Neutrinos are the Worst Particles in the Universe - Ask a Spaceman!
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 31 ก.ค. 2024
- The first 1000 people to use the link will get a free trial of Skillshare Premium Membership: skl.sh/paulmsutter04212
This video was sponsored by Skillshare.
Full podcast episodes: www.askaspaceman.com
Support: / pmsutter
Follow: / paulmattsutter and / paulmattsutter
How did we discover neutrinos? What don’t they make any sense? Why do they have mass, and how do they change their identities? I discuss these questions and more in today’s Ask a Spaceman!
Follow all the show updates at www.askaspaceman.com, and help support the show at / pmsutter
Keep those questions about space, science, astronomy, astrophysics, and cosmology coming to #AskASpaceman for COMPLETE KNOWLEDGE OF TIME AND SPACE!
00:00 Intro
01:24 What is a Neutrino?
06:23 The Solar Neutrino Problem
09:14 Neutrino Mixing
13:38 How the Neutrino Gets its Mass
15:11 Sterile Neutrino Mysteries
Image credits:
NASA
CERN - วิทยาศาสตร์และเทคโนโลยี
The first 1000 people to use the link will get a free trial of Skillshare Premium Membership: skl.sh/paulmsutter04212
This video was sponsored by Skillshare.
You have headache because you have not read "Time Matters: 3rd edition" - it's free and debunks a lot of myths, including neutrino oscillation means mass.
Is it possible that neutrinos and our inability to detect the counterparts we would expect them to have be the solution to dark matter/energy? As in since they are virtually undetectable and invisible to most of our sensors, could they be the missing key to the dark matter problem?
String Theory was not a waste of time. Geometry is the key to Math and Physics.
What if we describe subatomic particles as spatial curvature, instead of trying to describe General Relativity as being mediated by particles?
Quantum Entangled Twisted Tubules: "A theory that you can't explain to a bartender is probably no damn good." Ernest Rutherford
The following is meant to be a generalized framework for an extension of Kaluza-Klein Theory. Does it agree with the “Twistor Theory” of Roger Penrose? 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 gluons are actually made up of these twisted tubes which become entangled with other tubes to produce quarks. (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 Force" 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 Mesons. 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. 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 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.
Gamma photons are produced when a tube unwinds producing electromagnetic waves.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
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. We know there is an unequal distribution of electrical charge within each atom because the positive charge is concentrated within the nucleus, even though the overall electrical charge of the atom is balanced by equal positive and negative charge.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
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?
A neutrino goes to a bar and orders a beer. "What do I owe you?" he asks. The bartender answers, "For you, no charge."
Said the same thing for the Higgs boson, but warned him about being too heavy.
You on the hit list now
😂😂😂😂😂
Weak
Must have happened in Quark’s bar on deep space nine.
The rules of mass acquisition are quite complex.
I just found out that I know FAR less about neutrinos than I thought. Thanks, Paul!
I still think a great merch or T-shirt slogan for the Ask a Spaceman podcast would be : "Neutrinos....who DOES this???" Haha. ;)
I really like your casual yet energetic presentation. It makes this stuff go down so much smoother.
Since Neutrinos can escape a Supernova before the light does and they travel at approximately 99.99999 % the speed of light, this means they can give us a "heads-up" that a Supernova has occurred.
That makes Neutrinos (at least to astronomers) a little less irritating!
I'm confused, Doc. How do they leave a supernova before the light? And even if they were released a second or two before the light...wouldn't the light soon overtake them? Especially if we're talking about supernovae that are thousands or millions of light years away...the light would've surely surpassed them, especially by the time it has reached us and we see it...right?
Am I thinking about this in the correct way, or am I completely off?
Someone would have to do the math... Pika, pika, I choose you! ;) You might get a small heads up. There was a kilonova - a neutron stars collision - documented in 2017 by Ligo & Virgo and Fermi gamma-ray observatory, as well as other instruments in visual and radio wavelengths. The gravity waves and the gamma rays reached the detectors with 1.3 second discrepancy if I am not mistaken. The distance to the stars is about 130 mln ly. So this confirmed gravity waves travel with the speed of light.
I have also heard about the research where astronomers predicted a supernova explosion with pinpoint precision ;) This is because of the gravity lensing. Basically, they have witnessed an event and predicted the same supernova event a couple of times in the future, as the light took different paths and was lensed differently by the foreground cluster of galaxies. This is really interesting stuff! The same supernova happened multiple times to observers on Earth.
