Thanks again for the shoutout, The Gentleman Physicist! In less than a week, our subscriber's number doubled. It's motivating, we want to produce good content for everyone interested in physics and cosmology. There's another video that we're editing, and it's due this week, it's about the difference between special and general relativity. I hope you'll take a look at it :)
I have a physic question. About the foucault's pendulum. Why it stops swings? Once the earth makes it's direction change during the time? This fact don't keep it swinging?
Well, from the photon's "perspective", time doesn't pass at all. Light from distant galaxies that take, say, a billion years to reach earth (our reference frame), from the photon reference frame, it left the star and immediately collided with your retina. I think you're imagining it in the opposite (as if the photon had infinite time). Am I right?
It's limited by fusion. As a point of reference, a star hot enough to create anti protons would be about 1000 times too hot for nuclei to be able to exist(iron would evaporate into protons and neutrons), or 4 to 5 times too hot for protons to even be able to exist (the protons would then evaporate into free quarks). :)
about 1000Mev for the proton mass, about 25 MeV as the upper bound for nuclear fusion reactions, and 1Million Kelvin corresponds to a thermal energy of about 10^(-2) MeV.
My enormous bias (as someone studying the mathematical aspects of string theory) compels me to also point out another reason for funding string theory (although perhaps not through physics departments, I suppose some would say) is that it has had an enormous impact on mathematics. There are huge advances in many areas (perhaps most notably in algebraic geometry) which have come directly from trying to understand what string theorists are talking about. ;)
Haha. In the second video he addresses his detractors, saying the Clausius' original formulation said the universe, not a closed system, and then he goes on to further claim that there is no such thing as a closed system in the universe, because nothing can be completely isolated because it will always be affected by gravity, cosmic rays, neutrinos, etc.
At the speed of light distance and journey time appears to be zero, does this mean that a photon in flight is omnipresent? And might that help to explain how one photon can interfere with itself in 'two slit' situations?
Ok, I have a question! It's been rattling around my brain for a while, and it has to do with relativity and black-hole collapse. Here goes! We know that when objects approach the event horizon of a black hole, they experience extreme time dilation relative to a distant observer. So the first part of the question is: What kind of time dilation is experienced at the center of a star during collapse? My naive interpretation says none, since there's no acceleration, which leads to the second part:
Well that was eight minutes I'll never get back:P It sounds like the guy took 'closed systems tend to disorder' as meaning 'all things always tend to disorder' and then attacked that. If I have time I may actually rebut it, but it may not be able to get to it.
But since you are technically a biologist you are more well rested than chemists. :P Good to have you back though. I missed your history of infection videos.
can neutrons be attracted to anti-protons and positrons?If so is this the antimatter what everybody's looking for?Then can we duplicate the entire periodic table(only with opposite charges)?And for sci-fi fun ,can complex life come from it?
Not to my knowledge, the kinetic energy of nuclei in the plasma is actually much much lower than the energy of a particle ejected from a fusion reaction. Using the 10$ = mass of a proton analogy, the kinetic energy of a nucleus in a million kelvin plasma is less than a penny.
Have you seen Howard Bloom's videos on challenging entropy that The Amazing Atheist posted to his channel? To me, it seems like he's misunderstanding the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics as badly as a creationist, but being a layman myself I don't feel comfortable enough to challenge him, even though I know he's a layman himself. Here are the videos if you haven't seen them. watch?v=PIa9hjsIQJ4 watch?v=5ixpznYVX2M
Since space is expanding, does that mean that things like Planc's constant would also be increasing at the same rate? If there is a smallest unit of space/time possible, which expands, could that split into two at some point, creating new space? Why would space expanding not also expand it's constituent units?
What does the collapse look like from the inside? More specifically, how does the time dilation experienced by the surface of the star (relative to the core) as it collapses inward affect the collapse process? (Sorry about the wait, had to attend to an emergency :P)
Can you answer why potassium-40 can't be used as a nuclear fuel? Seeing that it emits all the radioactive particles that uranium produces, i.e. alpha, beta and gamma. Is it an issue of the financial costs of separation?
Just statistically speaking (thinking of the distribution of particle energies in any given system) wouldn't there be an incredibly small number of anti-proton/proton pairs created just by considering the fact that in such a system there will be at least one event with enough energy given a high enough average temperature (energy) and a long enough amount of time?
