If it wasn't for the bits with the hat I would be thinking that I had a vague grasp of it. Despite my inability to really get it, absolutely fascinating stuff.
I don't pretend to fully grasp what the Higgs field is, but Professor Ed really does explain things so that a layman can gain some limited understanding.
Could it be possible that a hogs Boson particle combines a graviton particle with a.quantum particle to make a Planck particle and could this Planck particle be a mini black hole?
I could listen to Ed speak for hours. He speaks about things in such a clear way that even if you do not understand the terms, you understand the meaning. Also the way Roger just kind of rants about how difficult it all is to even begin to explain the Higgs is sobering!
All of these fellows are brilliant, engaging speakers. I've never watched a 49 minute video on RUclips before, and not only did I do that, but I enjoyed every second of it!
Interesting what he said about the breaking of beautiful symmetry at earlier stages being necessary to move things forward. Reminds me of the Apollonian and Dionysian dichotomy in philosophy.
Incredible presentation. Years ago I read this . But after listening to the presentation by all of you, it clarified a lot of ideas. Yes I knew about math and perturbation method of analysis. But really what made it interesting was how such few instances in so many collisions. Also you explained many other details. I don't know If I have ever heard a group of people speak and make it so interesting. Before I turned on the video I asked am I going to waste my time hearing this for 46 min. On the contrary it turned out to be one of best videos on RUclips. You see they talk about gauge symmetry and much math in text books. First the math clouds everything. If you finally understand the math still it all does not all clear up. Once again great job.
oh man, i love your intuition Brady! any other channel would have edited out some of this, but you were nice enough to give us a full 49 minutes, thank you!
Thank you VERY very much Brady! I can't wait to watch this entire video :D! I just finished watching the shortened version and I've just made myself a nice hot cup of coffee so I can enjoy this video!
That made me think of an interesting idea. Wonder if the entire universe was like an endless, motionless ocean of some semifluid with the constancy of Jello, and then suddenly an event happened causing a wave to ripple out in every direction in this space-time material. If mass is somehow some kind of standing wave propelled through this medium in the wave of the now moment, we could be like images of a movie projected upon a 3 D screen. Perhaps the Higgs Boson could be like the way water molecules give waves their shape, but the actual peaks could be what we actually perceive as mass, being that we supposedly live in a universe where everything is a wave. i suppose it would be hard for an actor on a movie projected onto a screen to actually observe the screen, if all you could detect was other waves such as yourself. because in the ocean, the individual little atoms don't travel along with the wave, it only contributes to the formation of the wave.
Brady, if Id seen this before the short version, I wouldve said there was no way it could be edited to anything shorter, but youve actually done a really really good job of it! Its also really good to have MrOldProf back! yay!!!
The mechanism is the means by which a particle can interact with the Higgs field. More energy does not equate more interaction. For example, a proton is, subatomically speaking, a significant amount of energy; yet, its interaction with Higgs field is far less significant than that energy might suggest. For example, a top quark, a quark, mind you, something with less energy than the hadrons they make up (like protons), interacts as strongly with the Higgs field as a tungsten atom.
Excelent video, got my full attention for 50 minutes! Great questions asked and great answers given. Tkank you! I wish I have professors like that to teach me
Gravity, which is a force, is the attraction of masses, relative to their distances (inverse square law). Gravity is what happens AFTER a particle has mass. The Higgs boson is the energy exchanged between particles as we generally know them and the Higgs field. The Higgs field is a pervasive tensor, a fancy calculus term to mean it has value everywhere, but that value is just a value, and the interaction with the field is dependent on a second mechanism, hence "The Higgs Mechanism." CharLim
I don't know how I missed this vid the first time around. I gotta say, I am getting a new appreciation for the difficult job Brady and the absolutely brilliant minds do when making these. I feel really blessed to be able to hear their input and interpretations of the subject matter at hand. One last observation: Brady, you are making videos of great historical significance here. How does that feel?
