I bought a Cassimir Effect toaster and now I never buy bread. I push down the lever, the wires get hot, and two minutes later up pops a piece of toast and a piece of anti-toast, courtesy of the quantum foam. I eat the toast and throw the anti-toast out in my yard. Anti-birds gotta eat too.
+Liberty4Ever Wake up in the morning, bout 6am Have a little jelly, have a little jam Don't grab a piece of bread to put it in the slot Push down the button and the wire gets hot and the quantum foam properties of matter pops out toooooasssst. YEAH TOAST.
Where is science taking us? What is the purpose of all these experiments? After experimentation and conclusions, will there be any real benefit to our civilization? We discovered the Higgs boson... so now what, can it help us fight against HIV, is it going to give us a better energy source? I'm a microbiology major, I am pro science all the way but I dont understand the purpose for these experiments. What happens after we prove dark energy or dark matter exists ? Do we become immortal? I have a feeling these high end experiments are just going to pleasure our conscious, for example.. I would really like to know what happened before the big bang, or what caused the big bang, or why is there something instead of nothing. But if we do finally come up with a fundamental theory of everything, is it going to really physically benefit us or just mentally.
TheJfranco9 I find it strange that someone that is pro-science can't see the benefits and future innovations that can come from pushing the boundaries of our knowledge base further. You're argument isn't too different from people that criticized early E&M experiments by Faraday. I think you're intelligent enough to figure out the purpose of these experiments.
TheJfranco9 That's the argument usually made by people against space exploration because they ignore the slate of practical applications that have come from it (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASA_spin-off_technologies). Same goes for, say, research carried out at CERN. Apart from having developed and freely shared the WWW protocol, CERN is responsible for considerable advances in superconducting technology, not to mention ways to make proton therapies more effective (home.web.cern.ch/about/updates/2013/04/accelerators-medicine). As a science student you should understand that there can never be applied research without pure research. Ever.
TheJfranco9 We often don't know what the practical applications might be ahead of time. When the electron was discovered, it had no practical use at all; today, the entire world is run by electronics.
"QED must be right. It's even got QED as it's initialism." This leads us to one of the great unexplored laws of the Universe. Puns that come from Physicists cannot be accidental.
I studied physics at a university in chicago, im so close to fermilab and argonne. This channel always presents high level grad physics so well. I hope to be able to get a job there!
Nice. Thanks for posting. It's a travesty that Fermilab doesn't have more subscribers your videos are always fascinating and packed with information that's very simply and directly presented.
Schrodinger never used anything. The whole cat story was a derisive concoction, proposed by his critics who thought his ideas were hokum. The came up with the ridiculous idea that the cat could be both dead and alive, not realizing that serious physicists would embrace the idea.
Schrodinger used thought experiment to prove the absurdity of Quantum mechanics with its core idea that the wave function encompassed all possible states and only collapsed upon observation.
Confirmed to 3.6 sigma. More data and several technical improvements will come in run 2 increasing confidence that the result is real. Check back in 2020.
I really appreciate that this guy's videos make the subject material understandable to the unwashed masses like myself, yet he doesn't treat you like a child and talk down to you or wave his hands like we need to be constantly stimulated.
Really? Why can't there be long wavelengths between the plates? And how does such an imbalance move the plates together? Furthermore, what is the plates size and distance between them? It leaves a lot unanswered.
@@beliot3077 probably cuz of the size of plates and wavelength of the particles of the plates the high wavelength waves dont exist there, just an assumption
Same way that a wavelength is too long to get between the plates. Photon experiment with the double slit experiment that proves the existence of wave particles operates. The plate move together bc of the difference of amount of particles between the plates and outside the plates. The outside has more particles (bc a larger volume of particles can exist bc they aren't being filtered or hindered like they are between the plates. This creates a higher pressure outside than inside, thus the plates move away from the pressure and towards each other. This reasoning is how they proved the existence of the quantum foam by proving virtual particles.
Maybe the answer to my question is hidden somewhere below, in which case I apologise for wasting your time. My question has been bugging me for quite a while and I did pose it to a particle scientist .... who had no answer. Quantum foam is real, it's filled with virtual particles, but they are real, even though only for a (very) short period of time. My simple question is "what is the mass of this quantum foam?" If quantum foam has mass, the Casimir effect shows that macroscopic boundaries have an effect on the mass within the boundaries and thus physical boundaries influence the property/properties of quantum foam. The point I want to make is that the properties of the quantum foam can be influenced. A black hole distorts space/time. Might this distortion act on and influence the properties of the quantum foam? Like the macroscopic boundaries in the Casimir experiment. Now, what if mass/gravity indeed has an influence on the properties of quantum foam, might it explain dark matter/energy?
Sub-atomic particles dont actually spin the same way that macroscopic ones do. They dont physically spin around on their "axis". Its a very difficult concept to understand, since theyre not really particles at all, or tiny bits of "something". Theyre field quanta, excitations of the underlying respective field. Electrons have the electron field, quarks have their own field, photons too and so forth.
Seems to me it’s more accurate to say, rather than things are created from “nothing”, that everywhere there are fields which randomly undulate in various values and when these perturbations are great enough we perceive them as small particles. So “nothing” doesn’t exist, all that exists are things that momentarily look like nothing because they are temporarily at close to zero value in their field strengths so nothing is detectable. “Nothing” is just slightly calm spots in a turbulent ocean.
Glad this popped up in my feed in light of the news now in 2021 of the G-2 experiment hitting 4.2 sigma. It still might fizzle but 5 sigma confidence is closer. I'd also like to hear about the impact (or lack thereof) on the quantum foam on the clarity/crispness of the Hubble images. Did that ever get figured out?
Does this mean space is fluid and gravity is created by mass displacing space. What happened the fluid dynamics on a quantum level. Is the universe a bubble foaming expanding in to nothing? What is the viscosity of space if it is acts like a fluid? If space a Newtonian like liquid or Non?
Love your videos! So it's not just in deep space or vacuum then -- quantum foam and virtual particles occur everywhere, including, say, in the "empty" space around every nucleus and electrons of the atoms we're made of, even inside protons/neutrons and around every elementary particle, is that correct? If so, could a virtual positron pop up right next to an electron and live long enough for the two to annihilate each other? Not sure if "right next to" makes sense, I guess it would be that the probability wave of one intersects with the probability wave of the other so that there is a nonzero probability they could get annihilated. (That's my layman understanding.) But either way, could electrons spontaneously disappear and energy spontaneously be formed b/c of the quantum foam? Thank you. Also what software package do you use for the animations? Thanks!
Davor Magdic It is my understanding that when a "virtual" (antimatter) particle comes into existence, so does the matter part, i.e. when a positron comes into existence, it does with an electron as a companion. If that positron meets an electron, they disappear, but you end up with an electron. Depending on how far this electron is, I guess the disturbance could be measured.
***** How do positrons come into existence? Don't they pop up into existence next to an electron? Don't these pair usually annihilate each other in a very short amount of time?
Yes exactly. You could have a teapot appear and then annihilate - although this event would be rare. Theres a trade off between the size, the amount time it would exist and the amount of energy to it would require to exist.
it is possible to have a teapot and antiteapot appearing and disappearing. but the mass is so huge that the time involved is so small and we can't observe it
What he is saying is that spacetime is not nothing; that the universe itself, apart from any matter and energy in it, is SOMETHING. It does not merely have the potential for matter and motion to take place in it--it always has energy in it with particle-like fluctuations that average out to zero when space is "empty" of mass and fields.
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't Einstein come up with the quantized photon in 1905 in his Nobel prize winning paper on the photoelectric effect? QED successfully combined quantum mechanics, a MUCH more fleshed out theory than what Einstein wrote, one of his other famous 1905 papers, the one explaining special relativity. ( Technically 2 papers, E=mc2, a convergence on SR, was proven in a separate paper during Einstein's "Miracle Year" of 1905).
01:08 shows the effort (the funny letter from a curious soul) put in by the team of Dr. Lincoln, Ian Krass and Fermilab, in each and every video, to explain the complex concepts in an engaging and comprehensible way! Keep it up!!
Fermilab please, let me know when you write a book about quantum mechanics and the theory of relativity, easy and direct as your videos. Great contribution for non-physicist interested in the topic. Thanks
The 2nd explanation was lousy: electrons have spin but they don't literally spin, it's only one intrinsic property of theirs which is not even well known why they act like they spin. Yes, electrons are like microscopic magnets and due to that we say they have spin. In the drawing it should not be spinning though.
The notion that energy is being created and destroyed in this portrayal of quantum foam is false because the only way to prevent light particles from reflecting back is with a 100% black material, and such a material does not exist. This theory falls apart when you understand how color works. When light strikes a material, depending on the material, some of the wavelengths are absorbed while others are reflected. This occurs across a spectrum from white to black to produce the colors that we can see. White reflects all of the wavelengths of light, while black absorbs all of the wavelengths of light. However, there is so much variation in the composition of materials, regardless of color that affect the reflection and absorption of light. To put it another way, materials have variation among the particles they are composed of in their individual ability to reflect and or absorb wavelengths of light. You could say not all of the particles which makeup objects are composed of the same shade or hue. Put simply, this means nothing is 100% composed of a particular color. When it comes to black, which this experiment is based on, there is no known material that is 100% pure black known to man. Variations in the shades and hues of black come from the reflection of light particles in unpure black materials. Therefore, for theorists to claim that the observation of light shined onto a black material in the experiment referenced in this video is the creation and destruction of energy is absurd and false. While they observed light shone into a black material with an electron scopes, the fact that the material is not pure black means that what they observed was the reflection of light particles. I doubt the man who made this video nor proponents of the quantum foam theory understand the flaw present in their experiment. What irritates me the most is that the presenter gleefully expresses that the mathematics of quantum foam reconciles many of the problems with that challenge our overall understanding of physics when the rationality of the experiement and its conclusion are questionable.
