You can’t invent history by imagination. Dirac noticed the negative energy himself and tried to interpret it, not that other physicists pointed out to him. He did get nervous about announcing his antimatter hypothesis, however never considered the negative energy solution a mistake. After he made up his mind he never retracted the final antimatter idea, even under constant mocking by many including Bohr, until the verdict came from Anderson’s observational discovery.
“A hole, if there were be one, would be a new kind of particle, unknown to experimental physics, having the same mass and negative charge to an electron. We may call such a particle an anti-electron.” Published by Dirac in mid 1931 - the greatest prophesy in modern theoretical physics - prior to actual experimental discovery
This is why I am enraged when people say there's a consensus of scientist who claim "_____", fill in the blanks. They do this with Dark Matter, Covid or Climate Change. And if you suggest something different, or try to poke holes in their ideas, they mock you and call you a denier. Science should be questioned. Always. That's an essential part of Science. And Science should never be about consensus! It should be experiments, results and the DATA.
@@niks660097 Yeah sure, Engineers are very important, but they can't go to abstraction land like Grothendieck or an ex engineer mathematician, Raoul Bott. I most probably could never start to build the LHC, and probably would make everything explode...
One of the things I believe is amazing is how two of the greatest physicists in history (Mr. Feynman and Mr Dirac) had such different positions about the field they worked on. While Feynman believed strongly that we can only consider a theory when there is consistency with experiments, Dirac had an almost religious view on the mathematical beauty and simplicity of an equation. He even said that a beautiful equation is more likely to be right than an ugly one with consistency with experiments.
@@audience2 I vote Dirac too Excerpt from the book The Strangest Man " In his paper, Dirac had cryptically remarked that a critical quantum quantity is ‘analogous’ to its classical counterpart, but Feynman believed that the correct phrase was ‘proportional to’ (that is, if the quantum quantity changes, the classical one always changes proportionately). Here, at last, was Feynman’s chance to find out what Dirac meant. Feynman described his problem to Dirac and came to the crunch: Feynman: Did you know that they were proportional? Dirac: Are they? Feynman: Yes they are. Dirac: That’s interesting. Dirac then got up and walked away. Feynman subsequently became famous for his new version of quantum mechanics but thought the credit was undeserved. The more closely he looked at the ‘little paper’, the more he realised that he had done nothing new. He later said, repeatedly, ‘I don’t know what all the fuss is about - Dirac did it all before me.’ "
Lex asks great questions, such as here about how great a leap it was in viewing particles as fluctuations in a field so that for an electron, there's an electron field. It's a fine lesson in never being afraid to challenge conventional thinking with newer, more elegant ideas to replace it.
This very pleasant conversation diminishes Dirac's brilliancy in not only deriving the Dirac equation, but also interpreting the "negative energy states" and "anti-matter", as I remember it. That Dirac felt unsure about the mindblowing leap in insight just goes to show how revolutionary the ramifications of his equation were.
Diracs work showed us that we know absolutely nothing in terms of quantum physics, while physicist at the time were all chasing that next break through to get themselves famous, his awkwardness, shyness and peculiarities went against the norm of field. He humbled eveyone by proving they know nothing and not to too excited because we're still in the embryo of knowledge. A troubled genius and his beautiful equation humbled everyone and opened up a huge realm that we really haven't made any progress on.
A biopic on Dirac must be produced explaing his ingeneous discoveries at par with those of Eienstien's. His mathatimatical work is another level . He was a psssionately rational man too; his keen intellect saw through the devious technique of use of religion as a tool of exploitation of the poor He refused Knighthood and preferrrd to write his name as PAM Dirac.Such a genious and an enlightened individual too needs to be celebrated.
This uncertainty relation cannot play a fundamental role in a theory in which h-bar itself is not a fundamental quantity. I think one can make a safe guess that uncertainty relations in their present form will not survive in the physics of the future. ~Dirac
In aerospace when a rocket is fired to propel in space, the Input used is "Dirac function" Also Heaviside function. Human mind is bigger than all the money. Thank Greeks for Euclid and Archimedes and Plato and Socrates.
No, the quantum field theory was first developed by Pauli, Jordan, Dirac and some others, as soon as 1927. To be complete, the idea was already in the three man paper (Heisenberg, Born, Jordan) in late 1925. Feynman provided only a perturbative way of calculation. Too much is ascribe to him because of the economic power of the USA.
Dirac was one of Feynman’s heroes. When they finally met, the notoriously shy Dirac found Feynman’s extroversion and enthusiasm unbearable. They never spoke again.