Consider that perturbations in the Higgs field results in a local energy field that manifests as gravity through mass. Then gravity is the (push) force that maintains mass. Gravity is a property of the Higgs field and not of matter per se. Gravity is then an interaction mediated by the Higgs boson. Hence this is a conceptual foundation for describing quantum gravity.
@Krokonil I'm not a scientist but I think that the increase in mass at relativistic speeds is just a consequence of regular time and space dilation in Relativity, regardless of the mechanism that actually makes the mass.
does this mean that when they try to detect Higgs bosons from collisions, they're creating massless particles (photons or something) or are they just exciting the field with the colliding masses?
The higgs field gives particles mass. A higgs boson is a particle from that field. (think of an electron that comes from the electron field) so ofcourse the higgs particle has mass, as the higgs field also gives mass to it. (Right?) :)
i called in sick to work, just to watch this. and Im never sick. THANKYOU THANKYOU for all 49 mins 38 secs of this vid. this is what heaven would be like if there was one!
@insomniac1893 It is a visual reference of the SMPTE time code. It shows (from the right) frames, seconds, minutes, hours. This looks like 24 frames per second (watch the frames counter as the seconds tick by). Since this is raw footage it has been included, partly to show time sequence changes and partly because it is easy and fast for the producer to export it that way. There are several important uses for time code such as cataloging footage and syncing edits.
Forces involve transition, as a result, there are only four forces recognized by the Standard Model: The Strong Force, the effect varies on quarks, reducing its effect after they get close enough (asymptotic freedom); The Weak Force, which can exchange and disrupt the structure of quarks; Electro-Magnetic Force, which uses charges to repel or attract charged particles. Gravity, and it is very importanty, Gravity...will be covered after the character limit.
The Higgs Boson walks into a Catholic church. The priest turns round and says 'We don't let Bosons in here, get out.' Boson says 'Well, how do you have mass?'
have any theoretical physicist developed an explanation as to why some bosons have mass while photons dont or are any currently working on the problem? also do they know what it is about a particular particle that determines the strength of its interaction with the higgs field?
Ironically, as I've just said elsewhere, due to the way RUclips displays message, the order they were written, as identified by their start, was: 1) Forces involve transition... 2) Gravity, which is a force... 3) The mechanism is the means...
@mceyekon a photon has zero inertial mass but its energy still contributes to a gravitational interaction. I remember there being research done at the University of Washington to measure differences, if any, between inertial mass and gravitational mass.
Gravity doesn't bend light back around like that though. It bends it like a pair of glasses bends light. It doesn't make a loop, it just bends it a little. We can look into different parts of the sky and see different galaxies at different distances, with different characteristics. Your theory may sound cool, but it is wrong.
The best way I have heard it described was the Higgs Field is like a tank of water, and the Higgs Bosons are the molecules of water. Depending on the particle moving through said tank of water depends on how much it interacts with the field. I fish interects very little so it has a low mass, and a fat man interacts heavily with the water so he has a large mass.
@Brady, A question, please, if it is possible ask some of the scientist at Nottingham. We know that all things with mass get more massive as they increase their speed and as close to the speed of light they get their mass incises more and more. That's why things with mass cannot move at the speed of light - their masses will become infinite. How this can be explained in the Higgs field? Is it moving faster means stronger interactions with the Higgs field and acquiring more and more mass?
It's interesting how the answer to "why didn't I hear about the Higgs until a couple of years ago" was "they didn't know how to find it" is given, when currently people agree that string theory might be impossible to verify experimentally. Why aren't we still ignorant (as lay people) of string theory too?
I think it's more to do with impact and the media. String theory has had a lot of impact on theoretical physics, and the discovery of the Higgs boson has had a lot of impact on experimental physics. Not knowing how to find the Higgs boson is not exactly a big development in physics, so the media doesn't report it.