When I was 13 I called anti-proton's negatrons and hoped it would catch on. I think the name goes well with positrons. Though with tron used for netron and electronand -ton being used for proton (lol, protron?) I wonder now if it wouldn't be more linguistically correct to call them negatons. It subtelly sounds like the word negation, which is kind of what they do with protons anyhow. I don't know though, words are weird like that. I prefer to think of 'particles' as fuzzy regions of probability.
i would love to ask: what happens with all the matter that falls into a singularity? does it (all of it) radiate out as energy back into the universe? or does it actually disappear? or does it simply add to the already infinite mass of the singularity?
Kind of like how a cup of water will spontaneously produce a molecule of H-O-O-O-H given enough time despite its incredible instability and improbability? Or is there something I'm missing here? And what about quantum fluctuations and spontaneous generation of particle/anti-particle pairs?
Can we be sure there aren't unknown highly nonlinear processes going on in the core capable of concentrating energy which could potentially produce p-bars? After all, the discovery of megakelvin temperatures in the corona was a total surprise that remained a conundrum for over half a century. Perhaps such shenanigans would have revealed itself in anomalous neutrino fractions by now though if it were occurring.
+advait “total carnage” kshirsagar At the most basic? It's because we've never seen it happen. There are plenty of theories that describe how it happens mathematically, but just like conservation of energy, it's something that's observed to occur.
in nuclear fission and fussion there is no change in mass of reactant and product so accordingly E=m(c*c) is used here to calculate the enegry given out my question is.................. fron the reaction we ge 200mev enery so where is the change in mass and from where the 200mev come from
For once this is actually a really simple question to answer. :) Simply put the masses of the reactants and product are not the same. For example a He4 nucleus actually weighs about 28MeV less than 2x(proton mass)+2(neutron mass). When you fuse 2 protons and 2 neutrons together, you end up with a Helium 4 nucleus and 28MeV of energy (this is a bit oversimplified, but mostly true)
Gokul Ganesan You seem to be assuming that the mass of these guys are all integers. However that's not true, for example, the mass of U235 is NOT 235 times the mass of the proton. Nor is it 92 times the mass of the proton + 143 times the mass of the neutron. It actually weighs a few percent less, which comes from the binding energy of all those neutrons and protons stuck together.
What you need is a nice windowless van with a sign that say: hey kids want a adult to show you movie about to be posted online? I don't see any problem with that idea, try it.;-)
Right. I understand. I agree with your analogy and I don't ACTUALLY think it is occurring, mind, just fun to consider the possibility of other overlooked mechanisms. Unexpected forms of spontaneous concentration or focusing of energy in otherwise low energy systems are always surprising me. eg.: /watch?v=LhBBCOIjkiM
is there really an anti neutron if the neutron has no nuclear charge? from what i learned beta decay causes neutron to turn into a proton which in the process get a positive charge.In positron decay the proton looses its positive charge. Now we know it an can negatively charged.My conclusion is that the neutron has 3 stages in its atomic life plus,minus and neutral.
Ah, but you miss the point of these videos. You see I AM a zombie and I'm just trying to make my viewers smarter, therefore making your braaaiiiins more delicious. I'm the undead version of an organic farmer/gourmet chef. :)
That "neutrinos faster than light" thing is still used in arguments from science conspiracy theorists. And you know what? I took Computer Science and only have a healthy interest in physics. In other words, I'm not a physicist. However, even I knew that it was almost certainly bullshit. Sure, it'd be exciting if it were true, but it's hard to imagine how special relativity could possibly be THAT wrong at this point. Unless they found some really strange exception analogous to tachyons.
Thanks again for the shoutout, The Gentleman Physicist!
In less than a week, our subscriber's number doubled.
It's motivating, we want to produce good content for everyone interested in physics and cosmology. There's another video that we're editing, and it's due this week, it's about the difference between special and general relativity. I hope you'll take a look at it :)
That's a neat one, I'll be sure to put it in in a future video.
OMG this format is so amazing!
Keep it up.
I have a physic question.
About the foucault's pendulum. Why it stops swings? Once the earth makes it's direction change during the time?
This fact don't keep it swinging?
I'll have to look into that.
Well, from the photon's "perspective", time doesn't pass at all. Light from distant galaxies that take, say, a billion years to reach earth (our reference frame), from the photon reference frame, it left the star and immediately collided with your retina. I think you're imagining it in the opposite (as if the photon had infinite time). Am I right?