@@RILEYLEIFSON_UTAH Because neutrinos are only weakly interacting most of them pass straight through the surrounding star in seconds. But the star is opaque to light which takes hours or even days to escape the star. The photons then start to overhaul the neutrinos but the latter move at a very high percentage of the speed of light (in fact, I don't think we've ever been able to measure a difference in the speeds).
but why do neutrinos force the star into novae if they dont have mass... There's a concentration/pressure factor there that overwhelms quark matter or force carriers...
@el.presagio.de.los.neutrinos best scifi novel of last decade
Jen’s mom Beth here; I’m 2 years late here and my degree is not in physics. This will be very obvious when I ask my question. Could it be that the right handed neutrinos don’t interact with light? Has our Ice Cube neutrino detected these yet? Has this been figured out and I need to read more? I’m older and retired so this is for fun. Such fun.
Thanks for making physics not just interesting but also very entertaining 💚
what is the spelling of "... mass if you're curious?" part at 16:02 ?
Found it when I search for "neutrino mass mechanism", it returns a wikipedia article titled "Seesaw mechanism". Then you can follow a link to another wikipedia article titled "Majorana equation". I believe that's what Paul is talking about.
Thanks for sharing your knowledge Paul, I could watch your videos and listen to the podcast the whole day
Hey paul, just wanna let u know I've found your channel recently and I appreciate your honest contents.
I love his phraseology.
Enjoyed this video thanks for the awesome info as always 😀
The animations in this video remind me of visions I used to have back in the 60's. I never felt more lost than I did then. That is until I tried to grasp the concept of nutrinos. Thank's a lot, Paul
I have found my thinking outside of the box tends to curve in a predictable manner and this paradox drives my inventive nature.
That was so incredibly interesting, and at the same time, hilarious. Great job!
On How The Universe Works they said that we know neutrinos have mass because they change over time while massless particles do not experience time at the speed of light making them incapable of changing flavor. To be able to change flavor over time you have to exist in time which means you need to have mass. I don't know which is more profound, that photons don't experience time or why neutrinos must have mass.
Now, I have a headache too !!!
That is one great info package! Thank you!
The collider can be handed over for scrap metal)) Such
there are no broken fragments or glued bosons of matter in nature. There are 4 types of stable matter - strings, quarks, nucleons and atoms. Each type of matter has its own gravity, respectively 10 ^ 28, 10 ^ 18, and 10 ^ 6 times stronger than the familiar gravity of atoms.
They hold matter in the orbits of the universe.
Very interesting talk. Appreciate your mode of communication, where, even the average non-science oriented can understand the concepts. From what we have learned about the universe over the last 5000 or so years, it is blatantly obvious that we have just begun to scratch the surface of all that that we don't know. We've got a lot more to learn.
You missed a fabulous quote from Pauli in your intro: I have done a terrible thing. I have postulated a particle that cannot be detected.
So good on so many levels!
I'd love a collab between you and Sabine Hossenfelder. It'd be awesome
I love this stuff. Where were you guys in my study hall days ?
Two of the most honest physics channels are Sabine's and Paul's.
I am a regular follower of both
I noticed whenever I encounter someone in the youtube comments with a non-standard, sometimes even fringe ideas, they recommend following Sabine ;) It makes me very sceptical. She is a legitimate scientist as far as I know, but it seems she attracts anti-system and anti-mainstream folk.
@@pavel9652 From what I see you are of the mainstream. I understand that there are deep crises, both in quantum mechanics and cosmology So why not also listen to scientists who are not in the mainstream?
@@illogicmath So you confirm, she is not mainstream. It depends on how far you want to go off the trail I guess. Some folk I have seen have seriously fringe ideas, but obviously, the opinions of her followers not necessarily reflect her worldviews.
@@pavel9652 Oh no no, she is definitely mainstream. I understand that her main research interest is in quantum gravity but her TH-cam channel is very successful and it's true that many of her fans are people who like topics outside the mainstream.
I myself believe that at the moment there is a big crisis in quantum mechanics and practically nothing fundamentally new has been discovered in the last 50 years. Perhaps if funding were provided to researchers outside the mainstream, progress could be made, but this of course is speculation
@@pavel9652 s🎉
Could neutrinos be the key to quantum gravity?
Could neutrinos be the partical of the Higgs field. One and the same? All creating mass, space, and time?
I don’t know enough and assume this type of question has been all thought out and discarded before.
This video is very funny!