Quantum spin is due to Noether's theorem and rotational symmetry of the universe. This symmetry creates two conserved properties, angular momentum and spin. So quantum spin really is related to the way a ball spins, but it is also different.
Virtual particles at the Planck scale (1xE-34) are partitioned by metal plates that you and I can place next to each other? This reasoning for the Casimir Effect sounds highly suspect. More likely, it is some other undiscovered information structure beneath the sub-atomic but much larger than the Planck scale that is the cause of the CE. Or, for example, it could be particles such as dark matter. I bet when they evacuated that box they didn't evacuate the dark matter etc.
U may never look at foam same way again. This statement reminded me of Dr. Walter Lewin saying u never look at 🌈 same way again. Appreciate ur ability to make the common this special by attaching such a deep insight to it. Awesome work.
Binging Dr Lincoln again, always so interesting! There is also a video on the excellent 60 Symbols channel on the Casimir Effect that is quite good and complimentary. 60 Symbols is one of the channels from the University of Nottingham (so you know its real science... sometimes the algorithm suggests woo-woo...)
There's a pretty common factor though, which really begs to differ here.... "energy never dies it merely transforms into something else" - I think these sub-atomic particles don't "appear and "disappear" like scientists believe. I think they are literally traveling freely through dimensions and don't have the limitations other matter has. That would give the appearance of appearing and disappearing since we're trapped here.
In the Casimir effect experiment, the two plates move towards each other, conserving momentum. But, where does the energy come from? When the two plates move towards each other, they gain kinetic energy. Does this mean we can extract energy from the quantum foam?
Great video. This brings up a question in my mind. Since all the energy/matter in the universe existed, in some form, at the big bang, and expanded to form this gigantic universe with inflation, it is not possible to add anything in the way of energy or matter to what is "already there" in some form. As we now know, space is expanding at an accelerating rate, making the most distant galaxies recede from us faster and faster . So, the question is: as space itself rapidly expands, does the rate at which virtual particles pop in and out of existence in any given volume of space remain constant everywhere? If so, there would have to be many, many more virtual particles appearing than there were just a tiny fraction of a second ago. Yes, they all add up to zero by cancelling each other out, but many more of both matter and anti-matter virtual particles are existing now, even if just for a trillionth of a second, than there were a second ago, due to the expansion of space. So, it would seem that something is being added to the universe that wasn't there before. How is this explained?
The notion that energy is being created and destroyed in this portrayal of quantum foam is false because the only way to prevent light particles from reflecting back is with a 100% black material, and such a material does not exist. This theory falls apart when you understand how color works. When light strikes a material, depending on the material, some of the wavelengths are absorbed while others are reflected. This occurs across a spectrum from white to black to produce the colors that we can see. White reflects all of the wavelengths of light, while black absorbs all of the wavelengths of light. However, there is so much variation in the composition of materials, regardless of color that affect the reflection and absorption of light. To put it another way, materials have variation among the particles they are composed of in their individual ability to reflect and or absorb wavelengths of light. You could say not all of the particles which makeup objects are composed of the same shade or hue. Put simply, this means nothing is 100% composed of a particular color. When it comes to black, which this experiment is based on, there is no known material that is 100% pure black known to man. Variations in the shades and hues of black come from the reflection of light particles in unpure black materials. Therefore, for theorists to claim that the observation of light shined onto a black material in the experiment referenced in this video is the creation and destruction of energy is absurd and false. While they observed light shone into a black material with an electron scopes, the fact that the material is not pure black means that what they observed was the reflection of light particles. I doubt the man who made this video nor proponents of the quantum foam theory understand the flaw present in their experiment. What irritates me the most is that the presenter gleefully expresses that the mathematics of quantum foam reconciles many of the problems with that challenge our overall understanding of physics when the rationality of the experiement and its conclusion are questionable.
Both Matter and Energy described as "Quanta" of Spatial Curvature. (A string is revealed to be a twisted cord when viewed up close.) Is there an alternative interpretation of "Asymptotic Freedom"? What if Quarks are actually made up of twisted tubes which become physically entangled with two other twisted tubes to produce a proton? Instead of the Strong Force being mediated by the constant exchange of gluons, it would be mediated by the physical entanglement of these twisted tubes. When only two twisted tubules are entangled, a meson is produced which is unstable and rapidly unwinds (decays) into something else. A proton would be analogous to three twisted rubber bands becoming entangled and the "Quarks" would be the places where the tubes are tangled together. The behavior would be the same as rubber balls (representing the Quarks) connected with twisted rubber bands being separated from each other or placed closer together producing the exact same phenomenon as "Asymptotic Freedom" in protons and neutrons. The force would become greater as the balls are separated, but the force would become less if the balls were placed closer together. Therefore, the gluon is a synthetic particle (zero mass, zero charge) invented to explain the Strong Force. An artificial Christmas tree can hold the ornaments in place, but it is not a real tree. String Theory was not a waste of time, because Geometry is the key to Math and Physics. However, can we describe Standard Model interactions using only one extra spatial dimension? What did some of the old clockmakers use to store the energy to power the clock? Was it a string or was it a spring? What if we describe subatomic particles as spatial curvature, instead of trying to describe General Relativity as being mediated by particles? Fixing the Standard Model with more particles is like trying to mend a torn fishing net with small rubber balls, instead of a piece of twisted twine. Quantum Entangled Twisted Tubules: “We are all agreed that your theory is crazy. The question which divides us is whether it is crazy enough to have a chance of being correct.” Neils Bohr (lecture on a theory of elementary particles given by Wolfgang Pauli in New York, c. 1957-8, in Scientific American vol. 199, no. 3, 1958) The following is meant to be a generalized framework for an extension of Kaluza-Klein Theory. Does it agree with some aspects of the “Twistor Theory” of Roger Penrose, and the work of Eric Weinstein on “Geometric Unity”, and the work of Dr. Lisa Randall on the possibility of one extra spatial dimension? During the early history of mankind, the twisting of fibers was used to produce thread, and this thread was used to produce fabrics. The twist of the thread is locked up within these fabrics. Is matter made up of twisted 3D-4D structures which store spatial curvature that we describe as “particles"? Are the twist cycles the "quanta" of Quantum Mechanics? When we draw a sine wave on a blackboard, we are representing spatial curvature. Does a photon transfer spatial curvature from one location to another? Wrap a piece of wire around a pencil and it can produce a 3D coil of wire, much like a spring. When viewed from the side it can look like a two-dimensional sine wave. You could coil the wire with either a right-hand twist, or with a left-hand twist. Could Planck's Constant be proportional to the twist cycles. A photon with a higher frequency has more energy. ( E=hf, More spatial curvature as the frequency increases = more Energy ). What if Quark/Gluons are actually made up of these twisted tubes which become entangled with other tubes to produce quarks where the tubes are entangled? (In the same way twisted electrical extension cords can become entangled.) Therefore, the gluons are a part of the quarks. Quarks cannot exist without gluons, and vice-versa. Mesons are made up of two entangled tubes (Quarks/Gluons), while protons and neutrons would be made up of three entangled tubes. (Quarks/Gluons) The "Color Charge" would be related to the XYZ coordinates (orientation) of entanglement. "Asymptotic Freedom", and "flux tubes" are logically based on this concept. The Dirac “belt trick” also reveals the concept of twist in the ½ spin of subatomic particles. If each twist cycle is proportional to h, we have identified the source of Quantum Mechanics as a consequence twist cycle geometry. Modern physicists say the Strong Force is mediated by a constant exchange of Gluons. The diagrams produced by some modern physicists actually represent the Strong Force like a spring connecting the two quarks. Asymptotic Freedom acts like real springs. Their drawing is actually more correct than their theory and matches perfectly to what I am saying in this model. You cannot separate the Gluons from the Quarks because they are a part of the same thing. The Quarks are the places where the Gluons are entangled with each other. Neutrinos would be made up of a twisted torus (like a twisted donut) within this model. The twist in the torus can either be Right-Hand or Left-Hand. Some twisted donuts can be larger than others, which can produce three different types of neutrinos. If a twisted tube winds up on one end and unwinds on the other end as it moves through space, this would help explain the “spin” of normal particles, and perhaps also the “Higgs Field”. However, if the end of the twisted tube joins to the other end of the twisted tube forming a twisted torus (neutrino), would this help explain “Parity Symmetry” violation in Beta Decay? Could the conversion of twist cycles to writhe cycles through the process of supercoiling help explain “neutrino oscillations”? Spatial curvature (mass) would be conserved, but the structure could change. ===================== Gravity is a result of a very small curvature imbalance within atoms. (This is why the force of gravity is so small.) Instead of attempting to explain matter as "particles", this concept attempts to explain matter more in the manner of our current understanding of the space-time curvature of gravity. If an electron has qualities of both a particle and a wave, it cannot be either one. It must be something else. Therefore, a "particle" is actually a structure which stores spatial curvature. Can an electron-positron pair (which are made up of opposite directions of twist) annihilate each other by unwinding into each other producing Gamma Ray photons? Does an electron travel through space like a threaded nut traveling down a threaded rod, with each twist cycle proportional to Planck’s Constant? Does it wind up on one end, while unwinding on the other end? Is this related to the Higgs field? Does this help explain the strange ½ spin of many subatomic particles? Does the 720 degree rotation of a 1/2 spin particle require at least one extra dimension? Alpha decay occurs when the two protons and two neutrons (which are bound together by entangled tubes), become un-entangled from the rest of the nucleons . Beta decay occurs when the tube of a down quark/gluon in a neutron becomes overtwisted and breaks producing a twisted torus (neutrino) and an up quark, and the ejected electron. The production of the torus may help explain the “Symmetry Violation” in Beta Decay, because one end of the broken tube section is connected to the other end of the tube produced, like a snake eating its tail. The phenomenon of Supercoiling involving twist and writhe cycles may reveal how overtwisted quarks can produce these new particles. The conversion of twists into writhes, and vice-versa, is an interesting process, which is also found in DNA molecules. Could the production of multiple writhe cycles help explain the three generations of quarks and neutrinos? If the twist cycles increase, the writhe cycles would also have a tendency to increase. Gamma photons are produced when a tube unwinds producing electromagnetic waves. ( Mass=1/Length ) The “Electric Charge” of electrons or positrons would be the result of one twist cycle being displayed at the 3D-4D surface interface of the particle. The physical entanglement of twisted tubes in quarks within protons and neutrons and mesons displays an overall external surface charge of an integer number. Because the neutrinos do not have open tube ends, (They are a twisted torus.) they have no overall electric charge. Within this model a black hole could represent a quantum of gravity, because it is one cycle of spatial gravitational curvature. Therefore, instead of a graviton being a subatomic particle it could be considered to be a black hole. The overall gravitational attraction would be caused by a very tiny curvature imbalance within atoms. In this model Alpha equals the compactification ratio within the twistor cone, which is approximately 1/137. 1= Hypertubule diameter at 4D interface 137= Cone’s larger end diameter at 3D interface where the photons are absorbed or emitted. The 4D twisted Hypertubule gets longer or shorter as twisting or untwisting occurs. (720 degrees per twist cycle.) How many neutrinos are left over from the Big Bang? They have a small mass, but they could be very large in number. Could this help explain Dark Matter? Why did Paul Dirac use the twist in a belt to help explain particle spin? Is Dirac’s belt trick related to this model? Is the “Quantum” unit based on twist cycles? I started out imagining a subatomic Einstein-Rosen Bridge whose internal surface is twisted with either a Right-Hand twist, or a Left-Hand twist producing a twisted 3D/4D membrane. This topological Soliton model grew out of that simple idea. I was also trying to imagine a way to stuff the curvature of a 3 D sine wave into subatomic particles. .
