Great idea to post the whole interview. I now understand that I didn't understand before, but now I think I do! His explanation about how the Higgs gives mass to Quarks, or rather binding energy, and that gives other particles mass was really clear. Like most people I had not understood that bit before.
Sadiq Mohamed I think the Higgs gives mass (a tiny rest mass) to quarks. Gluon interactions of the strong force binding the quarks together into baryons is where the vast majority (practically all) of the mass of the neutrons & protons in a nucleus comes from. That didn’t sound quite like what you stated as your improved understanding.
That was absolutely fascinating. We both learned something there - about where our mass comes from. I'd never heard that explained before! Also, Sam's enthusiasm is contagious. I could listen to that man for hours. Thanks for this Becky!
I really enjoy these videos. I started my fascination with particle physics and particle physics in the 5th grade. We were working with prisms, and when I saw white light be transformed into the colors of the rainbow, I determined right then that I wanted to know everything I could about light. I never went to university, so everything I know is self taught.
Great video and conversation.Loads of enthusiasm from both sides. I learn't some surprising things in that video. Its always important to learn new things.
Trying to keep up with his warp speed commentary was tough, but did catch a number of fascinating tidbits. You did a very nice job of drawing him out...
So glad I watched to the end. His explanation of how the Higgs gives "mass" to quarks, but it's the binding energy that makes baryons heavy was brilliant. (Hope I have it right.) I also loved his interpretation of the "god ---- particle." Thank you Becky!
I liked the question at the end on how the mass related to the Higgs boson relates to the mass of general relativity. It was a great way to relate the activity of the LHC into astronomy. I always find it interesting how studying the smallest things helps us understand the biggest things.
Science is my Marijuana: too much science makes me dizzy.. like getting high on knowledge. I barely understand it, but I'm addicted to listening to it.
Great interview Dr. Becky! I wish that he had reviewed what particle was bombarded in order to find the Higgs Boson & what other particles were also observed during this event. It would have been nice if there was a blackboard that he could have used to illustrate some of the things that he was talking about. Anyway, looking forward to your next video.........Stay safe...........👍👍😉😉
I'm glad you had a moment like I usually do with physics. "I don't know what's going on but It all makes sense." Then you get another piece of information and it suddenly makes more sense, but you still don't know what's going on.
24:30 Does this extend to higher levels of structure? Do atoms have mass because of the binding electromagnetic energy of protons and and electrons and molecules likewise?
I'm pretty sure that when a real physicist answers that question, the answer will be, "Not really," because, remember the Rutherford experiment - shooting beta particles at gold foil - finding that basically all the mass of the atoms was located in the tiny nucleus, meaning that atoms are mostly empty space. Also, generating a current within a conductor drives electrons up to 1/10th light speed, if I remember correctly, and yet you do not observe any obvious inertia or reverse impulse on the conductor as you apply that voltage (or magnetic field) from changing the momentum of the electrons. That said, you *do* feel a reverse force due to the induced magnetic field the flowing electrons generate, but this is fairly easy to separate from the effect the electrons mass causes. Electrons have mass, but pushing them around is much, much easier than pushing nuclei around. Another example - photons (including radio transmissions) are created by inducing electrons to move back and forth very quickly, and while this takes EM power, you don't observe the mass of antennas moving around (significantly) in response.
The last paragraph of that discussion prompts an obvious question, leaving us hanging!!...: if LEP was cleaner, how does LHC "filter out" that noise created by, as he said, Hadron jets, etc???
Is it too late to redo my Maths A level at age 45? I scraped a pass first time round along with physics as I was a bit slack… So hopefully work harder now Im older and wiser?
Absolutely not at all. I came back to physics in my 40s and now I am a physics teacher and now I am going through relearning all my physics from university and now I find it way easier to study than I ever did in the past.
@@michaelcornish2299 That's very interesting. I heard Brian Cox once say he wasn't naturally good at maths but he had to grind it out through sheer practice. So are average students just slower at grasping concepts than naturally gifted ones but will get there given enough time and limitless resources ie online education Or do they just hit an intellectual brick wall once the concepts hit a certain level, no matter how hard they work?
@@jayx8804 . That is a very good question and a very tricky question to answer. I think there is probably a bit of both involved but one thing that is crucial is the desire to understand and a willingness to work but there are probably limits but I think this is the important point that those limits are greater than most people believe they are so I like to encourage that people always try their best and I can ask no more. I myself feel that I have gained greater understanding of the seemingly simplest concepts by teaching. I hope that answers your question.
Never could figure out how the sum of masses of the quarks can be less than the mass of the proton without it decaying into individual quarks -- for a stable particle, binding energy should be negative (a mass defect, just like a nucleus has less mass than the sum of its nucleons).
Is the force of gravity linear in regards to mass? Or is it more exponential? Like does something twice as massive as Earth have twice the gravitational force? Or does it have more or less than twice?