There you have it. Hard to argue with a spaceman.
Laughed all the way through your thoroughly clear explanation.
how do the detectors discern the flavours? i would have expected different mass ratios to show up differently instead of not being detected at all
Specific flavours of neutrino produce their corresponding flavour of charged lepton when interacting with other matter. An electron neutrino can produce an electron, but not a muon or tau, similarly muon neutrinos and tau neutrinos produce muons and taus.
Fun and super informative. I can now flavor (!) my scintillating conversation with impressive-sounding tidbits (devoid of real understanding, of course), like "The neutrino is the only subatomic particle that doesn't require the Higgs Field for its mass". Much obliged 😉
Would it have almost no charge and be smaller than an electron? It is a very powerful entity when provoked. Aether?
Thank you Paul.
Thank you, Dr. Sutter. Your physics lessons are always the opposite of boring...
I would say they are the worst KNOWN particles in the universe.
Thanks for that cheery thought!
"Circles" ~ The Who
Just a question (or two), maybe someone can help, although i think no one knows how it really works.
How does the decay work? How can particles (which do not consist of smaller things, they should be the last stop...) change their existence?
In my mind, if they are subatomic particles which do not consist of smaller particles, it should not be possible for them to transform into different particles. How should it? But yet they change into other leptons without any mechanism! Just like "Puff" here i am...
And how does the weak force strikes into a lepton and just by arriving tell the particles what to do?
Or for example the magnetic force: Their is a photon, the force carrier of electromagnetism, which strikes into an atom. This atom now moves with force closer to the source-electron from which the photon originated.
But how? Its just a photon which strikes into an atom (or the electron in it) and this electron gets attracted, against gravity and against the direction from where the photon is coming from, to the direction of the source-electron.
Am i getting something (or everything?) wrong?
The photons should actually contain information about what the electron should do and in which direction it should be attracted to.
I cant imagine how this stuff should work, this makes no sense.
Like in a PC game where someone sets some weird and random rules how particles decay, change and interact wirh another, without any deeper underlying mechanisms. It just works, basically like magic!
All this gives me the impression that we have no idea how this stuff really works.
Deep down in this particle/wave soup is probaply way more going on then we can imagine in the moment.
Balls! Sometimes Arvin Ash has an animation of 2 people standing in 2 boats. 1st they throw balls at each other & catch them. This pushes the boats further apart. This is analogous to how protons repel protons. The balls are.... you said it already = photons = the force carrier
Then they throw boomerangs to each other. The boomerangs don't go straight across to the other person like the balls did. Instead, each boomerang curves round *behind* the other person who turns round & catches it. This action pushes the boats closer together. This is analogous to how oppositely charged particles attract
My thinking leads toward Schrodinger's cat where it's in the box but once you open the box to observe the cat he ceases to exist but as long as the cat is not observed he is there. All you gotta do is not look to be sure he's there.simple.l
This is hilarious! From a high energy physicist (retired, thankfully).
String Theory was not a waste of time. Geometry is the key to Math and Physics.
What if we describe subatomic particles as spatial curvature, instead of trying to describe General Relativity as being mediated by particles?
Quantum Entangled Twisted Tubules: "A theory that you can't explain to a bartender is probably no damn good." Ernest Rutherford
The following is meant to be a generalized framework for an extension of Kaluza-Klein Theory. Does it agree with the “Twistor Theory” of Roger Penrose? 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 gluons are actually made up of these twisted tubes which become entangled with other tubes to produce quarks. (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 Force" 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 Mesons. 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. 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 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.
Gamma photons are produced when a tube unwinds producing electromagnetic waves.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
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. We know there is an unequal distribution of electrical charge within each atom because the positive charge is concentrated within the nucleus, even though the overall electrical charge of the atom is balanced by equal positive and negative charge.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
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?
Take a look to a TOE called "Quantum Realism" from (NZ) Brian Withworth, high energy photons in different resonant modes are the inner structure of Electrons, Neutrinos and Quarks, charge, mass, spin are explained in a better way than "inherent" properties of particles.
Yes, I agree. Also, nature says this is so, as in the nature of fruit or vegetables, let's say. Most of the good nutrients are tucked away hiding, right behind the outer skin. The story matches.
This was brilliant. I envy your physics students.
*duh he's on youtube, he's broke*
You've mentioned that "we cannot just create or add electrical charge etc." But from the beginning they have appeared from somewhere 🤔...
