even know if this class is a telescope, but we've got the Lisa mission from ESA as well, which is a gravitational wave detector in space, which again, late 2030s, early 2040s. So I just so many things to look forward to when it comes to big telescopes being built for you, Fiona. There's loads of those though. Gosh, we all have content for the next however many years. I know this is what I love about my colleagues. I'm like, will I ever run out of content? No, they just keep writing papers and building telescopes. Okay. And Robert, Samuel Hughes wants to know, is the future of large space telescopes going to be a raise of small CubeSats to reduce costs? And Chris O'Hare has also emailed us with a similar question and has also requested a good eye mate for me to try and pronounce. So I hope... Good eye mate. I'm so sorry. Robert Irwin in the room. But also says, are there any avenues of science that are exploring the vastly miniature and high number of devices that could revolutionize science like Hubble and JWST? Well, Chris and Samuel, I'll do my best to deserve it with this one. So for the benefit of listeners, CubeSats are very small satellites and they're typically say 10 centimeters on the side and they have a mass of no more than two kilograms. That's the definition of them. And incidentally, actually, there's some concern about deploying a lot of them because they're not necessarily going to reenter the earth as easily as others. You know, it's that protocol about space debris comes into two. However, of course, they're also tiny compared with your behemoths like JWST and Hubble. Huge things in comparison. Some have been deployed for astronomy already. So there was the PIXAP mission operated by the Paris Observatory that's looking at the star beta pictorist trying to see planetary transit. So it's more telescoping sensor. And there was actually a workshop dedicated to trying to find out how to do astronomy with them back at the American Astronomical Society in January 2020, you know, rather pressing year. And as far back as 2007, I remember our own National Astronomy Meeting considered this is not quite astronomy in that sense, the idea of nanonauts, millimeter sized probes that would work in a swarm to explore Mars. That has not happened, but it would be a cool idea. There's something about the word swarm, though, that stresses me out about like... It does sound like you could get wrong. It does, doesn't it? Well, hopefully not. Hopefully, they're not too sentient. But 2023, ESA looked at seven ideas for CubeSat Swarms. And one of them was for studying gamma ray bursts and one for solar activity. I don't know what the status of those is, but it clears us people thinking about it. Even whether they're cheaper, I mean, they should be because fundamentally, I guess, if you've got a small unit like this, then, you know, implies that it should be easier to replace so that you should be able to roll out lots of these things. But I'm not sure how well developed these ideas yet are now. I haven't heard of anything since that 2023 report. So we will see. But it's a really interesting idea, I guess, that you could, instead of building very, very large telescopes, you put them in space with all the risks of that single point failure or one of the single points of failure on the way that you deploy a large number of things instead. And then our producer has pointed out that in the aftermath of Artemis, we should talk about also other sorts of space-based astronomy. And he's mentioned doing astronomy from the moon. And so we're seeing more talk of that now, the idea of particularly putting a big radio telescope on the far side. Because if you want to shield a telescope from terrestrial transmissions, then putting the moon in the way of them is a pretty good way to do it, if you can protect the moon environment from satellites, too. So I just say space-based astronomy is not going away. It's doing many, many amazing things. It's here to stay. Yeah, that's one of the things that we're also concerned about the Artemis missions. Well, not necessarily Artemis, but the long-term goals of building a lunar base. I'm like, where are you going to put that big thing? Because I'd really rather put a radio telescope on the far side of the moon. Yeah, and I think also it's not, I reckon lunar base people, you know, that implies if it's scientific base, there'll be more cognizant of this. I'd be worried about mines and that kind of thing. If people seriously started to exploit it commercially, then I'd be really concerned about managing the interference. I would be less concerned if it hadn't been for the whole, you know, everyone in the space industry is friends, everyone wants to help out everybody. Oh, but by the way, we're going to launch like 50,000. Exactly, a million satellites. Exactly. Exactly. Into orbit around Earth and just never mind your ground-based astronomy. You know, I'd be more optimistic if it hadn't been for that. So I guess we'll just have to wait and see. And see if, you know, all these things where it comes back to space lore again, about who has rights to the moon and the scientific rights. Commercial, you know, like I don't know. But isn't there talk of also using moon craters as the dish for astronomy as well? You could, absolutely. You could. Yeah. And the same way as we did, I guess, I guess it's like looking at a natural bowl like the Arrasibo telescope had in Puerto Rico, you know, you could do it around that structure. You do still have to work with gravity on the moon. After all, it's only a six of what it is on Earth, but it does help if you've got those natural features. So yes, definitely. I mean, any of these are really ambitious projects, though. I mean, I think it's very hard to imagine posting astronauts there for long enough, individually at least, to construct something like this. So is this where the robots start to do the work for us? I don't know. It sounds like, but you know, this would be game-changing in the sense that you could build it on a bigger scale if you could put it together. And if you can preserve that quiet environment, that radio quiet environment, that could be just incredible. Yeah. And Becky, our listeners know you well because we have another question here that says, can you please tell us more about the Athena mission? No, oh my gosh, yes. Always, always. I mean, I just, I'm so excited for it. It's set to launch 2034 currently is the