So! Perhaps... all thought, memories, awareness and consciousness, which we think arises in the mind actually is something that manifests out of quantum foam. What's your thoughts?
I REALLY wish these videos would stop saying things like "a very short period of time" and give us at least some quantification like less than 100 zeptoseconds and then compare that to something actually physical. It's hard to understand if scientists are saying yes virtual particles exist but only for unmeasurable but real periods of time or that we don't know if if that short period of time is enough to make the particle actual or whether it's all a mathematical interval. In other words what does "a very short period of time" mean? Is there possibly some ghostly universe that infinitely underlies ours but whose entities exist too briefly to effect our own?
Let me put it into perspective for you a zepto second is a billionth of a billionth of a second that's how long it takes these VP's to decay if you compared it to every second that the universe has existed about 13.8 billion years. There are more half lives of these particles in one single second then every single second that the universe has existed by a factor of a thousand. That's how ridiculously short their existence is you can't even measure them with an instrument that operates at the speed of light all you can measure is their effect ie the (weak force) hints why they are called ghost particles.
Space is an energy field with physical structure. Motion of objects creates waves in the fabric of Space. Whenever these space waves interfere constructively they create vertual particles which quickly dissipate back into space.
0:21 “Relatively intuitive” -- remember that we’ve had literally centuries to get used to Newton’s laws. Back then, the idea that things would keep going after you pushed them, rather than stopping, was highly counterintuitive! And even in the early days of space rocketry, there were people who didn’t understand how rockets could work in a vacuum where there was “nothing to push against”. Remember that infamous New York Times editorial that said rockets would never work in space?
how can there be quantum foam and the quantum fields of QFT? Which is it? Or do they both exist? If so, which is the most fundamental, which is at the smallest planck scale?
Everything we see is just atoms specifically electrons masked by photons. Our bodies are made of atoms masked by photons, so my next question is what are our minds and thoughts made of? Maybe some array of particles or energy fields we haven't discovered yet. My next question is our awareness or consciousness, is it a whole other array of particles within a field or is it just some sort of self feedback loop. An environment checking itself with a vehicle(our body). If you read this can u please explain if there are any ongoing research or theories about these questions so I can research them on my own or perhaps you can make a video about them. Thank you in advance.
In case of two glass panels put together. Is the force glueing the panels together: a) electron veils interaction of the panels b) ”vacuum” between the panels c) Casimir-effect?
3:16 - Actually, not! This is a commonly misunderstood. Uncertainty Principle is not a font of energy, as small as it is! In any situation energy is conserved in Quantum Mechanics! The energy is already there if we can detect its effects. As literally said by David J. Griffiths: "It is often said that the uncertainty principle means that energy is not strictly conserved in Quantum Mechanics - that you are allowed to borrow energy ΔE, as long as you pay it back in a time Δt ≈ ℏ ⁄2ΔE; the greater the violation, the briefer the period over which it can occur. There are many legitimate readings of the energy-time uncertainty principle, but this is not one of them. Nowhere does Quantum Mechanics license violation of energy conservation, and certainly no such authorisation entered into the derivation of Eq 3.151 (ΔE Δt≥ℏ/2)".
Dr. Don Lincoln, I'm curious now, so this is about particles coming in existence and then annihilating each other again, quarks and anti-quarks. What is the difference between this phenomenon and mesons, which are a quark anti-quark pair? Is Quantum chromodynamics not an issue here? or is just a gluon missing ? How does the universe know, that for the phenomenon of particles coming in and out of existence, it's not supposed to create quarks with the opposite color charges, because otherwise we would get mesons. Or is it the gluon that prevents the quark anti-quark pair from annihilating each other? This is really confusing! Are mesons always the same quark antiquark pair? or is it possible to have mesons with an up quark and an anti strange quark for example?
+Alexandru Moise A guy named David Butler has some excellent videos on similar topics. Sixty symbols is great as well. But i agree, more in depth awesome science videos would be wonderful.
On the other hand, when quantum foam is applied to cosmology, the predicted value of the dark energy is 150 orders of magnitude off the measured value. You should tell the whole story, not just a part.
Thought experiment: a modest root beer fountain of extremely long lasting bubbles bubbling up in a very large pool of water that has fine dust floating at the surface. The dust and the fountain can not coincide. An island of root beer foam starts to grow, pushing the dust aside. The expansion make room for more bubble to come forth. The bubbles hard jostle each other which causes the island to grow. Its outer edge is now moving the dust away from the fountain at a slow rate. However, in pushing the dust aside, more room is made for the formation of new fountains in the area once covered by dust. Thus the number of new fountains increase at the rate of π R2 . Now we have an exponential growth in two dimensions. Turn this into three dimensional space and the root beer bubbles in to quantum foam surrounded by the dust that is matter and you have a quantum foam bubble pushing outwards on its surrounding matter at an exponentially increasing rate. If the Pauli exclusion principle also works on quantum virtual particles (VP) and if the repulsive force (quark degeneracy or similar) is both great enough and long lasting enough to push the VPs apart before they disappear again, is this not a sufficient force to explain accelerating cosmic expansion?
@@wayneyadams De Grasse Tyson is simply better at communicating and narrating. This video was good but I found Lincoln's exposition a bit awkward at times and not very exciting. But I repeat, the video was good
@Fermilab Thanks so much. Could you please explain (for non-expert people in simple conceptual words), why energy conservation law is not violated in the Casimir effect? Thank you
What about the paralelisms between modern physics and eastern philosophy?? Dr Lincoln, I'm a big fan! These videos are a great contribution to humanity itself!! Thanks for sharing your knowledge.
***** This is my guess: Gravity is by far the weakest of all the known forces in the universe. The gravitational field also barely affects single particles -- it is much more effective on clumps of massive particles. It is perhaps this reason that the gravitational force does not have any significant effect in this scenario.
I don't think it changes: string or M theory is a theory within quantum mechanics. I'd dare say that it's "too quantic" and not "relativistic enough" but just my opinion.
What if virtual partials are just spacetime remembering were everything has ever bin at different points in it's existence. So space remembers everything that happened with in confines of its spacetime.
Theory of the week - The box isnt empty, its full of gravity! Whatever gravity turns out to be the quantum foam may be the surface tension that gravity experirnces as it flows and stretches as the universe expands. This "stretching" will not be uniform it will be wrinkley. The emission of virtual particles/quantum foam is gravity seld adjusting to the forces distorting space time. As the earth rolls aroud the sun itsgravity will be creating a doppler shift in the fabric of time space, stretching on the leading edge and compressing on the trailing edge. Testing - complete the two plate experiment at the same time at different points on the earths surface and maybe on the international space station - any differences in the observed movement between tests - assuming all other factors are accounted for - may confirm.
If every rotating object is charged (magnet), does that mean that a static object also becomes charged if there are multiple moving (charged) objects around it?