My friend's son, a 3yo, once explained to me why birds fly in great detail. It had something to do with trees, colours, baby chipmunks, hopping up and down on one leg and spinning in a circle. These facts were so obvious to him and he was excited to share his knowledge. It was very amusing to listen to. I like being reminded of that. He's 4yo now, and more eager to listen and learn than to randomly make shit up. Still a very imaginative boy, but also smart.
What about building a higgs-particle vacuum cleaner to collect those small particles? If we empty an object for its higgs-particles it turns out to be weightless?
So, my question then would be. If Higgs Boson particles give all other particles mass, why do Higgs Bosons have mass? (What would be giving the Higgs mass?)
Not sure why I didn't see this until now, but a question I've had about the Higgs for a while: If it is many times more massive than a proton (apparently approx 125x, if the experiments prove statistically significant), how is it that it gives a proton a mass which is so much lower than itself?
pardon my ignorance, it really seems to me, in basic terms, the Higgs Boson is what makes "pure energy", slow enough to become actual mass. Thus making an otherwise light speed and untable energy field into the atoms and molecules that make up our solid universe. Am I on the right track?
I'm not a physicist, but as far as I understand it; the massive particles have mass because they somehow interact with the Higgs field that pervades every place in the universe. The Higgs boson itself results from certain fluctuations in that field. It requires a huge amount of energy to fluctuate the Higgs field enough to actually create a Higgs boson. The Higgle boson itself interacts with the Higgs field in the same way that other particles do, giving it a mass.
I tried working out what he said around 12:40. He said that the higgs would be ~125x the mass of a proton, and you'd need the e=mc^2 equivalent energy to create the mass. Well I worked out the energy to be 2.25x10^-8... Did I do some wrong calculation? Because that's really low energy to say they're slamming proton together just short of the speed of light and barely getting anything...
ive watched all the other great videos but now that im off school and on holidays my brain cant handle these extencive concepts D: hahahah great videos none the less!
Hang on, so, years later I have to ask a question. We talk about massless particles whizzing about at the speed of light. I understand from relativity that nothing with mass can travel the speed of light, because it has mass; it's got to do with conservation of energy and the amount of energy that is exerted toward moving in space. Right? So, is the Higgs "giving particles mass" simply a different way of saying "preventing an otherwise massless particle from traveling at light speed?" And therefore, anything that is prevented from moving at light speed by the Higgs therefore has mass by definition?
Actually, the particles get their mass by interacting with the Higgs Field, not the Higgs Boson. The boson is a virtual subatomic particle produced when particles collide against the Higgs Field with enough force. The reason why scientists are happy to have detected the boson is because this affirms the existence of the Higgs Field.
@qborg69 That's probably like saying "if water makes things wet then what makes the water wet?" Water doesn't get wet, "wet" (mass) is the result of an interaction, not an inherent trait.
@JandHfilms I'm not coming to his defense, but I believe he's trying to explain difference in galaxies by saying that they are the Milky Way at different points in time, between which it changed shape. A better question to ask would be "Why can we observe two unique galaxies colliding?"
All i could think of during this interview was of how a mass effect relay works. it reduces mass of an object and then shoots it across the galaxy to another mass relay
And it wasn't the internet that was invented at the CERN (the internet originated from DARPA), but it was the "world wide web" "hyper-text transfer-protocol" "html" part that came from CERN. RUclips won't let me post the acronyms for world wide web and hyper-text transfer protocol :-(
I think it's called a time stamp (note that the last number is the frame, not the time) I guess it's more of a case that he adds it to his extended video: but for a very long video like this it's just itrritating :P
Why do I have the feeling that the second law of thermodynamics has to do with broken symmetry? In my understanding, this is the underlying factor that powers the entropy... I don't know if I'm blabbing or if I really got some understanding of this... But what powers the entropy? And why is it there in the first place? PS: Please don't be hard on me if I got it wrong!
so to a blind person if you ask them to point towards where they think the jet is, they will point towards the source of the sound, but when you open your eyes to realize the jet is much further ahead of the sound wave. You think light can act the same way under the influence of gravity perhaps? But by how much can the light possibly distort under these forces which cant be accurately measured without traveling to these places with a probe.