plan. In my slip, as with always with these things, but 2034 is the current target. And it's set for a five-year mission, but it's likely to go to more like 10 as well with all of these things. So it is an X-ray telescope, but the likes of which we've never had before. So it's going to have two interchangeable instruments on it. So the telescope collecting the light will stay the same, but the instruments at the back recording the light will change. So it'll have what's known as the wide field imager. So as it says on the tin, we'll do wide field imaging. So take images across a really big field of view on the sky. So big, big pictures, but also the typical spectroscopy as well that you would normally expect from a telescope, right? You can take an image and you can split the light and record how much light each wavelength that you could detect. But then it's also got an IFU, an X-ray IFU, XIFU, as people call them, where you're getting this spectrum at every pixel image at every X-ray wavelength. That is incredibly hard to do in X-ray. So it will be revolutionary, right, for an X-ray telescope, but also for just so many different areas of study as well. The resolution is incredible compared to what we've had previously as well. So it means we can do things like map temperatures and densities in chemical compositions and velocities of this hot X-ray emitting gas, whether that is across big extended objects like an entire galaxy cluster, or whether it is just the material spiraling around a black hole, whether it's super massive or otherwise. So it's so exciting that it's not just like you don't just get one specific bit of data, you get like, oh, here's what's going on over here and over here and over here, and you can really map it out with these X-ray IFUs. And the big thing that people are very excited for, you know, outside of the black holes, obvious field that I'm excited for is this idea of whether it can detect what's known as missing matter. And I'm not talking about dark matter, I'm talking about missing normal matter. Oh, okay. That should be there. That we think the reason we can't detect it is because it is warm gas in intergalactic space. So very, very diffuse. You know, we think about space as being vacuum is empty, but there's the odd molecule here and there, right? And we think that it's fairly warm gas. And if it's warm, we're not going to detect it through, you know, sort of like hydrogen emission in radio and things like that, we're going to detect it through X-ray emission. But because it's so diffuse, it's really faint. So you need, you know, a decent telescope to be able to detect this and also be able to map out if it's there, you know, in this faint glowing X-ray. So hopefully Athena should be able to do that and hopefully be like, oh, that's for all the missing normal matter is that, you know, is predicted to be there in the universe, but we're just shy of it at the minute. Oh, very exciting. And I have to say, IFUs are a whole new thing for me. Like now I'm like, right, now I've got some reading to do. Okay. Yeah. One of the first was on the VLT in Chile, or at least not one of the first, but like one of the ones that was very like it made waves. Yeah. That online, maybe like 10 years ago. And I remember everybody wanted that data. Oh, nice. Like everybody wanted their pet galaxy observed with this thing, because it was like, here's what the stars velocity are doing here. And here's what this specific area of the galaxy is made of. And like the, just the data, like I was about to say images, but they're not images. It's like actual data where we're like, we've measured something in the spectra in this specific pixel. And then we've colored it because it's this value compared to this value over here. And even those things were pretty. Yeah. You know what I mean? Like people are being talks, being like, check out my data. And we don't, they're like, oh, so jealous. Oh, so good. Okay. And Robert, Doc Sal wants to know, what are the limitations when using telescopes in space, excluding the weight and size? Yeah, Doc Sal, those first things are exactly the things people think about. But I think the biggest challenge is if you exclude those, is keeping them going, making them operate in that harsh environment, because maintaining a telescope in space is not going to be easy. You can do things like you can reboot the software systems with signals in the ground. And you could then they do things like they'll try and say turn a gyroscope or turn a reaction wheel to if it's behaving slightly clunkily to loosen it, that kind of things that they do with the rovers on Mars. But if the hardware does fail, then it can sometimes be really expensive to fix and sometimes completely impossible. And two examples are, but the first one is Hubble where it launched in 1990 with the primary mirror, the wrong shape. So the telescope wouldn't focus properly, very, very famous at the time, lots of disgruntled taxpayer images effectively, you know, look, this is this is not good, you can get science out of it, it's not working as it should. And it could have been a complete disaster, it would have been very difficult to get more money for any future telescopes, I think. But in 1993, the shuttle astronauts launched did an 11 day repair mission, not cheap. I mean, each shuttle mission, I think was anything between a few hundred million dollars and a billion dollars. But its astronauts installed a correcting optic system that worked insanely well, and worked brilliantly for the following 33 years in counting. And we've come, you know, many people have completely forgotten about the fact it didn't work well for the first three years, it's been going strong ever since. And then there were more service emissions, four more to upgrade its instruments and replace the gyroscopes that keep it pointing in the right direction. Now, JWST on the other hand, can't be maintained at the moment by the astronauts or probably even robots, right, it's too far away, a million and a half kilometers away. So three times the distance from Earth Artemis II managed. So we've never ever sent people that far. And that's why you had that amazingly rigorous and cautious testing program, you know, they spent years doing it. It's why the telescope was delayed and being launched. And if a critical physical system went wrong, that that would probably be it for the telescope. But you know, fingers crossed, and