Why build a muon collider: a three minute guide

Поделиться
HTML-код
  • Опубликовано: 17 янв 2025

Комментарии • 77

  • @Rivulets048
    @Rivulets048 Месяц назад +4

    Just one more collider bro pls 😭

  • @maxtrap1947
    @maxtrap1947 Месяц назад +2

    Privileged to visit LHC in September, and left with renewed confidence humans can survive our myopic mania. Yes, there’s irony in looking at the little things to see the big things.

  • @ClimateAdam
    @ClimateAdam Месяц назад +7

    I'm a simple person. I see Lizzie Gibney explaining a new type of particle collider, and I click.

  • @fishercawkey
    @fishercawkey Месяц назад +1

    Thumbs up if you thought the title said, "Why build a moon collider"

  • @fburton8
    @fburton8 Месяц назад +5

    Smashing!

  • @4DCResinSmoker
    @4DCResinSmoker Месяц назад +1

    What I got from this... Wish for Muons is one hand and Shyte in the other, then see which gets funding faster.

  • @mikegofton1
    @mikegofton1 Месяц назад

    Energy efficient muon production would be a good first step, maybe then we could have room temperature fusion reactors.

  • @scottmerritt9877
    @scottmerritt9877 17 дней назад

    At 3:08. Note the lifetime of a muon at rest is 2.2 microseconds, not milliseconds.

  • @Legault146
    @Legault146 Месяц назад

    I think your comments were interesting and important to hear…but can you slow down a bit so I can grasp them.

  • @sulner9997
    @sulner9997 Месяц назад

    It was interesting what she is saying

  • @AdityaMehendale
    @AdityaMehendale Месяц назад +10

    There's a special place in heck reserved for camera-persons who needlessly use side-camera.

    • @dangerfly
      @dangerfly Месяц назад

      I prefer my scientists to force direct eye contact as a show of dominance.

    • @farhanrejwan
      @farhanrejwan Месяц назад

      @@dangerfly i honestly don't mind, but given how much anti-science movement is still on the run, even little things like that might be somewhat necessary.

    • @ClimateAdam
      @ClimateAdam Месяц назад

      it might not be to your taste, but not needless. multiple camera angles allows (one way) to cut between takes without using "jump cuts"

    • @AdityaMehendale
      @AdityaMehendale Месяц назад +1

      @@dangerfly It's not a ted-talk. It'd be odd if my friend were talking to me, and all of a sudden stared off to one side..

    • @dangerfly
      @dangerfly Месяц назад

      @@AdityaMehendale What if your friend turns away and talks over her shoulder as she walks towards the fridge to make a sandwich? So natural!

  • @Tarquin2718
    @Tarquin2718 Месяц назад +2

    First help build an effective fusion reactor stellarator or tokamak then you can have all the toys you can think of.

  • @Khashayarissi-ob4yj
    @Khashayarissi-ob4yj Месяц назад

    With luck. Hoping for more videos.

  • @Alex1611AD
    @Alex1611AD Месяц назад

    I think I can make one with two straws and a magnet

  • @ian7208
    @ian7208 Месяц назад +1

    why don't we build a big collider in space, between lagrange points, sort of like ligo? vacuum not good enough, and too hard to steer particles? what about putting some of the big detectors in space, or on the moon, to detect super energetic cosmic rays?

    • @spartaleonidas540
      @spartaleonidas540 Месяц назад +1

      Money

    • @bethlong7115
      @bethlong7115 Месяц назад +1

      The only thing you solve is the civil engineering - you don't have to dig a tunnel like that. But you have to send everything into space, which is extremely expensive in both money and fuel, cancelling out the savings from the civil engineering. Then for this kind of experiment you want to avoid cosmic rays as much as possible, that's why experiments are often under mountains.
      There was a serious proposal for something along these lines once, but it isn't a mainstream idea because the cost/benefit ratio is extremely high - both due to high cost and due to low benefit

    • @ian7208
      @ian7208 Месяц назад

      @@bethlong7115 What was the proposal? There seem to be various things for cubesats now, and the ISS has had a detector for like 10 years (from the J/Psi guy). In principle if you want to actually produce the particles yourself rather than detect stuff from quasars, the earth is only so large.

    • @bethlong7115
      @bethlong7115 Месяц назад +1

      @@ian7208 Producing the particles yourself gives you the option to control them how you want them. You don't necessarily need the highest energies in the universe do to new science, that's only one interesting branch of physics

    • @ian7208
      @ian7208 Месяц назад

      @@bethlong7115 i agree, but it's curious to think of how we're going to be able to keep going up in energy (and down in distance). there's a big gap between the lhc and planck scale.

  • @Feefa99
    @Feefa99 Месяц назад +5

    Meowons 😸

  • @antonburdin9756
    @antonburdin9756 Месяц назад +1

    What is the point of price comparison for something which doesn't exist? Unless you include a price estimate for bridging the technological gap.

  • @surkewrasoul4711
    @surkewrasoul4711 Месяц назад

    Cute expriment, Thanks aunti 😊

  • @anthonyclent6240
    @anthonyclent6240 Месяц назад

    To really get all the answers you would have to create temperatures and pressures equivalent to the Big Bang. I hope I'm not around when they try that one!