Increasing entropy leads to decreased disorder? No energy = atoms breaking apart, thus restoring the universe to the perfectly ordered state(as the "soup" would eventually settle) which would lead to a singularity of finite proportions, thus recombining everything to continue the cycle once more. However that would mean that in a state of zero energy that a state of infinite energy is the next step, which doesn't seem to work with current understandings of thermodynamics.
Excellent stuff, Señor Haran & all the physicists. I'm hoping to one day understand what influence interaction with the Higgs field has on mass/energy equivalence (E=mc²). Because when people talk about the Higgs field imparting mass, and when Ed says at 2:50 that particles were massless in the very early universe, surely that breaks this equivalence? Obviously there are different definitions for these terms that I don't know (and I know very little!)
As most things in QED, this bosom is counterintuitive: particles need another particle to gain mass so that they can interract with eachother gravitationally. Well, the photon's mass is zero and it still interract with gravity: gravitational lensing! Could someone explain this appearent paradox?
so if when the universe cools and the higgs field becomes nonzero for some particles, does that mean that other particles (eg. photons) will become massive?
The mass required to completely turn light around is that of a black hole, so for this to be true every part of our own galaxy would have to weigh as much as a black hole. It's a neat idea but extremely unlikely This can also be disproven based on the fact that non symmetrical galaxies have been found
Well.... gravity doesn't really bend light. Gravity distorts space and the light is traveling straight through space including the distortion. If you "unbent" the space you would see the path of the light is absolutely straight.
I know im responding to this a little late but the idea of "outside the universe" is flawed because there is no time or space there. Empty space is not truly empty; it has waves of energy and quantum fluctuations producing phantom particles. The universe also cannot be infinite in length, for otherwise it could not change in size, and the universe is known to be expanding. There is an old idea that an infinite universe contains infinite stars, so an infinite universe would have infinite energy
That was a massive video. Very good questions from Brady. Stuff like this boggles my mind. It seems like ultimate small scale reality is composed of a bunch of abstract mathematical entities interacting in abstract mathematical ways. It seems that "having substance" fades away at such scales.
![Quando Rondo - Grow Up [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/8zFnCg3BO4Q/mqdefault.jpg)
Professor Copeland, you're simply the personification of what/how a teacher really should be.
I really like Professor Copeland, but a really think they are all awesome!
I really like listening to these "unedited" videos
Damn Brady you have some amazing questions. I could never think of these questions in front of these great minds.
Close to an hour of this?? OOOOOW YUUUSSS
What I find especially amazing is how good questions you ask, Brady! It's a talent of it's own to know what to ask.
Whom ever is doing this interview really knows the questions to ask... great vid
If it wasn't for the bits with the hat I would be thinking that I had a vague grasp of it. Despite my inability to really get it, absolutely fascinating stuff.
Loved Prof. Bowley's comments..
If i had teachers like you. There is no telling where i'd be.
Professor Bowley in another wonderful mood I see :P
I don't pretend to fully grasp what the Higgs field is, but Professor Ed really does explain things so that a layman can gain some limited understanding.
There should be a video about Nambu-Goldstone bosons and the relation to the Higgs field and bosons.
Could it be possible that a hogs Boson particle combines a graviton particle with a.quantum particle to make a Planck particle and could this Planck particle be a mini black hole?
I could listen to Ed speak for hours. He speaks about things in such a clear way that even if you do not understand the terms, you understand the meaning. Also the way Roger just kind of rants about how difficult it all is to even begin to explain the Higgs is sobering!
The breaking of symmetry is absolutely vital for the creation of the universe we have today. Discord is the stuff of life not harmony.
All of these fellows are brilliant, engaging speakers. I've never watched a 49 minute video on RUclips before, and not only did I do that, but I enjoyed every second of it!
Thank you very much for these interviews.