So it hypothetically may mean that we theoretically can creat something from "nothing" (let us call it so) but not at the moment? Hm?
always gettin in the way of stuff!
A neutrino walks into a bar, and the bartender says "we don't serve your kind here." Neutrino starts to walk away and the bartender says "welcome back, Tau!"
Another reason for postulating the neutrino was conservation of angular momentum.
Neutron = 1/2
So, product particles must have a total angular momentum of 1/2.
HOWEVER,
proton = 1/2
electron = 1/2
It is impossible to juggle things so that angular momentum is conserved because 1/2 is NOT equal to 1/2 + 1/2.
Hence, a new particle with angular momentum = -1/2 must be involved.
Then 1/2 = 1/2 + 1/2 - 1/2 becomes a possible angular momentum equation.
Aren’t neutrinos their own anti particles?
could neutrinos' left handed nature be because the act of observing somehow destroys or alters its spin? or could this be a clue as to why there is so much more matter than anti-matter?
I have no idea about how/if a particle could "lose" "spin". However, the idea of measurment changing that spin doesn't solve the fact that only 1 spin type is ever detected. If both types of spin exist then the measurement would result at least some of both over a large amount of registerations. If there is only 1 spin then all measurement would do is create opposites leading all of one spin to just being all of the other spins and thus never have a mix.
This is fun! A real challenge... It makes me think of the three-polarizer problem where the center polarizer will re-orient the photon to fit through its window... I like to think of it as the "cost" of observation... So perchance the "cost" of observation of the Neutrino is that it will always seem to have left-handed chirality. If that were to be true, then we have a new level of interaction between the physical and the intellectual, or at least what is known... That COULD lead us somewhere interesting! Like how is that consistent with the cosmic censorship of the run-of-the-mill black hole.
1 dislike? the legend says that Paul himself disliked the video because he didn't like the way his hair looked like
Since neutrinos have mass (sort of), they travel slower than the speed of light.
So, consider a left-handed neutrino, that is a neutrino whose spin is antiparallel to its direction of motion. There MUST be a rest frame for this neutrino. In this rest frame, there is no correlation between direction of motion and spin because there is no motion. If one reversed the direction of the neutrino without affecting its spin, then it would be, ipso facto, a right-handed neutrino. So a stationary neutrino has no handedness relative to its direction of motion.
Serious question. When the neutrinos change flavour mid-flight, do they do this by combining with other neutrinos, or could a single neutrino carry this out? If one can do it, where does the energy for the extra mass come from?
Nice! Brought me some steps nearer to understand neutrinos, One question, however:
Around 5:00 you kind of equate the colour difference between electron vs tau vs muon with their respective masses. However, later (9:30) in the video it appears there are m1, m2 and m3. How is it, you gloss over the difference?
Thanks, really great video. I obviously hate large things, like rogue planets, asteroids, SMBHs and their Godawful killer death-ray beams, but now I can take a fresh perspective on my detestation of this worst of all possible universes.
You sounded as insulted and annoyed by neutrinos as I had always imagined the "SUNFISH ARE STUPID AND AWFUL" meme-discussion guy to sound as he named all the flaws and inanities of the Sunfish to sound like. It was very amusing to find out that Neutrinos are the Physics Sunfish, but stranger still.
Hilarious rant! But if the flavor doesn't express mass, what property does it express?
Someone once floated the idea that Neutrinos have been at lightspeed since the big bang so they are immune from the E=MC^2 thing because they didn't use energy to propel them to lightspeed they just came into existence at lightspeed.
The same guy tried to tell me that they can move faster than light and effectively move backwards in time.
He was a bright guy but we were 18 so don't base any papers on any of this wild speculation...
My understanding of Quantum Physics is this is possible or at least the coming into being at lightspeed thing.
I mean everything is as unlikely as everything else right?
Luv and Peace.
William Sidis used the term reversals ...feels confluent in some strange way
The cosmos must be full of these things since they're produced by stars. I thought they were massless until now.
neutrinos almost never interract with anything but they are produced in a whopping majority of all nuclear reactions. so why isn't the entire universe awash in neutrinos by now?
C'mon now! Everyone knows Strage Quarks are the worst! 🤷♂️😂🤣👍🏼
Perhaps this is the most important particle of all! After all, it is the smallest.
Thnx.
I’m looking forward to your next video.
I’d love to know your opinion of ‘The Electric Universe’. ????