  • @aitor9185
    @aitor9185 Месяц назад +1

    18 billion? LHC cost like 5 bill. Does not sound like a bargain to me

    • @ian7208
      @ian7208 Месяц назад +2

      the cheapest way to understand the universe at high energy. world gdp is like 100 trillion per year, this is .00018 percent.

  • @hamsterclamper
    @hamsterclamper Месяц назад +12

    Thanks for the background music, because what she was saying wasn’t quite interesting enough🙄

    • @Apodeipnon
      @Apodeipnon Месяц назад +12

      It's involuntary, that's the music that starts playing automatically whenever a scientist opens their mouth. We don't know why, although some think it's related to dark matter .

    • @rickh3714
      @rickh3714 Месяц назад

      What with the duck quarking as well... in the quark, quark 🦆collision

    • @JimmyCerra
      @JimmyCerra Месяц назад +4

      I was intrigued. Just because you aren't interested doesn't mean others aren't.

    • @hamsterclamper
      @hamsterclamper Месяц назад +4

      @@JimmyCerrait’s called sarcasm, Jimmy, but don’t worry about it 🤦‍♂️

    • @neeks3782
      @neeks3782 Месяц назад

      There’s always something to cry about

  • @lavrentii
    @lavrentii Месяц назад +1

    Enormous amount of money which could be spent much better in other research.

    • @thereadersvoice
      @thereadersvoice Месяц назад

      Great achievement has no road map. The X-ray and penicillin were not discovered with practical objectives in mind. And, when the electron was discovered over 100 years ago, it was useless. Now, we have a whole world run by, and entirely dependent on, electronics.
      You don't know what some experiments will lead to. So, don't be so quick to judge, pal.

    • @lavrentii
      @lavrentii Месяц назад

      @thereadersvoice A hundred years ago - yeah. Now, without solid financing, it is almost impossible to do frontier research. Yeah, it is possible that a future collider will bring great benefits. But highly unlikely. At least much more unlikely than the possible benefits of thousands or even tens of thousands of research projects that can be financed with the same money.

    • @Enigma1336
      @Enigma1336 Месяц назад

      We don't know that before we have tried.

    • @lavrentii
      @lavrentii Месяц назад

      @Enigma1336 Yeah, of course. If I start digging for gold at a random place, I don't know if I would find gold before trying. It is just highly unlikely. We don't know anything with 100 percent certainty before doing it. This doesn't mean all probabilities are the same.

    • @Enigma1336
      @Enigma1336 Месяц назад

      @@lavrentii please show me the probability calculations you did to reach your very adamant conclusion. Or is it just an opinion spoken as fact? mmm

  • @dann5480
    @dann5480 Месяц назад +1

    Can't feed the homeless but let's build a muon collider 😂😂😂

    • @ian7208
      @ian7208 Месяц назад +5

      it's European. the US canceled supercolliders in 1993 and still has homeless people.

  • @DarrylHernandez-m2t
    @DarrylHernandez-m2t Месяц назад

    Let's focus these millions on something to help humanity further itself in ways that actually make a difference to NOW.

  • @rudyd3560
    @rudyd3560 Месяц назад +1

    Do more with what you already have, and then, just maybe, we'll buy you some new toys.

    • @jake2796
      @jake2796 Месяц назад

      No shit right. I remember when the current machine was down for like a year and the agreed opinion amongst physicist was because possibly a bird came back from the future to drop a twig in the machine as a warning to mankind. I tried this excuse several times at my own job but it never worked.😢

  • @Inmate005
    @Inmate005 Месяц назад +4

    Stop wasting other scientists money

    • @JimmyCerra
      @JimmyCerra Месяц назад +6

      They aren't

    • @absolute___zero
      @absolute___zero Месяц назад +6

      lol, particle collision is actually the most important part of physics, it hides the secrets of how our computer (aka Universe) works on the inside. Understanding it is of huge value for humanity.

    • @dziban303
      @dziban303 Месяц назад +3

      ​@@absolute___zerowhat tactile benefits has LHC provided to the average taxpayer?

    • @absolute___zero
      @absolute___zero Месяц назад

      @@dziban303 We get lots of data from LHC , this data is used to test current (computational) quantum mechanical modeling methods which are used by commercials to create new products. The models are needed to (for example) create new materials, new designs of transistors for our computer chips, new drugs, and so on. So as a tax payer you benefit from all technological advances that a better knowledge quantum physics provides. If for example , someone goes to a hospital for cancer treatment, most likely the drugs offered that person were created on a computer software which is using the quantum mechanical model derived from the data that LHC have provided some time in the past. So, basically the survival of human kind and the quality of living of human kind depends on the knowledge of our Universe and this is what LHC is meant for. In the future, you will have to say thanks CERN research for its help in creating quantum computers, which are needed to accelerate the development of AI, and we need the development of AI to accelerate if we want the robots to take our jobs, so we can stop working and just live for pleasure.

    • @sugarfrosted2005
      @sugarfrosted2005 Месяц назад +2

      Stop drinking Hossenfelder's kool-aid.