It's limited by fusion. As a point of reference, a star hot enough to create anti protons would be about 1000 times too hot for nuclei to be able to exist(iron would evaporate into protons and neutrons), or 4 to 5 times too hot for protons to even be able to exist (the protons would then evaporate into free quarks). :)
about 1000Mev for the proton mass, about 25 MeV as the upper bound for nuclear fusion reactions, and 1Million Kelvin corresponds to a thermal energy of about 10^(-2) MeV.
My enormous bias (as someone studying the mathematical aspects of string theory) compels me to also point out another reason for funding string theory (although perhaps not through physics departments, I suppose some would say) is that it has had an enormous impact on mathematics. There are huge advances in many areas (perhaps most notably in algebraic geometry) which have come directly from trying to understand what string theorists are talking about. ;)
I remember when you only had about 60 subscribers.
Keep up the good work!
:)
Haha. In the second video he addresses his detractors, saying the Clausius' original formulation said the universe, not a closed system, and then he goes on to further claim that there is no such thing as a closed system in the universe, because nothing can be completely isolated because it will always be affected by gravity, cosmic rays, neutrinos, etc.
I'll check it out.
Thanks, I figured it was something a lot of people would be able to associate with.
At the speed of light distance and journey time appears to be zero, does this mean that a photon in flight is omnipresent? And might that help to explain how one photon can interfere with itself in 'two slit' situations?
Ok, I have a question! It's been rattling around my brain for a while, and it has to do with relativity and black-hole collapse. Here goes!
We know that when objects approach the event horizon of a black hole, they experience extreme time dilation relative to a distant observer. So the first part of the question is:
What kind of time dilation is experienced at the center of a star during collapse? My naive interpretation says none, since there's no acceleration, which leads to the second part:
Well that was eight minutes I'll never get back:P It sounds like the guy took 'closed systems tend to disorder' as meaning 'all things always tend to disorder' and then attacked that. If I have time I may actually rebut it, but it may not be able to get to it.
But since you are technically a biologist you are more well rested than chemists. :P
Good to have you back though.
I missed your history of infection videos.
can neutrons be attracted to anti-protons and positrons?If so is this the antimatter what everybody's looking for?Then can we duplicate the entire periodic table(only with opposite charges)?And for sci-fi fun ,can complex life come from it?
Not to my knowledge, the kinetic energy of nuclei in the plasma is actually much much lower than the energy of a particle ejected from a fusion reaction. Using the 10$ = mass of a proton analogy, the kinetic energy of a nucleus in a million kelvin plasma is less than a penny.
Have you seen Howard Bloom's videos on challenging entropy that The Amazing Atheist posted to his channel? To me, it seems like he's misunderstanding the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics as badly as a creationist, but being a layman myself I don't feel comfortable enough to challenge him, even though I know he's a layman himself.
Here are the videos if you haven't seen them.
watch?v=PIa9hjsIQJ4
watch?v=5ixpznYVX2M
Are there any semiconductive materials that respond differently to different wavelengths of light?
Since space is expanding, does that mean that things like Planc's constant would also be increasing at the same rate? If there is a smallest unit of space/time possible, which expands, could that split into two at some point, creating new space? Why would space expanding not also expand it's constituent units?
That's not quite right, I will put it one the list for a future video though because it is a good question.
What does the collapse look like from the inside?
More specifically, how does the time dilation experienced by the surface of the star (relative to the core) as it collapses inward affect the collapse process?
(Sorry about the wait, had to attend to an emergency :P)
Can you answer why potassium-40 can't be used as a nuclear fuel? Seeing that it emits all the radioactive particles that uranium produces, i.e. alpha, beta and gamma. Is it an issue of the financial costs of separation?
What are your views on Time Travelling to Future? will it be ever possible, if YES why or how?
Just statistically speaking (thinking of the distribution of particle energies in any given system) wouldn't there be an incredibly small number of anti-proton/proton pairs created just by considering the fact that in such a system there will be at least one event with enough energy given a high enough average temperature (energy) and a long enough amount of time?
When I was 13 I called anti-proton's negatrons and hoped it would catch on. I think the name goes well with positrons. Though with tron used for netron and electronand -ton being used for proton (lol, protron?) I wonder now if it wouldn't be more linguistically correct to call them negatons. It subtelly sounds like the word negation, which is kind of what they do with protons anyhow.
I don't know though, words are weird like that.