Interesting what he said about the breaking of beautiful symmetry at earlier stages being necessary to move things forward. Reminds me of the Apollonian and Dionysian dichotomy in philosophy.
Thank you for the access to this interview, Nottingham.
Incredible presentation. Years ago I read this . But after listening to the presentation by all of you, it clarified a lot of ideas. Yes I knew about math and perturbation method of analysis.
But really what made it interesting was how such few instances in so many collisions.
Also you explained many other details. I don't know
If I have ever heard a group of people speak and make it so interesting.
Before I turned on the video I asked am I going to waste my time hearing this for 46 min.
On the contrary it turned out to be one of best videos on RUclips.
You see they talk about gauge symmetry and much math in text books. First the math clouds everything. If you finally understand the math still it all does not all clear up.
Once again great job.
He can explain very simply and clearly...he has very deep understanding in theoretical physics.!!
I wish all sixty Symbols were longer like this one. 6 mins just isn't enough and just as I'm starting to enjoy it's finished.
oh man, i love your intuition Brady! any other channel would have edited out some of this, but you were nice enough to give us a full 49 minutes, thank you!
Brian Cox is great at the big picture, and this guy with his quiet charisma is brilliant at explaining the minutiae. Wow....
Thank you VERY very much Brady! I can't wait to watch this entire video :D! I just finished watching the shortened version and I've just made myself a nice hot cup of coffee so I can enjoy this video!
symmetry in a chess game often means a boring draw when the symmetry breaks things get interesting
Brilliant! Best explanation of Higgs I have heard to date, between the different professors.
If the Higgs Field is not uniform would that mean that protons could have different mass at different points in the universe?
Nicholas Layton Yes :)
However, as the Higgs is so heavy, it’s very difficult to shift the strength of the coupling.
That made me think of an interesting idea. Wonder if the entire universe was like an endless, motionless ocean of some semifluid with the constancy of Jello, and then suddenly an event happened causing a wave to ripple out in every direction in this space-time material. If mass is somehow some kind of standing wave propelled through this medium in the wave of the now moment, we could be like images of a movie projected upon a 3 D screen. Perhaps the Higgs Boson could be like the way water molecules give waves their shape, but the actual peaks could be what we actually perceive as mass, being that we supposedly live in a universe where everything is a wave. i suppose it would be hard for an actor on a movie projected onto a screen to actually observe the screen, if all you could detect was other waves such as yourself. because in the ocean, the individual little atoms don't travel along with the wave, it only contributes to the formation of the wave.
This man is a genius at explaining things
Brady, if Id seen this before the short version, I wouldve said there was no way it could be edited to anything shorter, but youve actually done a really really good job of it! Its also really good to have MrOldProf back! yay!!!
I just found out that you cut those videos. Please upload extended versions of all of them. This is so much more fun. Best spent friday evening :))
Now this is what I call extended. Good job.
The mechanism is the means by which a particle can interact with the Higgs field. More energy does not equate more interaction. For example, a proton is, subatomically speaking, a significant amount of energy; yet, its interaction with Higgs field is far less significant than that energy might suggest. For example, a top quark, a quark, mind you, something with less energy than the hadrons they make up (like protons), interacts as strongly with the Higgs field as a tungsten atom.
Excelent video, got my full attention for 50 minutes! Great questions asked and great answers given. Tkank you! I wish I have professors like that to teach me
Fantastic video - best yet. Also the best explanation of the Higgs mechanism to the lay person I've heard
My life would be infinitely better if we could get more of these 40+ minute videos.
i think it's because he has a kind face and a soothing voice with a monotone that helps the "like" factor. I enjoy his explanations too.
Gravity, which is a force, is the attraction of masses, relative to their distances (inverse square law). Gravity is what happens AFTER a particle has mass. The Higgs boson is the energy exchanged between particles as we generally know them and the Higgs field. The Higgs field is a pervasive tensor, a fancy calculus term to mean it has value everywhere, but that value is just a value, and the interaction with the field is dependent on a second mechanism, hence "The Higgs Mechanism." CharLim
Still the best vid of you, Brady.