IMO yes or at least maybe, a stubborn legacy of Newtonian point-based mechanics, at least to some extent. However it is true that "particles" do behave as such particles at times, so its not all their fault. But I do suspect that a less "particle-ist" approach should be more fruitful indeed.
Does the clock appear slower or is it actually slower? Also if you were travelling close to the speed of light and everything slowed down for you, does that mean that you age slower too?
It "appears" and "is" slower at the same time because it all depends on who is the observer. For the photon's "clock", time never passes at all: they are oddly eternal and extemporaneous, yet they still interact with "faster", time-involved stuff, like our very eyes, in specific moments of time. Weird, I know.
Particles are not exactly particles but probability waves. There are some very nice videos around explaining how actual electron "orbitals" are. And there is always a field or actually several fields but quantum physics insists on explaining it in terms of "particles", what is sometimes good and sometimes not so good because of the particle-wave duality thing... It's complicated. But there is at least a smallest possible length and time, Planck's distance, aka "h". It's extremely tiny though. It's required to avoid the "ultraviolet catastrophe", which doesn't actually happens.
Quantum foam is space-time, nothing else: all physics apply, just that particles adding to zero can pop in and out of existence at any time. Not sure if thermodynamics is a great way of approaching the micro-reality however.
Just a question as I am ignorant of many things but want to learn more. Science text books say that matter or energy cannot be created or destroyed. Does this go against what we've been taught with "virtual particles" coming into and out of existence? Or, is like that idea behind Flatland and more dimensions? Are things from a "higher dimension" coming into our dimensions and passing out of it again and we briefly see it for a moment of time. The higher energy "hyper-dimensional" particles are moving faster, therefore are here for a shorter period of time. It seems random to us who only experience 3 dimensions, but if they are travelling through ours from a higher dimension, it may not be as random as we think? (Not talking sic-fi alternate reality here, just different dimensions of space) I once gave a small presentation in an undergrad class about Flatland and my thoughts often flow through that filter. Any ideas or criticisms are welcome!
+Nicholas Rachevsky Its more of a temporary vs permanent thing. A more accurate wording of the law would be Matter and energy cannot be permanently created or destroyed. Energy can be converted into matter and vice versa. Energy can temporarily be created like in the case of quantum tunneling and matter can be temporarily be created like virtual particles. It just doesnt remain in existence for very long. If something forces it to remain in existence (like a black hole in the case of hawkings radiation) energy is lost to keep it in existence thereby converting energy to matter. Or if energy is created permanently like in a nuclear reaction then it is at the cost of matter being converted.
So, are these virtual particles just happening to come into existence because some energy converged at at single point of time and space and created a particle, but was unstable and fell apart again and became energy once more? Seems too random to me.
Its more of a continuous process as far as I can understand. It is always happening almost everywhere. And it creates 2 particles. 1 matter and 1 anti-matter. They attract and annihilate eachother immediately becoming energy again. From what i can understand basically all energy is just matter and anti-matter joined together. And all matter is just energy missing its other half. Energy and matter are basically the same thing.
Do we have any ways of forcing this to happen so we can see it occurring, like the collider in Geneva? Is there a way to store antimatter to then make energy? (Am I getting into Star Trek too much, or is that the idea they had anyway?)
When you say the predicted matches the experiment how would you exactly model the behavior of virtual particles? Like density, wavelength, lifespans exactly??
There is a different perspective, that there is no vacuum in the classical sense because the grown state of many fields that permeate the universe is not zero. That avoid the paradoxes that come from “coming from nothing” the Casimir effect , by the way have other explanations , not only the quantum one so it’s hardly a prove. By the way I am not saying that QED is wrong , we know is incomplete , but also the most precisely confirm theory we have for anything.
My only complaint with this video is how you described quantum spin before showing an animation of a positron spinning. It's spin angular momentum. Nothing is actually spinning. Other than that, awesome video!
Quantum spin is indeed a bit complicated. I'm not an expert, but I think that quantum spin refers for the angular momentum that quantum particles possess. Angular momentum sounds like just ordinary spin for me, so I just like to think of it like they act like they are spinning even though they don't, not the weirdest thing in quantum mechanics, if you ask me.
@@nafrost2787 what !! They act like spin but they don't ??? And how it's possible that they have angular momentum properties without spin ???? If this is the magical case then how scientists even imagine such things at first time ?? , m asking because , if it is reality then still it's hard to imagine for me such scenario.
Question - if you could actually zoom to 10^-35 wouldn't that be much smaller than the size of virtual particles? That image of light blobs popping in and out representing virtual particle pairs would be something you would "see" around 10^-18...? At 10^-35 you would be seeing blobs of space-time not proton clouds. I thought at that scale the only possible particle would be the hypothetical graviton?
***** That would be interesting if QED foam is part of space-time, especially if inflation holds up. It seems, to me, common sense, to posit that if black holes and massive bodies have such a strong influence on space-time and electrodynamics gives us Special Relativity, which gives E = mc², mass & time dilation, length contraction, they must all be somehow entangled, mingled in one nice equation. An equation that gives a predicted magnetic strength of an electron all the way out to our measured accuracy and beyond.
I liked the video however I'm not sure: I always thought that the term "quantum foam" refers to the smallest Planck scale where it is expected that the notion of the geometry itself no longer makes sense. What is buzzling here are not virtual particles but the quanta of space itself and as opposed to virtual particles, these phenomena are still not confirmed by experiments.
This is how matter can be controlled by the will of men. Magnets are a 'force' that have applied effect on these subatomic particles. All Eastern mystics teach that the will, or mental exertion, of a rightly trained man's brain can create effect on matter as well. By addressing the laws that make the laws, the mind can direct the form and path of matter.
![Kodak Black - Versatile 4 [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/VcP_1Ua__vY/mqdefault.jpg)
I bought a Cassimir Effect toaster and now I never buy bread. I push down the lever, the wires get hot, and two minutes later up pops a piece of toast and a piece of anti-toast, courtesy of the quantum foam. I eat the toast and throw the anti-toast out in my yard. Anti-birds gotta eat too.
When u touch the antibread you would explode in gamma radiation
+Kaushal Banthia Not if you use tongs made of unobtanium.
+Liberty4Ever I had the unfortunate occurrence of accidentally mixing pasta and anti-pasta in my kitchen. Now my kitchen is a mess.
+Kaushal Banthia Well not if you wear anti-gloves duh... Oh wait...
+Liberty4Ever
Wake up in the morning, bout 6am
Have a little jelly, have a little jam
Don't grab a piece of bread to put it in the slot
Push down the button and the wire gets hot and the quantum foam properties of matter pops out toooooasssst.
YEAH TOAST.
Empty space may not be all that empty after all.
super cool!
Where is science taking us? What is the purpose of all these experiments? After experimentation and conclusions, will there be any real benefit to our civilization? We discovered the Higgs boson... so now what, can it help us fight against HIV, is it going to give us a better energy source? I'm a microbiology major, I am pro science all the way but I dont understand the purpose for these experiments. What happens after we prove dark energy or dark matter exists ? Do we become immortal? I have a feeling these high end experiments are just going to pleasure our conscious, for example.. I would really like to know what happened before the big bang, or what caused the big bang, or why is there something instead of nothing. But if we do finally come up with a fundamental theory of everything, is it going to really physically benefit us or just mentally.
TheJfranco9 I find it strange that someone that is pro-science can't see the benefits and future innovations that can come from pushing the boundaries of our knowledge base further. You're argument isn't too different from people that criticized early E&M experiments by Faraday. I think you're intelligent enough to figure out the purpose of these experiments.
TheJfranco9 That's the argument usually made by people against space exploration because they ignore the slate of practical applications that have come from it (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASA_spin-off_technologies). Same goes for, say, research carried out at CERN. Apart from having developed and freely shared the WWW protocol, CERN is responsible for considerable advances in superconducting technology, not to mention ways to make proton therapies more effective (home.web.cern.ch/about/updates/2013/04/accelerators-medicine). As a science student you should understand that there can never be applied research without pure research. Ever.
TheJfranco9 We often don't know what the practical applications might be ahead of time. When the electron was discovered, it had no practical use at all; today, the entire world is run by electronics.
QED must be right. It's even got QED as it's initialism.
Yes, but QFT is QFT. ;)
4:43 it means , virtual particles not only electrons and position but all subatomic particles?
@Ordinary Sessel Unrelated to the pun, Mr. Feynman was one helluva bright spark indeed.
"QED must be right. It's even got QED as it's initialism."
This leads us to one of the great unexplored laws of the Universe. Puns that come from Physicists cannot be accidental.
Nice!
I studied physics at a university in chicago, im so close to fermilab and argonne. This channel always presents high level grad physics so well. I hope to be able to get a job there!
Did you go for the job? It's 7 years later. I hope you are doing what you love!
Hope you're doing well! Would love to know what your up to. I wish I left film for science.
It's been 8 years now. We need to know!
Pls let us know! I need to know if ur at LHC or Fermi
Nice. Thanks for posting. It's a travesty that Fermilab doesn't have more subscribers your videos are always fascinating and packed with information that's very simply and directly presented.
ScienceNinjaDude are you from fermilab?
If Schrödinger had used a parrot instead of a cat we could say it was just resting.
its a former cat
It's just pining for the fjords.
Schrodinger never used anything. The whole cat story was a derisive concoction, proposed by his critics who thought his ideas were hokum. The came up with the ridiculous idea that the cat could be both dead and alive, not realizing that serious physicists would embrace the idea.