It’s a shame that some people who are not “normal” are labeled as strange by more socially acceptable folks . There are some fantastic videos of Paul Dirac teaching at Florida State in the 70s. Can you imagine?
I absolutely love your show and I wish you were on Odysee. I’m deleting RUclips so I am about to leave. We must fight these companies that are censoring. I will really miss you!
The negative energy solutions are *NOT* positrons. Positrons clearly have positive energy. When electrons & positrons annihilate, they produce 2 x mc^2 energy. Also, positrons do not fall up. They could simply be artifacts of not handling particle creation and annihilation.
Holograms are a great example of particles fluctuating in a field. Technology makes it possible to bend the field. Think about it next time you microwave your boxed dinner 📡
"I Have Become Space" - Silly isn't it. Rate of motion changes matter. It's a particle when "stopped" and a wave when in motion. See CIG Theory. An introduction is on the link above. But, since I am not a trained physicist, I need the help of the community to further its offerings. HELP
Yes, matter-antimatter collisions produce energy through a process called annihilation. When a particle collides with its respective antiparticle, they annihilate each other, and the total mass of the two particles is converted into energy according to Einstein's famous equation, E=mc^2. This energy is typically released in the form of gamma rays or other high-energy particles.
Be very careful with such statements. I'm sure you are talking about virtual particles, the thing is, that it is a ''mathematical trick'' or our explanaiton/description of vacuum fluctuations. Particle-anitparticle pairs emerging from vacuum and then anihilating while giving borrowed energy back to vacuum is just a simplified interpretaion to wrap our minds around certain problem. The reality (whatever your definition of that is :D) is very likely different and probably beyond human imagination. Physics is not about describing reality, it is about creating models of the world which are consistent with our observations.
Dont be silly , he is English , we have no gods or do we need them , in fact we disproved the monotheistic Arab nonsense in 1687 and 1859 , he is simply a homosapien who thought , just another Englishman with an equation that represents a fundamental aspect of reality , he had flaws and faults like us all . Its the equation that is important not the man .
Imagine that! Dirac discovered reality mathematically, BEFORE the reality was proven to exist! Absolutely incredible 😎 So, it is conceivable that taking the Schrödinger equation at face value, the Many World’s Interpretation of quantum mechanics, by Hugh Everett, may just turn out to be correct ☺️
![I.N "HALLUCINATION" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/n5B5q1Hwt_U/mqdefault.jpg)
You can’t invent history by imagination. Dirac noticed the negative energy himself and tried to interpret it, not that other physicists pointed out to him. He did get nervous about announcing his antimatter hypothesis, however never considered the negative energy solution a mistake. After he made up his mind he never retracted the final antimatter idea, even under constant mocking by many including Bohr, until the verdict came from Anderson’s observational discovery.
“A hole, if there were be one, would be a new kind of particle, unknown to experimental physics, having the same mass and negative charge to an electron. We may call such a particle an anti-electron.” Published by Dirac in mid 1931 - the greatest prophesy in modern theoretical physics - prior to actual experimental discovery
@@aXw4ryPlJR the best of man is he who has eyes to see the unseen because seeing the unseen is enlightenment
its crazy to me that they took pictures at this level in 1932
This is why I am enraged when people say there's a consensus of scientist who claim "_____", fill in the blanks. They do this with Dark Matter, Covid or Climate Change. And if you suggest something different, or try to poke holes in their ideas, they mock you and call you a denier. Science should be questioned. Always. That's an essential part of Science. And Science should never be about consensus! It should be experiments, results and the DATA.
"Dirac noticed the negative energy himself" . Yes he did! Thanks for pointing this out.
Dirac is the most under appreciated genius in history
Very appreciated by physics enthusiasts but I agree the world doesn’t know of him.
His time will come like Tesla and Turing.
@@M.-.D Tesla should never been in a conversation with Dirac and Turing.
@@gaulindidier5995 Tesla was an engineer, without engineers physicists are stuck, which is the current problem with "bigger" particle accelerators...
@@niks660097 Yeah sure, Engineers are very important, but they can't go to abstraction land like Grothendieck or an ex engineer mathematician, Raoul Bott. I most probably could never start to build the LHC, and probably would make everything explode...