I think I have seen you in the comments under one of the Fermilab videos week ago. Sky Scholar is an unqualified quack feeding anti-system masses with pseudo-science garbage. Don't listen to him, don't watch him, forget what you have seen already and unsubscribe. "The Electric Universe" is complete garbage. Check the video called "Pierre-Marie Robitaille Is Clueless (Sky Scholar Debunked)" if you want to know more about it. If you are not an expert in astrophysics stay away from non-mainstream folk to avoid exposure to quackery. Robitaille has been expelled from academia once he went "dark side".
I fail to see the heartburn. Wouldn't it be boring as all hell to know everything, not not have new things to discover about the universe?
Personally, I enjoy most steep learning curve problems and situations. Neutrinos are just one such problem, showing that our models and understanding is incomplete and requiring us to find new ways to explore and probe the problem to reveal a solution.
And neutrinos are kind of useful. They indicate certain reactions are occurring, which can be handy detecting an unlicensed nuclear reactor, a clandestine nuclear test or give early warning that a supernova has occurred before we get an indication by photonic signature.
Neutrinos sound like a rich field of study for new ideas.
Maybe the neutrino penetrates into other universes that are "Close" to ours, coming in and out of them? They would exist in a bulk instead of a Higg's field. They cycle through some other universes, in and out as they travel.
I have read that commercial nuclear power plants lose a significant amount of power through the creation of neutrinos. They are just "lost" power.
Since there are trillions of galaxies and each galaxy has billions of stars creating a billion-trillion neutrinos per millisecond even if the neutrino has a very small mass that could be enough to make up dark matter, Neutrinos mutate/vibrate from flavor to flavor etc. so are hard to detect.
Look at it this way. As our knowledge of physics is advanced, the definition of mass itself continues to evolve. The original definition of mass is the amount of matter in an object. But, when particle acceleration began to yield collisions of electrically charged particles, the definition of mass itself changed. The new mass was defined as the amount of electrical potential difference necessary to make a charged particle ford the gap between electrodes which are separated by a distance of one centimeter. Now, what would happen if we were to develope a magnetic theory of both mass and energy? I propose that the logical outcome is that magnetism itself would be defined as a superfluid, with heretofore undefined oscillatory properties. My personal estimation yields a new portmanteau term to define the science of such magnetism based oscillations, namely, magnetothermohydrodynamics. The philosophy of interpretation that would attach to this newly adapted term, if expanded carefully, would likely yield the properties of stable nuclear fusion and also, gravitational effects.
Could DarkMatter be some sort of "Heavy"/"Special"/"NotYetDiscovered"Neutrino, or some kind of "ExtraArranged"quarks or some"thing"BEYOND our understanding, if there is indeed the so called "DarkMatter"?
maybe right-handed version of neutrino is dark matter?:)
A new mass giving mechanism that *only* interacts with neutrinos?
They're so odd in the first place, perhaps a "neutrino Higgs field" might be a thing? 🤷♂️
11:52 yes 1 ,3 and 5 give direction to 2, 4 and 6 in a chance and probability of probable mass there is no left and right up or down only plus or minus and to have a plus you need a minus so that cancels out too
Question :
To paint a picture do you start with black or white and take away black or add light
Or visa versa 😮
...job security for the expectorating class...
So, considering the phenomenon of neutrino mixing and all the other variabilities of neutrinos, how about this: there is just ONE kind of neutrino, but it has a complex "personality." That is, like us, it's an individual but can manifest or display different aspects of its intrinsic nature at different times (for what reasons, we don't know). But this is a simpler, in a way, concept than considering every single different combination of characteristics as a unique particle type. ESPECIALLY considering neutrino mixing, where the SAME neutrino appears to change into a different particle. Of course, it's not doing that (it seems wrong because it is!), any more than I become a completely different type of being if I walk backwards or have a change of mood. Neutrinos just manifest different characteristics at different times or under different conditions or influences. - And that's an opportunity! What if we learned how to induce neutrino state changes? Then perhaps we could use neutrinos for communication, a signaling vector that can pass through any matter!
Could sterile neutrinos be dark matter?
No
I'm just educated enough to be annoying, but not so educated that I can explain these things, but isn't it true that an atomic nucleus derives only 1% of its mass from the Higgs field and 99% of its mass from the energy inside of it? Could that have anything to do with why neutrinos have mass? Or do there have to be interactions like with gluons. Even so, could it be that neutrinos do have interactions within them?
Well, photons have energy too, but they do not have any mass. So my guess would be probaply no ^^
To get mass from interactions in a particle, it must consist of smaller elementary particles.