I don't know how I missed this vid the first time around. I gotta say, I am getting a new appreciation for the difficult job Brady and the absolutely brilliant minds do when making these. I feel really blessed to be able to hear their input and interpretations of the subject matter at hand. One last observation: Brady, you are making videos of great historical significance here. How does that feel?
Consider that perturbations in the Higgs field results in a local energy field that manifests as gravity through mass. Then gravity is the (push) force that maintains mass. Gravity is a property of the Higgs field and not of matter per se. Gravity is then an interaction mediated by the Higgs boson. Hence this is a conceptual foundation for describing quantum gravity.
Higgs fields are formed during the energy-matter transformation under the strain of threshold energy.
It is a bremstahlung
process.
@Krokonil I'm not a scientist but I think that the increase in mass at relativistic speeds is just a consequence of regular time and space dilation in Relativity, regardless of the mechanism that actually makes the mass.
does this mean that when they try to detect Higgs bosons from collisions, they're creating massless particles (photons or something) or are they just exciting the field with the colliding masses?
The higgs field gives particles mass. A higgs boson is a particle from that field. (think of an electron that comes from the electron field) so ofcourse the higgs particle has mass, as the higgs field also gives mass to it. (Right?) :)
i called in sick to work, just to watch this. and Im never sick. THANKYOU THANKYOU for all 49 mins 38 secs of this vid. this is what heaven would be like if there was one!
@insomniac1893 It is a visual reference of the SMPTE time code. It shows (from the right) frames, seconds, minutes, hours. This looks like 24 frames per second (watch the frames counter as the seconds tick by). Since this is raw footage it has been included, partly to show time sequence changes and partly because it is easy and fast for the producer to export it that way. There are several important uses for time code such as cataloging footage and syncing edits.
Forces involve transition, as a result, there are only four forces recognized by the Standard Model: The Strong Force, the effect varies on quarks, reducing its effect after they get close enough (asymptotic freedom); The Weak Force, which can exchange and disrupt the structure of quarks; Electro-Magnetic Force, which uses charges to repel or attract charged particles. Gravity, and it is very importanty, Gravity...will be covered after the character limit.
The Higgs Boson walks into a Catholic church. The priest turns round and says
'We don't let Bosons in here, get out.'
Boson says
'Well, how do you have mass?'
Captain Radd grooooaaaaannn.
Did you get the taxi I sent?
Ha
Paul Hector what taxi?
thanks we need longer videos for the more complicated topics
have any theoretical physicist developed an explanation as to why some bosons have mass while photons dont or are any currently working on the problem? also do they know what it is about a particular particle that determines the strength of its interaction with the higgs field?
Give more extended interviews, please!!!
Ironically, as I've just said elsewhere, due to the way RUclips displays message, the order they were written, as identified by their start, was:
1) Forces involve transition...
2) Gravity, which is a force...
3) The mechanism is the means...
@mceyekon a photon has zero inertial mass but its energy still contributes to a gravitational interaction. I remember there being research done at the University of Washington to measure differences, if any, between inertial mass and gravitational mass.
Gravity doesn't bend light back around like that though. It bends it like a pair of glasses bends light. It doesn't make a loop, it just bends it a little. We can look into different parts of the sky and see different galaxies at different distances, with different characteristics. Your theory may sound cool, but it is wrong.
The best way I have heard it described was the Higgs Field is like a tank of water, and the Higgs Bosons are the molecules of water. Depending on the particle moving through said tank of water depends on how much it interacts with the field. I fish interects very little so it has a low mass, and a fat man interacts heavily with the water so he has a large mass.
@Brady,
A question, please, if it is possible ask some of the scientist at Nottingham.
We know that all things with mass get more massive as they increase their speed and as close to the speed of light they get their mass incises more and more. That's why things with mass cannot move at the speed of light - their masses will become infinite.