@@niks660097 vise versa also true
One of the things I believe is amazing is how two of the greatest physicists in history (Mr. Feynman and Mr Dirac) had such different positions about the field they worked on. While Feynman believed strongly that we can only consider a theory when there is consistency with experiments, Dirac had an almost religious view on the mathematical beauty and simplicity of an equation. He even said that a beautiful equation is more likely to be right than an ugly one with consistency with experiments.
thank you for this
I vote Feynman
I vote Dirac
@@audience2 I vote Dirac too
Excerpt from the book The Strangest Man
" In his paper, Dirac had cryptically remarked that a critical quantum quantity is ‘analogous’ to its classical counterpart, but Feynman believed that the correct phrase was ‘proportional to’ (that is, if the quantum quantity changes, the classical one always changes proportionately). Here, at last, was Feynman’s chance to find out what Dirac meant. Feynman described his problem to Dirac and came to the crunch:
Feynman: Did you know that they were proportional?
Dirac: Are they?
Feynman: Yes they are.
Dirac: That’s interesting.
Dirac then got up and walked away. Feynman subsequently became famous for his new version of quantum mechanics but thought the credit was undeserved. The more closely he looked at the ‘little paper’, the more he realised that he had done nothing new. He later said, repeatedly, ‘I don’t know what all the fuss is about - Dirac did it all before me.’ "
beauty is in the eye of the beholder ... who's to say what is ugly? Beauty and symmetry can be misleading in physics -- where is supersymmetry now?
man this guy explains this stuff in so easy language this guy is a genius
Obrigado por terem colocado legendas em português neste vídeo sobre Paul Dirac. Excelente entrevista sobre a obra deste brilhante físico. Um abraço,!
Lex asks great questions, such as here about how great a leap it was in viewing particles as fluctuations in a field so that for an electron, there's an electron field. It's a fine lesson in never being afraid to challenge conventional thinking with newer, more elegant ideas to replace it.
This very pleasant conversation diminishes Dirac's brilliancy in not only deriving the Dirac equation, but also interpreting the "negative energy states" and "anti-matter", as I remember it. That Dirac felt unsure about the mindblowing leap in insight just goes to show how revolutionary the ramifications of his equation were.
Graham Farmelo’s biography of Dirac ‘The Strangest Man’ is a good read. He really was strange as well as a genius.
I hate when I accidentally create negative energy
Just change your orbit and problem solved.
You can come to my orbit 😂😂😂
@@RajeshYadav-to5zq the sheer game physicists have is demonstrated through your comment
😂😂
Diracs work showed us that we know absolutely nothing in terms of quantum physics, while physicist at the time were all chasing that next break through to get themselves famous, his awkwardness, shyness and peculiarities went against the norm of field. He humbled eveyone by proving they know nothing and not to too excited because we're still in the embryo of knowledge.
A troubled genius and his beautiful equation humbled everyone and opened up a huge realm that we really haven't made any progress on.
Both of the solutions are correct.
Every electron is a positron on the other side of time
Good work
Someone explain the first and second derivative of the time operator thing he talks about in the beginnjng
A biopic on Dirac must be produced explaing his ingeneous discoveries at par with those of Eienstien's. His mathatimatical work is another level . He was a psssionately rational man too; his keen intellect saw through the devious technique of use of religion as a tool of exploitation of the poor He refused Knighthood and preferrrd to write his name as PAM Dirac.Such a genious and an enlightened individual too needs to be celebrated.
Go noles!
Dirac was a legend who founded Quantum Mechanics , one of the genius of 20 th century, how these people will assess him?
This uncertainty relation cannot play a fundamental role in a
theory in which h-bar itself is not a fundamental quantity. I think one
can make a safe guess that uncertainty relations in their present
form will not survive in the physics of the future.
~Dirac
In aerospace when a rocket is fired to propel in space, the Input used is "Dirac function"
Also Heaviside function.
Human mind is bigger than all the money.
Thank Greeks for Euclid and Archimedes and Plato and Socrates.
No, the quantum field theory was first developed by Pauli, Jordan, Dirac and some others, as soon as 1927. To be complete, the idea was already in the three man paper (Heisenberg, Born, Jordan) in late 1925. Feynman provided only a perturbative way of calculation. Too much is ascribe to him because of the economic power of the USA.
Dirac was one of Feynman’s heroes. When they finally met, the notoriously shy Dirac found Feynman’s extroversion and enthusiasm unbearable. They never spoke again.
❤❤❤❤Love this
It’s a shame that some people who are not “normal” are labeled as strange by more socially acceptable folks .
There are some fantastic videos of Paul Dirac teaching at Florida State in the 70s.
Can you imagine?