I prefer to think of 'particles' as fuzzy regions of probability.
i would love to ask:
what happens with all the matter that falls into a singularity?
does it (all of it) radiate out as energy back into the universe? or does it actually disappear?
or does it simply add to the already infinite mass of the singularity?
That's actually not always true, there are a few elements below iron that can undergo fission due to anomalously low binding energy.
Kind of like how a cup of water will spontaneously produce a molecule of H-O-O-O-H given enough time despite its incredible instability and improbability? Or is there something I'm missing here? And what about quantum fluctuations and spontaneous generation of particle/anti-particle pairs?
Can we be sure there aren't unknown highly nonlinear processes going on in the core capable of concentrating energy which could potentially produce p-bars? After all, the discovery of megakelvin temperatures in the corona was a total surprise that remained a conundrum for over half a century.
Perhaps such shenanigans would have revealed itself in anomalous neutrino fractions by now though if it were occurring.
Do you mean are they transparent to some and not to others?
why do u need to create a standard particle to create anti-particle? what does it mean that time will stop? when will it happen?
+advait “total carnage” kshirsagar At the most basic? It's because we've never seen it happen. There are plenty of theories that describe how it happens mathematically, but just like conservation of energy, it's something that's observed to occur.
in nuclear fission and fussion there is no change in mass of reactant and product so accordingly E=m(c*c) is used here to calculate the enegry given out my question is.................. fron the reaction we ge 200mev enery so where is the change in mass and from where the 200mev come from
For once this is actually a really simple question to answer. :) Simply put the masses of the reactants and product are not the same. For example a He4 nucleus actually weighs about 28MeV less than 2x(proton mass)+2(neutron mass). When you fuse 2 protons and 2 neutrons together, you end up with a Helium 4 nucleus and 28MeV of energy (this is a bit oversimplified, but mostly true)
Gokul Ganesan You seem to be assuming that the mass of these guys are all integers. However that's not true, for example, the mass of U235 is NOT 235 times the mass of the proton. Nor is it 92 times the mass of the proton + 143 times the mass of the neutron. It actually weighs a few percent less, which comes from the binding energy of all those neutrons and protons stuck together.
The Gentleman Physicist
I shouldn't have said 'a few percent', its more like a few tenths of a percent
The Gentleman Physicist thank you
how are antiproton , positron and anti neutron made?
What you need is a nice windowless van with a sign that say: hey kids want a adult to show you movie about to be posted online? I don't see any problem with that idea, try it.;-)
Right. I understand. I agree with your analogy and I don't ACTUALLY think it is occurring, mind, just fun to consider the possibility of other overlooked mechanisms. Unexpected forms of spontaneous concentration or focusing of energy in otherwise low energy systems are always surprising me. eg.:
/watch?v=LhBBCOIjkiM
Could you supply me with the actual energy amounts?
Moderately well rested I say. ;)
is there really an anti neutron if the neutron has no nuclear charge? from what i learned beta decay causes neutron to turn into a proton which in the process get a positive charge.In positron decay the proton looses its positive charge. Now we know it an can negatively charged.My conclusion is that the neutron has 3 stages in its atomic life plus,minus and neutral.
I like the money thing.
Dude,
I am a chemical engineer.
where does your statement put me?
yep
Ah, but you miss the point of these videos. You see I AM a zombie and I'm just trying to make my viewers smarter, therefore making your braaaiiiins more delicious. I'm the undead version of an organic farmer/gourmet chef. :)
what i meant was the singularity inside a black hole
No, I just don't sleep.
am a social channel would be fine like studding physiology about people and their reactions, ... ... ... hope you understand what I mean.
That "neutrinos faster than light" thing is still used in arguments from science conspiracy theorists. And you know what? I took Computer Science and only have a healthy interest in physics. In other words, I'm not a physicist. However, even I knew that it was almost certainly bullshit. Sure, it'd be exciting if it were true, but it's hard to imagine how special relativity could possibly be THAT wrong at this point. Unless they found some really strange exception analogous to tachyons.
Lol, I've been wondering about your panda eyes, but have been hesitant to ask. Boy, you kinda look like a ghoul now.
I actually did a video on this already :) Check out "Higgs: the angry god."
Do you wear makeup?
in a way, theoretical physics is moronic as it's merely childish speculation (not backed up by hard facts)?
+Ka Bong Maybe, but I think that childish speculation is getting us somewhere. Plus, whats wrong with childish speculation?
am i the only one who thinks this guy is a zombie?
Sleep is for the weak i.e chemists