How this can be explained in the Higgs field? Is it moving faster means stronger interactions with the Higgs field and acquiring more and more mass?
It's interesting how the answer to "why didn't I hear about the Higgs until a couple of years ago" was "they didn't know how to find it" is given, when currently people agree that string theory might be impossible to verify experimentally. Why aren't we still ignorant (as lay people) of string theory too?
I think it's more to do with impact and the media. String theory has had a lot of impact on theoretical physics, and the discovery of the Higgs boson has had a lot of impact on experimental physics. Not knowing how to find the Higgs boson is not exactly a big development in physics, so the media doesn't report it.
My friend's son, a 3yo, once explained to me why birds fly in great detail. It had something to do with trees, colours, baby chipmunks, hopping up and down on one leg and spinning in a circle. These facts were so obvious to him and he was excited to share his knowledge. It was very amusing to listen to. I like being reminded of that. He's 4yo now, and more eager to listen and learn than to randomly make shit up. Still a very imaginative boy, but also smart.
What about building a higgs-particle vacuum cleaner to collect those small particles? If we empty an object for its higgs-particles it turns out to be weightless?
So, my question then would be. If Higgs Boson particles give all other particles mass, why do Higgs Bosons have mass? (What would be giving the Higgs mass?)
@pwed546 ha ha... but you'll miss all my careful and clever edits! ;) but here you'll get the fuller picture...
His voice is so gentle...
Not sure why I didn't see this until now, but a question I've had about the Higgs for a while: If it is many times more massive than a proton (apparently approx 125x, if the experiments prove statistically significant), how is it that it gives a proton a mass which is so much lower than itself?
pardon my ignorance, it really seems to me, in basic terms, the Higgs Boson is what makes "pure energy", slow enough to become actual mass. Thus making an otherwise light speed and untable energy field into the atoms and molecules that make up our solid universe. Am I on the right track?
I'm not a physicist, but as far as I understand it; the massive particles have mass because they somehow interact with the Higgs field that pervades every place in the universe. The Higgs boson itself results from certain fluctuations in that field. It requires a huge amount of energy to fluctuate the Higgs field enough to actually create a Higgs boson. The Higgle boson itself interacts with the Higgs field in the same way that other particles do, giving it a mass.
I tried working out what he said around 12:40. He said that the higgs would be ~125x the mass of a proton, and you'd need the e=mc^2 equivalent energy to create the mass. Well I worked out the energy to be 2.25x10^-8... Did I do some wrong calculation? Because that's really low energy to say they're slamming proton together just short of the speed of light and barely getting anything...
ive watched all the other great videos but now that im off school and on holidays my brain cant handle these extencive concepts D: hahahah great videos none the less!
Have you done any videos on String Theory and a Theory of Everthing? Would be interested in watching that !
I identify with the his joy in how weird and beautiful the universe is.
Hang on, so, years later I have to ask a question. We talk about massless particles whizzing about at the speed of light. I understand from relativity that nothing with mass can travel the speed of light, because it has mass; it's got to do with conservation of energy and the amount of energy that is exerted toward moving in space. Right? So, is the Higgs "giving particles mass" simply a different way of saying "preventing an otherwise massless particle from traveling at light speed?" And therefore, anything that is prevented from moving at light speed by the Higgs therefore has mass by definition?
One of my favorite professors
Julian Gonzalez
Three...there are three
The best video on the subject for a common person like me ... Thank u.
Actually, the particles get their mass by interacting with the Higgs Field, not the Higgs Boson. The boson is a virtual subatomic particle produced when particles collide against the Higgs Field with enough force. The reason why scientists are happy to have detected the boson is because this affirms the existence of the Higgs Field.
@qborg69 That's probably like saying "if water makes things wet then what makes the water wet?"
Water doesn't get wet, "wet" (mass) is the result of an interaction, not an inherent trait.
@JandHfilms I'm not coming to his defense, but I believe he's trying to explain difference in galaxies by saying that they are the Milky Way at different points in time, between which it changed shape. A better question to ask would be "Why can we observe two unique galaxies colliding?"