Schrodinger used thought experiment to prove the absurdity of Quantum mechanics with its core idea that the wave function encompassed all possible states and only collapsed upon observation.
@@wayneyadams I'm glad those assholes existed to try and ridicule Schrodinger's idea, because the idea of quantum zombie cat is awesome
I love how your electron has a positive charge
Ben Vrakas positron
positron, pleb
Sign of charge is purelly conventional, and physics should work the same if we were to change the sign of every charged species,
@@mok0s1 C Symmetry, Yeah?
@@mok0s1 the laws of physics are not invariant under charge conjugation
PLEASE update this. Its been five years. What did the LHC find?
Confirmed to 3.6 sigma. More data and several technical improvements will come in run 2 increasing confidence that the result is real.
Check back in 2020.
@@NoMoreForeignWars 3.6 sigma. Not great, not terrible. :-P
still colecting data?
Any news as of the end of January 2020?
April 2020?
I really appreciate that this guy's videos make the subject material understandable to the unwashed masses like myself, yet he doesn't treat you like a child and talk down to you or wave his hands like we need to be constantly stimulated.
have you bathed yet? I hope so ;)
(it's important to wash your masses y'all)
I've always heard of the double plate experiment but I never really understood it. This video explains it really well. Thanks!
Really? Why can't there be long wavelengths between the plates? And how does such an imbalance move the plates together? Furthermore, what is the plates size and distance between them? It leaves a lot unanswered.
@@beliot3077 τι λεει ρε μητσαρα
Ελληνας
@@beliot3077 Maybe that in particle physics, there is always a gap between an acceptable explanation and the accurate theory.
@@beliot3077 probably cuz of the size of plates and wavelength of the particles of the plates the high wavelength waves dont exist there, just an assumption
Same way that a wavelength is too long to get between the plates. Photon experiment with the double slit experiment that proves the existence of wave particles operates. The plate move together bc of the difference of amount of particles between the plates and outside the plates. The outside has more particles (bc a larger volume of particles can exist bc they aren't being filtered or hindered like they are between the plates. This creates a higher pressure outside than inside, thus the plates move away from the pressure and towards each other. This reasoning is how they proved the existence of the quantum foam by proving virtual particles.
Maybe the answer to my question is hidden somewhere below, in which case I apologise for wasting your time. My question has been bugging me for quite a while and I did pose it to a particle scientist .... who had no answer.
Quantum foam is real, it's filled with virtual particles, but they are real, even though only for a (very) short period of time.
My simple question is "what is the mass of this quantum foam?"
If quantum foam has mass, the Casimir effect shows that macroscopic boundaries have an effect on the mass within the boundaries and thus physical boundaries influence the property/properties of quantum foam.
The point I want to make is that the properties of the quantum foam can be influenced.
A black hole distorts space/time. Might this distortion act on and influence the properties of the quantum foam? Like the macroscopic boundaries in the Casimir experiment.
Now, what if mass/gravity indeed has an influence on the properties of quantum foam, might it explain dark matter/energy?
The fundamental building blocks of our universe are made from the foamy head of a pan-dimensional cosmic beer. I like this idea.
What if we're all just floating on some extra-dimensional aliens beer after a long day at work?
😂😂
Sub-atomic particles dont actually spin the same way that macroscopic ones do. They dont physically spin around on their "axis". Its a very difficult concept to understand, since theyre not really particles at all, or tiny bits of "something". Theyre field quanta, excitations of the underlying respective field. Electrons have the electron field, quarks have their own field, photons too and so forth.
I agree completely. Using the term spin was a bad idea because it leads people to believe that electrons are tiny spinning balls.
Watching this video today (04.11.21) is pretty cool!
Congrats Fermilab!!!
Seems to me it’s more accurate to say, rather than things are created from “nothing”, that everywhere there are fields which randomly undulate in various values and when these perturbations are great enough we perceive them as small particles. So “nothing” doesn’t exist, all that exists are things that momentarily look like nothing because they are temporarily at close to zero value in their field strengths so nothing is detectable. “Nothing” is just slightly calm spots in a turbulent ocean.
Here after the discovery, congrats!
Glad this popped up in my feed in light of the news now in 2021 of the G-2 experiment hitting 4.2 sigma. It still might fizzle but 5 sigma confidence is closer.
I'd also like to hear about the impact (or lack thereof) on the quantum foam on the clarity/crispness of the Hubble images. Did that ever get figured out?
Does this mean space is fluid and gravity is created by mass displacing space. What happened the fluid dynamics on a quantum level. Is the universe a bubble foaming expanding in to nothing? What is the viscosity of space if it is acts like a fluid? If space a Newtonian like liquid or Non?
Love your videos! So it's not just in deep space or vacuum then -- quantum foam and virtual particles occur everywhere, including, say, in the "empty" space around every nucleus and electrons of the atoms we're made of, even inside protons/neutrons and around every elementary particle, is that correct? If so, could a virtual positron pop up right next to an electron and live long enough for the two to annihilate each other? Not sure if "right next to" makes sense, I guess it would be that the probability wave of one intersects with the probability wave of the other so that there is a nonzero probability they could get annihilated. (That's my layman understanding.) But either way, could electrons spontaneously disappear and energy spontaneously be formed b/c of the quantum foam? Thank you.
Also what software package do you use for the animations? Thanks!
Davor Magdic It is my understanding that when a "virtual" (antimatter) particle comes into existence, so does the matter part, i.e. when a positron comes into existence, it does with an electron as a companion. If that positron meets an electron, they disappear, but you end up with an electron. Depending on how far this electron is, I guess the disturbance could be measured.
***** How do positrons come into existence? Don't they pop up into existence next to an electron? Don't these pair usually annihilate each other in a very short amount of time?
Excellent presentation! Physics was my most favorite subject of my primary and secondary school years.
So you're saying that when you have literally *nothing*, antimatter and matter creates itself and then annihilates into nothing and then repeat?
+Sebastian Gulbransen Assuming you have matter and antimatter in everywhere space?
Yes exactly. You could have a teapot appear and then annihilate - although this event would be rare. Theres a trade off between the size, the amount time it would exist and the amount of energy to it would require to exist.
it is possible to have a teapot and antiteapot appearing and disappearing.
but the mass is so huge that the time involved is so small and we can't observe it
Exactly but it's random and unpredictable.
What he is saying is that spacetime is not nothing; that the universe itself, apart from any matter and energy in it, is SOMETHING. It does not merely have the potential for matter and motion to take place in it--it always has energy in it with particle-like fluctuations that average out to zero when space is "empty" of mass and fields.
oh so this concept was definitely brainstormed in a pub
If we zoom into a not empty space, the foam is still there? Or the foam is exclusive to empty spaces?
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't Einstein come up with the quantized photon in 1905 in his Nobel prize winning paper on the photoelectric effect? QED successfully combined quantum mechanics, a MUCH more fleshed out theory than what Einstein wrote, one of his other famous 1905 papers, the one explaining special relativity. ( Technically 2 papers, E=mc2, a convergence on SR, was proven in a separate paper during Einstein's "Miracle Year" of 1905).
01:08 shows the effort (the funny letter from a curious soul) put in by the team of Dr. Lincoln, Ian Krass and Fermilab, in each and every video, to explain the complex concepts in an engaging and comprehensible way! Keep it up!!
Watching it in 2021, and being able to confirm the Muon thing is still a hot topic.
Fermilab please, let me know when you write a book about quantum mechanics and the theory of relativity, easy and direct as your videos. Great contribution for non-physicist interested in the topic. Thanks
The 2nd explanation was lousy: electrons have spin but they don't literally spin, it's only one intrinsic property of theirs which is not even well known why they act like they spin. Yes, electrons are like microscopic magnets and due to that we say they have spin. In the drawing it should not be spinning though.
The notion that energy is being created and destroyed in this portrayal of quantum foam is false because the only way to prevent light particles from reflecting back is with a 100% black material, and such a material does not exist.
This theory falls apart when you understand how color works. When light strikes a material, depending on the material, some of the wavelengths are absorbed while others are reflected. This occurs across a spectrum from white to black to produce the colors that we can see. White reflects all of the wavelengths of light, while black absorbs all of the wavelengths of light. However, there is so much variation in the composition of materials, regardless of color that affect the reflection and absorption of light.
To put it another way, materials have variation among the particles they are composed of in their individual ability to reflect and or absorb wavelengths of light. You could say not all of the particles which makeup objects are composed of the same shade or hue. Put simply, this means nothing is 100% composed of a particular color.
When it comes to black, which this experiment is based on, there is no known material that is 100% pure black known to man. Variations in the shades and hues of black come from the reflection of light particles in unpure black materials. Therefore, for theorists to claim that the observation of light shined onto a black material in the experiment referenced in this video is the creation and destruction of energy is absurd and false.
While they observed light shone into a black material with an electron scopes, the fact that the material is not pure black means that what they observed was the reflection of light particles. I doubt the man who made this video nor proponents of the quantum foam theory understand the flaw present in their experiment. What irritates me the most is that the presenter gleefully expresses that the mathematics of quantum foam reconciles many of the problems with that challenge our overall understanding of physics when the rationality of the experiement and its conclusion are questionable.
Quantum spin is due to Noether's theorem and rotational symmetry of the universe. This symmetry creates two conserved properties, angular momentum and spin.
So quantum spin really is related to the way a ball spins, but it is also different.
I wish that instead of using the word "nothing" science would use the word "chaos" to name the quantum foam.