right now it's doing a brilliant, brilliant job. So we just sit there and think, please keep working, please keep working. Please, please, please, please. Sorry, like Sabrina Carpenter over here. Anyway. Thank you to everyone who sent us questions. Please keep them coming. We've had some really great ones. So sorry that we couldn't get to all of them. But you can email podcast at ris.ac.uk, find us on Instagram at supermassivepod, or join the Supermassive Club and post on the forum. Members, I'm going to be asking you some questions soon because I've got some tricks up my sleeve. But anyway, interesting. Plus, you never know, if you do send in a question and it doesn't make the main episode, it might make the bonus episode as well. Exactly. Exactly. Be surprised by the bonus episode. So shall we finish with some stargazing? What should we look out for in June, Robert? The sunset. Exactly. Always good sunset. Yeah. I mean, it's northern hemisphere, mid-summer, at least in astronomical terms. So you don't, no matter what the weather's actually like. So with the solstice on the 21st of June, it never gets properly dark in the UK. The nights are at their shortest. And that's because the sun isn't actually very far below the horizon, even at one o'clock in the morning, which because we're on summertime is the equivalent of midnight. Now, there are still always things to see there, right? You know, the summer triangle is now coming into view. So, Dan M, Vega and Alt F, three lovely bright stars that delimit the summer and autumn skies. And that's visible from 10, 11 o'clock at night. And if you're further south, where it is a bit darker because the sun is a bit lower below the horizon, then you can see the Milky Way running through them too. And low down, you've got Scorpius with the bright red star Antares. And I always think that's quite nice. And again, further south, you see the whole of the Scorpion in the UK. You see the top bit of it. And not far from Vega, you've got targets like Hercules and the Keystone grouping of stars. And in there is Messier 13, which is one of the best globular clusters, several hundred thousand stars. You're not going to see that many with a small telescope. You see some, and even with a pair of binoculars, you see this lovely, lovely haze. It's, you know, really quite something to think you're looking at this ball of stars there. Planets, one event to look forward to. We've got a conjunction of Venus and Jupiter on the night of the June. And so Venus is appearing to move further away from the sun in the skies. It moves around in its orbit. Jupiter on the other hand, mostly because the Earth is moving much more quickly around the sun, is now going to be behind the sun quite soon and move out of view. But on that night, they'll be really quite close together. So you could try taking a picture with your phone or a better camera if you've got one. I think they're not close enough that you'd see them in the same field of view with the telescope, but definitely in a pair of binoculars. And it's well worth a go. And then on the 17th of June, you can see Venus and Jupiter with Mercury lower down as well, which is always a bit hard to spot. But there are certain times each year when it's good and the present moon. And, you know, if you've got a good northwestern horizon, then you should be able to see all of them in quite a nice lineup. Then a couple of other things. It's also the start of the Noctilucent Cloud season, which is when you get these very thin clouds visible at night. They're about 80 kilometers up. They're quite unlike stuff lower down. And they shine because they're catching the sunlight. As I mentioned before, the sun isn't far below the horizon, so it illuminates them. If you've ever seen, they're really quite ethereal. They've got this remarkable beauty. They do this beautiful blue-ish color. And if you get a pair of binoculars or a telescope, you start to see all this detail in them as well. They're so high up that they go through these very weird flows under the influence of gravity in the upper atmosphere. So, you know, if you do see them, then, well, or if you hear there, there, then go out and have a look. I absolutely recommend them. And then finally, the sun's still active. It's still got a reasonable number of sunspots, even though it's now a couple of years past maximum. So if you've got a safe solar filter, we're in the middle of the summer. The sun's going to be high in the sky in the middle of the day. Put that safe solar filter on your telescope, put a pair of binoculars and enjoy the view of that as well. And as I always say, do please send us pictures, tag us on Instagram. We always want to see how people are enjoying the sky. Yeah, absolutely. We've got some great ones on the member forum that I'm actually going to be posting soon because they're so nice. But I think that's it for today. We'll have our usual bonus episode in a few weeks answering more of your questions. And then our next episode is going to be on neutrinos. Ooh, fun. Contact us if you try some astronomy at home. I doubt it will be neutrino astronomy, but less than that. You'll get that joke, everyone. By next week's episode, if you didn't get the science find that. It's at SupermassivePod on Instagram, or you can email your questions to podcast.ris.ac.uk. And we'll try and cover them in a future episode or a future bonus episode. Make sure you listen to the bonuses, guys. Don't miss out. Until then, though, everybody, happy stargazing. Got the idea? You've planned it all through. This start-up needs starting. The next move is you. With support from NatWest and this thought we impart, you could do great things. Don't wait. Just start. With the range of accounts, including our Metal Mobile account, NatWest has helped tens of thousands of businesses get started in the last year. Search NatWest business accounts. Tomorrow begins today. Over 18s only. Specific accounts and services eligibility apply. Source NatWest January to November 2025 data. Your team just added its 67th AI tool and also your 67th security blind spot. The good news, the Vantor agent works like a GRC engineer in the background, finding every app your team uses, scoring the risk, and drafting fixes for you. Vantor is the platform used by over 16,000 fast-moving companies like Synthesia, Nando's, and Granola, who are shaping the future with AI and staying ahead of AI risk. Get started at Vantor.com