Priceless videos
All i could think of during this interview was of how a mass effect relay works. it reduces mass of an object and then shoots it across the galaxy to another mass relay
And it wasn't the internet that was invented at the CERN (the internet originated from DARPA), but it was the "world wide web" "hyper-text transfer-protocol" "html" part that came from CERN.
RUclips won't let me post the acronyms for world wide web and hyper-text transfer protocol :-(
OMG I LOVE THIS CHRISTMAS PRESENT! you knew what to get me :D!
Does chemistry depend on the phase angle of the Higgs field?
I think it's called a time stamp (note that the last number is the frame, not the time) I guess it's more of a case that he adds it to his extended video: but for a very long video like this it's just itrritating :P
Why do I have the feeling that the second law of thermodynamics has to do with broken symmetry? In my understanding, this is the underlying factor that powers the entropy... I don't know if I'm blabbing or if I really got some understanding of this... But what powers the entropy? And why is it there in the first place?
PS: Please don't be hard on me if I got it wrong!
so to a blind person if you ask them to point towards where they think the jet is, they will point towards the source of the sound, but when you open your eyes to realize the jet is much further ahead of the sound wave. You think light can act the same way under the influence of gravity perhaps? But by how much can the light possibly distort under these forces which cant be accurately measured without traveling to these places with a probe.
Isn't it more likely the "particle" associated with the Higgs field is the graviton?
Disclaimer: Not hats were hurt in the making of this video.
Increasing entropy leads to decreased disorder? No energy = atoms breaking apart, thus restoring the universe to the perfectly ordered state(as the "soup" would eventually settle) which would lead to a singularity of finite proportions, thus recombining everything to continue the cycle once more.
However that would mean that in a state of zero energy that a state of infinite energy is the next step, which doesn't seem to work with current understandings of thermodynamics.
Could virtual particles break the symmetry?
Excellent stuff, Señor Haran & all the physicists. I'm hoping to one day understand what influence interaction with the Higgs field has on mass/energy equivalence (E=mc²). Because when people talk about the Higgs field imparting mass, and when Ed says at 2:50 that particles were massless in the very early universe, surely that breaks this equivalence? Obviously there are different definitions for these terms that I don't know (and I know very little!)
As most things in QED, this bosom is counterintuitive: particles need another particle to gain mass so that they can interract with eachother gravitationally. Well, the photon's mass is zero and it still interract with gravity: gravitational lensing! Could someone explain this appearent paradox?
Was Prof Bowley getting a bit grumpy when trying to explain the Higgs mechanism?
Who wrote the equations in the background, and what do they mean?
@clayphish You are in the Order of the Discalced Carmelites?
so if when the universe cools and the higgs field becomes nonzero for some particles, does that mean that other particles (eg. photons) will become massive?
The mass required to completely turn light around is that of a black hole, so for this to be true every part of our own galaxy would have to weigh as much as a black hole. It's a neat idea but extremely unlikely
This can also be disproven based on the fact that non symmetrical galaxies have been found
Well.... gravity doesn't really bend light. Gravity distorts space and the light is traveling straight through space including the distortion. If you "unbent" the space you would see the path of the light is absolutely straight.
I know im responding to this a little late but the idea of "outside the universe" is flawed because there is no time or space there. Empty space is not truly empty; it has waves of energy and quantum fluctuations producing phantom particles.
The universe also cannot be infinite in length, for otherwise it could not change in size, and the universe is known to be expanding. There is an old idea that an infinite universe contains infinite stars, so an infinite universe would have infinite energy
So if everything was massless, does that mean things like protons had no mass, or that they didn't exist yet?
That was a massive video. Very good questions from Brady. Stuff like this boggles my mind. It seems like ultimate small scale reality is composed of a bunch of abstract mathematical entities interacting in abstract mathematical ways. It seems that "having substance" fades away at such scales.