Virtual particles at the Planck scale (1xE-34) are partitioned by metal plates that you and I can place next to each other? This reasoning for the Casimir Effect sounds highly suspect. More likely, it is some other undiscovered information structure beneath the sub-atomic but much larger than the Planck scale that is the cause of the CE. Or, for example, it could be particles such as dark matter. I bet when they evacuated that box they didn't evacuate the dark matter etc.
What's the update video to this video? Was the muon experiment carried out successfully?
U may never look at foam same way again. This statement reminded me of Dr. Walter Lewin saying u never look at 🌈 same way again.
Appreciate ur ability to make the common this special by attaching such a deep insight to it. Awesome work.
Binging Dr Lincoln again, always so interesting!
There is also a video on the excellent 60 Symbols channel on the Casimir Effect that is quite good and complimentary.
60 Symbols is one of the channels from the University of Nottingham (so you know its real science... sometimes the algorithm suggests woo-woo...)
There's a pretty common factor though, which really begs to differ here.... "energy never dies it merely transforms into something else" - I think these sub-atomic particles don't "appear and "disappear" like scientists believe. I think they are literally traveling freely through dimensions and don't have the limitations other matter has. That would give the appearance of appearing and disappearing since we're trapped here.
In the Casimir effect experiment, the two plates move towards each other, conserving momentum. But, where does the energy come from? When the two plates move towards each other, they gain kinetic energy. Does this mean we can extract energy from the quantum foam?
Great video. This brings up a question in my mind. Since all the energy/matter in the universe existed, in some form, at the big bang, and expanded to form this gigantic universe with inflation, it is not possible to add anything in the way of energy or matter to what is "already there" in some form. As we now know, space is expanding at an accelerating rate, making the most distant galaxies recede from us faster and faster . So, the question is: as space itself rapidly expands, does the rate at which virtual particles pop in and out of existence in any given volume of space remain constant everywhere? If so, there would have to be many, many more virtual particles appearing than there were just a tiny fraction of a second ago. Yes, they all add up to zero by cancelling each other out, but many more of both matter and anti-matter virtual particles are existing now, even if just for a trillionth of a second, than there were a second ago, due to the expansion of space. So, it would seem that something is being added to the universe that wasn't there before. How is this explained?
The notion that energy is being created and destroyed in this portrayal of quantum foam is false because the only way to prevent light particles from reflecting back is with a 100% black material, and such a material does not exist.
This theory falls apart when you understand how color works. When light strikes a material, depending on the material, some of the wavelengths are absorbed while others are reflected. This occurs across a spectrum from white to black to produce the colors that we can see. White reflects all of the wavelengths of light, while black absorbs all of the wavelengths of light. However, there is so much variation in the composition of materials, regardless of color that affect the reflection and absorption of light.
To put it another way, materials have variation among the particles they are composed of in their individual ability to reflect and or absorb wavelengths of light. You could say not all of the particles which makeup objects are composed of the same shade or hue. Put simply, this means nothing is 100% composed of a particular color.
When it comes to black, which this experiment is based on, there is no known material that is 100% pure black known to man. Variations in the shades and hues of black come from the reflection of light particles in unpure black materials. Therefore, for theorists to claim that the observation of light shined onto a black material in the experiment referenced in this video is the creation and destruction of energy is absurd and false.
While they observed light shone into a black material with an electron scopes, the fact that the material is not pure black means that what they observed was the reflection of light particles. I doubt the man who made this video nor proponents of the quantum foam theory understand the flaw present in their experiment. What irritates me the most is that the presenter gleefully expresses that the mathematics of quantum foam reconciles many of the problems with that challenge our overall understanding of physics when the rationality of the experiement and its conclusion are questionable.
Both Matter and Energy described as "Quanta" of Spatial Curvature. (A string is revealed to be a twisted cord when viewed up close.)
Is there an alternative interpretation of "Asymptotic Freedom"? What if Quarks are actually made up of twisted tubes which become physically entangled with two other twisted tubes to produce a proton? Instead of the Strong Force being mediated by the constant exchange of gluons, it would be mediated by the physical entanglement of these twisted tubes. When only two twisted tubules are entangled, a meson is produced which is unstable and rapidly unwinds (decays) into something else. A proton would be analogous to three twisted rubber bands becoming entangled and the "Quarks" would be the places where the tubes are tangled together. The behavior would be the same as rubber balls (representing the Quarks) connected with twisted rubber bands being separated from each other or placed closer together producing the exact same phenomenon as "Asymptotic Freedom" in protons and neutrons. The force would become greater as the balls are separated, but the force would become less if the balls were placed closer together. Therefore, the gluon is a synthetic particle (zero mass, zero charge) invented to explain the Strong Force. An artificial Christmas tree can hold the ornaments in place, but it is not a real tree.
String Theory was not a waste of time, because Geometry is the key to Math and Physics. However, can we describe Standard Model interactions using only one extra spatial dimension? What did some of the old clockmakers use to store the energy to power the clock? Was it a string or was it a spring?
What if we describe subatomic particles as spatial curvature, instead of trying to describe General Relativity as being mediated by particles? Fixing the Standard Model with more particles is like trying to mend a torn fishing net with small rubber balls, instead of a piece of twisted twine.
Quantum Entangled Twisted Tubules:
“We are all agreed that your theory is crazy. The question which divides us is whether it is crazy enough to have a chance of being correct.” Neils Bohr
(lecture on a theory of elementary particles given by Wolfgang Pauli in New York, c. 1957-8, in Scientific American vol. 199, no. 3, 1958)
The following is meant to be a generalized framework for an extension of Kaluza-Klein Theory. Does it agree with some aspects of the “Twistor Theory” of Roger Penrose, and the work of Eric Weinstein on “Geometric Unity”, and the work of Dr. Lisa Randall on the possibility of one extra spatial dimension? During the early history of mankind, the twisting of fibers was used to produce thread, and this thread was used to produce fabrics. The twist of the thread is locked up within these fabrics. Is matter made up of twisted 3D-4D structures which store spatial curvature that we describe as “particles"? Are the twist cycles the "quanta" of Quantum Mechanics?
When we draw a sine wave on a blackboard, we are representing spatial curvature. Does a photon transfer spatial curvature from one location to another? Wrap a piece of wire around a pencil and it can produce a 3D coil of wire, much like a spring. When viewed from the side it can look like a two-dimensional sine wave. You could coil the wire with either a right-hand twist, or with a left-hand twist. Could Planck's Constant be proportional to the twist cycles. A photon with a higher frequency has more energy. ( E=hf, More spatial curvature as the frequency increases = more Energy ). What if Quark/Gluons are actually made up of these twisted tubes which become entangled with other tubes to produce quarks where the tubes are entangled? (In the same way twisted electrical extension cords can become entangled.) Therefore, the gluons are a part of the quarks. Quarks cannot exist without gluons, and vice-versa. Mesons are made up of two entangled tubes (Quarks/Gluons), while protons and neutrons would be made up of three entangled tubes. (Quarks/Gluons) The "Color Charge" would be related to the XYZ coordinates (orientation) of entanglement. "Asymptotic Freedom", and "flux tubes" are logically based on this concept. The Dirac “belt trick” also reveals the concept of twist in the ½ spin of subatomic particles. If each twist cycle is proportional to h, we have identified the source of Quantum Mechanics as a consequence twist cycle geometry.
Modern physicists say the Strong Force is mediated by a constant exchange of Gluons. The diagrams produced by some modern physicists actually represent the Strong Force like a spring connecting the two quarks. Asymptotic Freedom acts like real springs. Their drawing is actually more correct than their theory and matches perfectly to what I am saying in this model. You cannot separate the Gluons from the Quarks because they are a part of the same thing. The Quarks are the places where the Gluons are entangled with each other.
Neutrinos would be made up of a twisted torus (like a twisted donut) within this model. The twist in the torus can either be Right-Hand or Left-Hand. Some twisted donuts can be larger than others, which can produce three different types of neutrinos. If a twisted tube winds up on one end and unwinds on the other end as it moves through space, this would help explain the “spin” of normal particles, and perhaps also the “Higgs Field”. However, if the end of the twisted tube joins to the other end of the twisted tube forming a twisted torus (neutrino), would this help explain “Parity Symmetry” violation in Beta Decay? Could the conversion of twist cycles to writhe cycles through the process of supercoiling help explain “neutrino oscillations”? Spatial curvature (mass) would be conserved, but the structure could change.
=====================
Gravity is a result of a very small curvature imbalance within atoms. (This is why the force of gravity is so small.) Instead of attempting to explain matter as "particles", this concept attempts to explain matter more in the manner of our current understanding of the space-time curvature of gravity. If an electron has qualities of both a particle and a wave, it cannot be either one. It must be something else. Therefore, a "particle" is actually a structure which stores spatial curvature. Can an electron-positron pair (which are made up of opposite directions of twist) annihilate each other by unwinding into each other producing Gamma Ray photons?
Does an electron travel through space like a threaded nut traveling down a threaded rod, with each twist cycle proportional to Planck’s Constant? Does it wind up on one end, while unwinding on the other end? Is this related to the Higgs field? Does this help explain the strange ½ spin of many subatomic particles? Does the 720 degree rotation of a 1/2 spin particle require at least one extra dimension?