But neutrinos are elementary particles, therefore they do not consist of smaller particles interacting with each other, from which an additional mass could come from.
Hit the calf from the side!!! ;)
Great
Neutrinos are sexy. They provide us an independent window to the universe, next to the electromagnetic and gravitational window.
It's the aether, my friend.
Having operated 5 nuclear reactors I appreciate this!
Paul, allow me to impose my thinking upon the Brotherhood of Physics by proposing that some, if not all Neutrinos are produced by dark matter interacting with regular matter under high temperatures and pressure...neutrinos are hybrid particles created by the interaction between regular matter and dark matter. I remain unaware of any test or 'grading system' proposed by physicists to rule out this possibility along with the other possibility dark energy is a byproduct of this hybrid, high-energy, reaction/interaction between dark matter and regular matter.
que significa los portales en los cristales
Dear Dr. Paul, I understood everything you said. Thank you for speaking my language on this subject, and speaking my mind. However, I have to say: please consider the possibility of the neutrino as a highjacked proton with the electron being the kidnapper with a gun. It's gun is its ability to get us thinking this was a mutual engagement -- opposites attracting. I say No. Only one is attracted to the other. The electron is a leech, and I think it's a predator of the proton. The electron is walking around and getting the proton to serve it. Proton is doing all the work. Electron hitched a free ride! AND kept proton muzzled. It is impossible to move slowly without the power of the proton. It is the proton that is able to move through objects. Electrons are good liars. They were able to make us believe they were alive. Or is proton being kind? Probably proton is being kind, and also glorious. We should study Proton much more. 😊 Oh, also, I think when a neutron meets another proton, it is possibly knocking the protons out, thus the reason why decay would happen. The Decay is the real Electron, ... I think. Why else would we be having a story called, "One day we must die."? Nothing ages me more than the leeches, the predators, the liars, etc. ...
yeah, Proton needs a therapist.
If particles get their mass from the Higgs field could a difference in Higgs particle concentration result in a difference in mass for particles in places with different concentrations of Higgs particles? Maybe this could be a mechanism that explains dark matter? Note: highly uninformed speculation on my part.
I love Paul's style of presenting his lecture. He really can capture and keep my attention. Great work!
What about dark matter? It hasn't even been discovered yet. It is a postulated corpuscule.
TLDR: Neutrinos shape-shift.
Klaatu sent me here...
I also understand it🙏
Somewhat
I am just a totally amateur physicist, but I figured it out.
There i is a way to see the results of one hitting zomethig
Dang neutrinos. They're like the punk-particles of the Universe. Well, do you feel lucky punk? Do ya?
Asi se siente mejor que caminar en lo oscuri sin saver que es lo que pas
Haha I love neutrinos 🤣
Hahaha! Glad that you stated that, "We just don't know" rather than what has happened in physics - making up terms such as "Dark Matter / Energy" which in my humble opinion is BS.... !! Where is the Aether in all of this?? You are very entertaining, Paul - Thank you and Cheers from Seattle! 🍻 Alex
It is not impossible to count the number of electron, protons, etc., so why doesn't physicists have a list of the many particles? Maybe Paul can find the list. Culprit maybe electron, not neutrino. However only the list could save the day.
Neutrinos are oscillating resonating Inertial planes.
Re: bullets spinning in whatever direction - err, what? No way, that's beyond offensive. All bullets spin in the same direction - the right one!. Well, if they are shot from the gun, as is proper of course :). Hand thrown bullets can indeed do whatever, but those are not real bullets...
Neutrinos the worst? We still have dark matter that might be a particle. And that one might be worse. We will have to see.
Well the latest news says we now know dark matter doesn't clump together as much as regular matter. so it is getting messier but it's still not the total cllusterfuck that the neutrino is!
I do love your videos, but I think I preferred them when they were just you talking, without additional videos. Your great skill is in being able to explain things so simply and in such a compelling way without the need for diagrams or animations, like the best of storytellers. Consider bringing it back to basics and doing away with the animations :)
I really disagree: a picture can tell a thousand words, it can be much clearer & he's IMO better at explaining than Arvin Ash etc but gets much less views so I think if he tries to make it look like a TV program kind of like Arvin Ash his views will snowball
Neutrinos arent that bad. They just don't really react with much on our plane of existence. On other planes, they are much more important, perhaps.
the love story 1 + 1 = 2 💞 neutrinos 💐