I absolutely love your show and I wish you were on Odysee. I’m deleting RUclips so I am about to leave. We must fight these companies that are censoring. I will really miss you!
That's a bit dramatic
Soooo melodramatic. Good luck, no one will miss you & Google has shadow accounts on people without one.
I've not heard this history before, it was an interesting perspective. Maths is always cleverer than the user...
Strings finding their way home
The negative energy solutions are *NOT* positrons. Positrons clearly have positive energy. When electrons & positrons annihilate, they produce 2 x mc^2 energy. Also, positrons do not fall up. They could simply be artifacts of not handling particle creation and annihilation.
Well...i have to take his word for it...
Wondering but knowing the how.
To what extent leaps of faith.
what a guy! has a story to say physics.
Negative energy is a thing? So antimatter is a thing.. but not antitime?
Holograms are a great example of particles fluctuating in a field. Technology makes it possible to bend the field. Think about it next time you microwave your boxed dinner 📡
"I Have Become Space" - Silly isn't it. Rate of motion changes matter. It's a particle when "stopped" and a wave when in motion. See CIG Theory. An introduction is on the link above. But, since I am not a trained physicist, I need the help of the community to further its offerings. HELP
😊😘
More words made up by Vafa than Dirac ever spoke.
I don't understand a dam thing he said
🤣🤣
Hahahaha. Yes
Did Dirac not know a proton is 1800+ times the mass of an electron?
Dirac showed that empty vacuum can borrow particles from the futures
They will meet and destroy themselves
They aren't entirely destroyed because they create a lot of energy when they collide. You can view them as being converted into energy (photons iirc).
Yes, matter-antimatter collisions produce energy through a process called annihilation. When a particle collides with its respective antiparticle, they annihilate each other, and the total mass of the two particles is converted into energy according to Einstein's famous equation, E=mc^2. This energy is typically released in the form of gamma rays or other high-energy particles.
Be very careful with such statements. I'm sure you are talking about virtual particles, the thing is, that it is a ''mathematical trick'' or our explanaiton/description of vacuum fluctuations. Particle-anitparticle pairs emerging from vacuum and then anihilating while giving borrowed energy back to vacuum is just a simplified interpretaion to wrap our minds around certain problem. The reality (whatever your definition of that is :D) is very likely different and probably beyond human imagination. Physics is not about describing reality, it is about creating models of the world which are consistent with our observations.
Trae young lol
That was my first thought lmao I was so confused
Dirac and his equation is proof that Gods walk among us
Man is a good in ruins
Dont be silly , he is English , we have no gods or do we need them , in fact we disproved the monotheistic Arab nonsense in 1687 and 1859 , he is simply a homosapien who thought , just another Englishman with an equation that represents a fundamental aspect of reality , he had flaws and faults like us all . Its the equation that is important not the man .
bohr was basically a bully to dirac
Hey, I didn't give anybody permission to take my lane.
Poderiam ter colocado legendas em português. É somente para os ingleses e americanos? Que pena!
Aprende ingles cara, vai deixar de se comunicar com o mundo por causa disso? boa sorte.
Imagine that! Dirac discovered reality mathematically, BEFORE the reality was proven to exist! Absolutely incredible 😎 So, it is conceivable that taking the Schrödinger equation at face value, the Many World’s Interpretation of quantum mechanics, by Hugh Everett, may just turn out to be correct ☺️
Mathematics shows where there is an inconsistency, and force to bend the reasoning. It predicts nothing by itself, it only guides a good initial idea.
@@clmasse It LED Dirac to the positron.
yeah but Dirac came to the equation that bears his name by calculation, Schrodinger got his equation out of his belly.
Dirac had his famous equation inscribed in his gravestone.
I wish Lex had stuck to these topics and not platforming science charlatans like RFK...
Sounds like these guys are rewriting history. I like the facts not the fiction.
And of course positrons are used in all major hospitals in the form of PET scans
It's 1-0 on that equation because there is a square root.
Schlodsinger is interesting.
It's funny how most people have heard of Einstein but not a lot of people have heard of Dirac, I think he disserves more credit.
it must be nice, to be wrong... and just make up a solution to show why you're not🤔
He wasn't wrong, he was just incomplete.
If anyone was wrong it was Schrodinger, Dirac's equation was very accepted by the physicists of his time and has been by modern physicists.
Telepathy = CRN1
To use telepathy use your throat and tongue chakra. Moving your tongue to sound out the words helps transmit.
Paul Dirac was genius