Alpha decay occurs when the two protons and two neutrons (which are bound together by entangled tubes), become un-entangled from the rest of the nucleons
. Beta decay occurs when the tube of a down quark/gluon in a neutron becomes overtwisted and breaks producing a twisted torus (neutrino) and an up quark, and the ejected electron. The production of the torus may help explain the “Symmetry Violation” in Beta Decay, because one end of the broken tube section is connected to the other end of the tube produced, like a snake eating its tail. The phenomenon of Supercoiling involving twist and writhe cycles may reveal how overtwisted quarks can produce these new particles. The conversion of twists into writhes, and vice-versa, is an interesting process, which is also found in DNA molecules. Could the production of multiple writhe cycles help explain the three generations of quarks and neutrinos? If the twist cycles increase, the writhe cycles would also have a tendency to increase.
Gamma photons are produced when a tube unwinds producing electromagnetic waves. ( Mass=1/Length )
The “Electric Charge” of electrons or positrons would be the result of one twist cycle being displayed at the 3D-4D surface interface of the particle. The physical entanglement of twisted tubes in quarks within protons and neutrons and mesons displays an overall external surface charge of an integer number. Because the neutrinos do not have open tube ends, (They are a twisted torus.) they have no overall electric charge.
Within this model a black hole could represent a quantum of gravity, because it is one cycle of spatial gravitational curvature. Therefore, instead of a graviton being a subatomic particle it could be considered to be a black hole. The overall gravitational attraction would be caused by a very tiny curvature imbalance within atoms.
In this model Alpha equals the compactification ratio within the twistor cone, which is approximately 1/137.
1= Hypertubule diameter at 4D interface
137= Cone’s larger end diameter at 3D interface where the photons are absorbed or emitted.
The 4D twisted Hypertubule gets longer or shorter as twisting or untwisting occurs. (720 degrees per twist cycle.)
How many neutrinos are left over from the Big Bang? They have a small mass, but they could be very large in number. Could this help explain Dark Matter?
Why did Paul Dirac use the twist in a belt to help explain particle spin? Is Dirac’s belt trick related to this model? Is the “Quantum” unit based on twist cycles?
I started out imagining a subatomic Einstein-Rosen Bridge whose internal surface is twisted with either a Right-Hand twist, or a Left-Hand twist producing a twisted 3D/4D membrane. This topological Soliton model grew out of that simple idea. I was also trying to imagine a way to stuff the curvature of a 3 D sine wave into subatomic particles.
.
Is there an update on this? 🙂
The only thing I'm pretty sure he got wrong is that physicists think of the foam in *real* beer, not root beer.
I always get a smooth shave with Quantum Foam
So! Perhaps... all thought, memories, awareness and consciousness, which we think arises in the mind actually is something that manifests out of quantum foam. What's your thoughts?
I REALLY wish these videos would stop saying things like "a very short period of time" and give us at least some quantification like less than 100 zeptoseconds and then compare that to something actually physical.
It's hard to understand if scientists are saying yes virtual particles exist but only for unmeasurable but real periods of time or that we don't know if if that short period of time is enough to make the particle actual or whether it's all a mathematical interval.
In other words what does "a very short period of time" mean?
Is there possibly some ghostly universe that infinitely underlies ours but whose entities exist too briefly to effect our own?
Let me put it into perspective for you a zepto second is a billionth of a billionth of a second that's how long it takes these VP's to decay if you compared it to every second that the universe has existed about 13.8 billion years.
There are more half lives of these particles in one single second then every single second that the universe has existed by a factor of a thousand.
That's how ridiculously short their existence is you can't even measure them with an instrument that operates at the speed of light all you can measure is their effect ie the (weak force) hints why they are called ghost particles.
Seriously? no comments? This is a fantastic video! come on people, share and comment!
Space is an energy field with physical structure. Motion of objects creates waves in the fabric of Space. Whenever these space waves interfere constructively they create vertual particles which quickly dissipate back into space.
Can’t the Casimir effect be explained by the gravitational attraction between the two very very closely spaced metal plates?
0:21 “Relatively intuitive” -- remember that we’ve had literally centuries to get used to Newton’s laws. Back then, the idea that things would keep going after you pushed them, rather than stopping, was highly counterintuitive!
And even in the early days of space rocketry, there were people who didn’t understand how rockets could work in a vacuum where there was “nothing to push against”. Remember that infamous New York Times editorial that said rockets would never work in space?
how can there be quantum foam and the quantum fields of QFT? Which is it? Or do they both exist? If so, which is the most fundamental, which is at the smallest planck scale?
Man, i want to work here.
I'd gladly sweep their floors. Probably the only job that I would be qualified for.
PhoofNScoops get a phd.
Everything we see is just atoms specifically electrons masked by photons. Our bodies are made of atoms masked by photons, so my next question is what are our minds and thoughts made of? Maybe some array of particles or energy fields we haven't discovered yet. My next question is our awareness or consciousness, is it a whole other array of particles within a field or is it just some sort of self feedback loop. An environment checking itself with a vehicle(our body). If you read this can u please explain if there are any ongoing research or theories about these questions so I can research them on my own or perhaps you can make a video about them. Thank you in advance.
In case of two glass panels put together.
Is the force glueing the panels together:
a) electron veils interaction of the panels
b) ”vacuum” between the panels
c) Casimir-effect?
So....? What's the news on the Muon thing at Fermilab? Any progress yet?
@ScienceNinjaDude Wow, I thought it'd be half a millennia at least.
3:16 - Actually, not! This is a commonly misunderstood. Uncertainty Principle is not a font of energy, as small as it is! In any situation energy is conserved in Quantum Mechanics! The energy is already there if we can detect its effects. As literally said by David J. Griffiths: "It is often said that the uncertainty principle means that energy is not strictly conserved in Quantum Mechanics - that you are allowed to borrow energy ΔE, as long as you pay it back in a time Δt ≈ ℏ ⁄2ΔE; the greater the violation, the briefer the period over which it can occur. There are many legitimate readings of the energy-time uncertainty principle, but this is not one of them. Nowhere does Quantum Mechanics license violation of energy conservation, and certainly no such authorisation entered into the derivation of Eq 3.151 (ΔE Δt≥ℏ/2)".
Dr. Don Lincoln, I'm curious now, so this is about particles coming in existence and then annihilating each other again, quarks and anti-quarks. What is the difference between this phenomenon and mesons, which are a quark anti-quark pair? Is Quantum chromodynamics not an issue here? or is just a gluon missing ? How does the universe know, that for the phenomenon of particles coming in and out of existence, it's not supposed to create quarks with the opposite color charges, because otherwise we would get mesons. Or is it the gluon that prevents the quark anti-quark pair from annihilating each other? This is really confusing! Are mesons always the same quark antiquark pair? or is it possible to have mesons with an up quark and an anti strange quark for example?
amateur here, does the Casimir effect accounts for gravity, even that is very weak at those masses and scale?
I wish there were a chanel on youtube that goes into more detail on these things
google "Leonard Susskind"
+Alexandru Moise Vsauce has a pretty interesting take on things of this nature if you haven't already heard of him.
CrazyLegs tanx but i saw it
+Alexandru Moise PBS SpaceTime. They may not have all the topics that you want but they do a good job at explaining complex physics ideas.
+Alexandru Moise A guy named David Butler has some excellent videos on similar topics. Sixty symbols is great as well. But i agree, more in depth awesome science videos would be wonderful.
On the other hand, when quantum foam is applied to cosmology, the predicted value of the dark energy is 150 orders of magnitude off the measured value. You should tell the whole story, not just a part.
Thought experiment: a modest root beer fountain of extremely long lasting bubbles bubbling up in a very large pool of water that has fine dust floating at the surface. The dust and the fountain can not coincide. An island of root beer foam starts to grow, pushing the dust aside. The expansion make room for more bubble to come forth. The bubbles hard jostle each other which causes the island to grow. Its outer edge is now moving the dust away from the fountain at a slow rate. However, in pushing the dust aside, more room is made for the formation of new fountains in the area once covered by dust. Thus the number of new fountains increase at the rate of π R2 . Now we have an exponential growth in two dimensions. Turn this into three dimensional space and the root beer bubbles in to quantum foam surrounded by the dust that is matter and you have a quantum foam bubble pushing outwards on its surrounding matter at an exponentially increasing rate. If the Pauli exclusion principle also works on quantum virtual particles (VP) and if the repulsive force (quark degeneracy or similar) is both great enough and long lasting enough to push the VPs apart before they disappear again, is this not a sufficient force to explain accelerating cosmic expansion?
They should have picked Don Lincoln to narrate Cosmos 2 instead of Tyson. Great video as always! Can't wait for the next one.
Dr. doesn't satisfy the equal opportunity mindset of the left wing TV moguls.
@@wayneyadams De Grasse Tyson is simply better at communicating and narrating. This video was good but I found Lincoln's exposition a bit awkward at times and not very exciting. But I repeat, the video was good
@@Ghost-xu3xs exactly. Tyson has a great voice and easy to listen to
Finally, you guys did an interesting video/content worth watching.
@Fermilab Thanks so much. Could you please explain (for non-expert people in simple conceptual words), why energy conservation law is not violated in the Casimir effect?
Thank you
What about the paralelisms between modern physics and eastern philosophy?? Dr Lincoln, I'm a big fan! These videos are a great contribution to humanity itself!! Thanks for sharing your knowledge.
Dr. Lincoln, thank you for your plain language explanation that allows the average person to get a basic understanding of quantum foam.
but doesent the 2 plates also have their own gravityfield which attracts each other instead of just casimirs reason?
6:20 that doesn't convince me. What about gravity? isn't that pushing them?
***** They most likely calculated how quick they should move, and gravity may not be strong enough
***** Yeah, because you thought of that and professional scientists all over the world that have repeated the experiment didn't..
MrAwesomesize You misunderstand me. I'm no claiming anything, I just want to know the reason why gravity isn't affecting it.
***** This is my guess:
Gravity is by far the weakest of all the known forces in the universe. The gravitational field also barely affects single particles -- it is much more effective on clumps of massive particles.
It is perhaps this reason that the gravitational force does not have any significant effect in this scenario.
+J ALIEN Gravity is the strongest force on the macro scale...
How does the idea and the visualization of quantum foam change if you are embarking in the subject from the perspectiva of string theory?
I don't think it changes: string or M theory is a theory within quantum mechanics. I'd dare say that it's "too quantic" and not "relativistic enough" but just my opinion.
What if virtual partials are just spacetime remembering were everything has ever bin at different points in it's existence. So space remembers everything that happened with in confines of its spacetime.
Answering to the theory debunking mails is now part of your job description
This damn good channel should be reciving 100* views. Good work guys.
After watching a few of your videos, and many others modern physics videos, it's pretty clear we have no idea what we're dealing with.
Theory of the week - The box isnt empty, its full of gravity! Whatever gravity turns out to be the quantum foam may be the surface tension that gravity experirnces as it flows and stretches as the universe expands. This "stretching" will not be uniform it will be wrinkley. The emission of virtual particles/quantum foam is gravity seld adjusting to the forces distorting space time. As the earth rolls aroud the sun itsgravity will be creating a doppler shift in the fabric of time space, stretching on the leading edge and compressing on the trailing edge.
Testing - complete the two plate experiment at the same time at different points on the earths surface and maybe on the international space station - any differences in the observed movement between tests - assuming all other factors are accounted for - may confirm.
If every rotating object is charged (magnet), does that mean that a static object also becomes charged if there are multiple moving (charged) objects around it?
Are scientists stubborn for not ditching the 'particle' word since it seems like all is interference of fields?
IMO yes or at least maybe, a stubborn legacy of Newtonian point-based mechanics, at least to some extent. However it is true that "particles" do behave as such particles at times, so its not all their fault. But I do suspect that a less "particle-ist" approach should be more fruitful indeed.
Wow, that was awesome. No technical and complicated words, easy understanding even for a non native english speaker like me. Thank you.
Does the clock appear slower or is it actually slower? Also if you were travelling close to the speed of light and everything slowed down for you, does that mean that you age slower too?
It "appears" and "is" slower at the same time because it all depends on who is the observer. For the photon's "clock", time never passes at all: they are oddly eternal and extemporaneous, yet they still interact with "faster", time-involved stuff, like our very eyes, in specific moments of time. Weird, I know.
But what about in between the particles? Is there some kind of field or is it just completely empty?
Particles are not exactly particles but probability waves. There are some very nice videos around explaining how actual electron "orbitals" are. And there is always a field or actually several fields but quantum physics insists on explaining it in terms of "particles", what is sometimes good and sometimes not so good because of the particle-wave duality thing...
It's complicated.
But there is at least a smallest possible length and time, Planck's distance, aka "h". It's extremely tiny though. It's required to avoid the "ultraviolet catastrophe", which doesn't actually happens.
If I'm not mistaken, photons are the force carrier for electromagnetism. But under what class of particle do the fall under?
Boson. Elementary boson to be precise.
Does quantum foam have its own kind of thermodynamics? With properties analogous to temperature, pressure, entropy, specific heat, etc?
Quantum foam is space-time, nothing else: all physics apply, just that particles adding to zero can pop in and out of existence at any time. Not sure if thermodynamics is a great way of approaching the micro-reality however.
Just a question as I am ignorant of many things but want to learn more. Science text books say that matter or energy cannot be created or destroyed. Does this go against what we've been taught with "virtual particles" coming into and out of existence?
Or, is like that idea behind Flatland and more dimensions? Are things from a "higher dimension" coming into our dimensions and passing out of it again and we briefly see it for a moment of time. The higher energy "hyper-dimensional" particles are moving faster, therefore are here for a shorter period of time. It seems random to us who only experience 3 dimensions, but if they are travelling through ours from a higher dimension, it may not be as random as we think? (Not talking sic-fi alternate reality here, just different dimensions of space)
I once gave a small presentation in an undergrad class about Flatland and my thoughts often flow through that filter. Any ideas or criticisms are welcome!
+Nicholas Rachevsky Its more of a temporary vs permanent thing. A more accurate wording of the law would be Matter and energy cannot be permanently created or destroyed.
Energy can be converted into matter and vice versa. Energy can temporarily be created like in the case of quantum tunneling and matter can be temporarily be created like virtual particles. It just doesnt remain in existence for very long.
If something forces it to remain in existence (like a black hole in the case of hawkings radiation) energy is lost to keep it in existence thereby converting energy to matter.
Or if energy is created permanently like in a nuclear reaction then it is at the cost of matter being converted.
So, are these virtual particles just happening to come into existence because some energy converged at at single point of time and space and created a particle, but was unstable and fell apart again and became energy once more? Seems too random to me.
Its more of a continuous process as far as I can understand. It is always happening almost everywhere. And it creates 2 particles. 1 matter and 1 anti-matter. They attract and annihilate eachother immediately becoming energy again. From what i can understand basically all energy is just matter and anti-matter joined together. And all matter is just energy missing its other half. Energy and matter are basically the same thing.
Thanks! Mind bending stuff, but fun to contemplate!
Do we have any ways of forcing this to happen so we can see it occurring, like the collider in Geneva? Is there a way to store antimatter to then make energy? (Am I getting into Star Trek too much, or is that the idea they had anyway?)
When you say the predicted matches the experiment how would you exactly model the behavior of virtual particles? Like density, wavelength, lifespans exactly??
There is a different perspective, that there is no vacuum in the classical sense because the grown state of many fields that permeate the universe is not zero. That avoid the paradoxes that come from “coming from nothing” the Casimir effect , by the way have other explanations , not only the quantum one so it’s hardly a prove. By the way I am not saying that QED is wrong , we know is incomplete , but also the most precisely confirm theory we have for anything.
Awesome video bites; many many thanks to Fermilab and Dr. Lincoln for some great informative entertainment!
Absolutely love this channel.
So would it be fare to assert that quantum form is essentially perpetual motion since there is energy and movement created from nothing?
Can we get more units/mathematical explanations? Especially around the 7:30 mark
My only complaint with this video is how you described quantum spin before showing an animation of a positron spinning. It's spin angular momentum. Nothing is actually spinning. Other than that, awesome video!
You confused me again , you are saying electrons actually spin 6:55 but i have also heard that , it does not spin tha way object spin like earth !!!??
Quantum spin is indeed a bit complicated. I'm not an expert, but I think that quantum spin refers for the angular momentum that quantum particles possess. Angular momentum sounds like just ordinary spin for me, so I just like to think of it like they act like they are spinning even though they don't, not the weirdest thing in quantum mechanics, if you ask me.
@@nafrost2787 what !! They act like spin but they don't ??? And how it's possible that they have angular momentum properties without spin ???? If this is the magical case then how scientists even imagine such things at first time ?? , m asking because , if it is reality then still it's hard to imagine for me such scenario.
Question - if you could actually zoom to 10^-35 wouldn't that be much smaller than the size of virtual particles? That image of light blobs popping in and out representing virtual particle pairs would be something you would "see" around 10^-18...?
At 10^-35 you would be seeing blobs of space-time not proton clouds. I thought at that scale the only possible particle would be the hypothetical graviton?
Is the space-time fabric made up of this foam, or is this foam within space-time fabric?
Blaise Pascal would be delighted and slightly surprised to know that a vacuum in our Universe isn't exactly empty.
***** That would be interesting if QED foam is part of space-time, especially if inflation holds up. It seems, to me, common sense, to posit that if black holes and massive bodies have such a strong influence on space-time and electrodynamics gives us Special Relativity, which gives E = mc², mass & time dilation, length contraction, they must all be somehow entangled, mingled in one nice equation. An equation that gives a predicted magnetic strength of an electron all the way out to our measured accuracy and beyond.
if i had any doubts wether to study physics or chemistry, it's now definitely been cleared. PHYSICS!!
While chemistry is a great choice, I’m with you!
Excellent series of talks. Thank you so much.
I liked the video however I'm not sure: I always thought that the term "quantum foam" refers to the smallest Planck scale where it is expected that the notion of the geometry itself no longer makes sense. What is buzzling here are not virtual particles but the quanta of space itself and as opposed to virtual particles, these phenomena are still not confirmed by experiments.
And the g-2 experiment results after 2016? What are they?
I will never look at my beer again, without thinking about: getting virtually drunk :) GREAT VIDEO!!!
But... Isn't it against the conversation of energy? 2 plates starting to move by beings pushed by void?
This is how matter can be controlled by the will of men. Magnets are a 'force' that have applied effect on these subatomic particles. All Eastern mystics teach that the will, or mental exertion, of a rightly trained man's brain can create effect on matter as well. By addressing the laws that make the laws, the mind can direct the form and path of matter.
Wow...that is sooo not true. Do you not research things yourself, or do you just regurgitate what you are spoon fed by the establishment?
Great video but it'll be even greater if you come up with a better audio.
Very enlightening and entertaining VDO clip. Now, when I am looking at the bubbles in my Paulaner beer glass, I will always think of your VDO.
Yet another excellent video.
That picture of Schroediger at 1:41 looks like James Woods.
That's probably also because of the uncertainty principle :p
Schrodinger*
You need to change your mic or up the volume somehow. I need to put earphone always to listen to your videos.