The attractive force between two objects of mass M and m is GMm/(r*r) where G is Newtons gravitational constant and r is the distance between them. Newton's second law says F=ma, where F is the force on an object and a is the acceleration. Putting ma=GMm/(r*r) the m cancels and so the acceleration of a body in a gravitational field is independent of the mass of the body. This is why objects of different mass fall to earth at the same speed as long as air resistance isn't a significant factor.
@Just Looking Weight is just the force pulling an object towards Earth - F=mg, where g is the acceleration due to gravity (9.81 m/s^2 for earth) - so you get a force proportional to the mass of the object. There are actually two forms of mass, inertial and gravitational. Inertial mass is a measure of the amount of "stuff" in an object. Imagine an object out in space, well away from any stars, planets etc. with a rocket strapped to it. Light the rocket and measure the acceleration of the object. This will be proportional to the amount of "stuff" and will vary for different objects. Gravitational mass is a measure of the force with which an object reaches out to pull on other objects. As far as we can tell, these two values are identical, although no one truly understands why. Einstein's relativity requires them to be the same.
Satyendra Nath Bose Indian.. The class of particles that obey Bose-Einstein statistics, bosons, was named after Bose by Paul Dirac . It's amazed me that single mind's predicts proven by 3000 minds when technology so advances..
When he was speaking about the lead crystals, I think he meant to say, Lead Floride crystals. Because lead itself, alone, is not clear, no mater what crystal structure it has.
Something is on my mind, I need to ask someone who is really clever, so I came here. Do you think gravity is really a 'thing', a real 'force'? Einstein said gravity is a description of the curvature of spacetime. So gravity is just an apparent force, so this is why a gravity particle or graviton will never be discovered. So we learn general relativity, the geometry of spacetime, to understand what we think of as gravity. Particle physics is a totally different ball game. What do you think?
I think Einsten's representation of gravity as space curvature is only a geometric approximation, the way we represent electric and magnetic fields geometricaly as field lines. I think general relativity is already demonstrably invalid because its math contain singularities, points of infinite density that can have no physical reality. I think we can fairly confidently state that gravitons exist because we have detected gravitational waves, and wave-particle duality seems to be a thing with everything else we have observed in the universe. And finally, I think you shouldn't take what I have just said too seriously because it is only the opinion of someone who reads a lot and who is no physicist. Hopefully, someone with better credentials will chime in.
According to Einstein it isn't a real force, but a fictitous one, because it depends on the observer and their frame of reference: th-cam.com/video/NblR01hHK6U/w-d-xo.html and th-cam.com/video/qD9idUQG7ng/w-d-xo.html The reason why a thing like a graviton was expected is that gravity cannot be ignored on a quantum level. Even though it is absurdly weak compared to the other forces, there are scenarios in which it becomes infinitely strong even at quantum scales (think black hole singularity + Heisenberg uncertainty principle and stuff). Einsteins equations break down in those instances, and quantum mechanics has not yet found a solution that could take over the burden. So, quantum gravity is not needed, because Einstein's theory is wrong - but because it cannot apply in those realms. In a sense both theories are incomplete, but they _should_ compliment each other... hence the search for a unification.
You should see Dr Stone. Its the polar opposite of Rick and Morty. It's optimistic inspiring and based on Real science. Rick&Morty is nilistic and another one of those sci-fies that pulls concepts out their 🐴
@@0ned Good point! I missed that. She should have told him to stop putting adrenochrome in his coffee. Stirring in a cube of sugar should provide him with all the energy he needs.
@@0ned So, the rabbit hole at CERN goes deeper and deeper. I admit the guy is extremely energetic but I think taking ritalin and adrenochrome and a cube of sugar with his coffee would be dangerous (it's the sugar cube that does it). Having said that, I forgot to check out whether or not he was wearing a caffeine patch. We are probably both wrong. He was probably just excited at seeing Dr. Becky. Certainly works for me!
I love to watch you guys casually talking about stuff I cannot even remotely wrap my head around. Sadly I am in no way firm in physics and have a hard time to umderstand beyond Pluto or Elektrons and you talk about "The Higgs" or the gamma ...frankly you Scientist are little children in their own (and awsome!) playground and enjoying the fact that you have no real clue even what you don't understand, aren't you? 😉
I love the almost childlike enthusiasm of this interview as well as the science. Fantastic.
I just love the enthusiasm!
Great idea to post the whole interview. I now understand that I didn't understand before, but now I think I do! His explanation about how the Higgs gives mass to Quarks, or rather binding energy, and that gives other particles mass was really clear. Like most people I had not understood that bit before.
Sadiq Mohamed I think the Higgs gives mass (a tiny rest mass) to quarks. Gluon interactions of the strong force binding the quarks together into baryons is where the vast majority (practically all) of the mass of the neutrons & protons in a nucleus comes from. That didn’t sound quite like what you stated as your improved understanding.
I like how he seemed so excited about his work. Can't wait to hear what they find in the future. Great interview 5🌟
That was absolutely fascinating.
We both learned something there - about where our mass comes from. I'd never heard that explained before!
Also, Sam's enthusiasm is contagious. I could listen to that man for hours.
Thanks for this Becky!
I really enjoy these videos. I started my fascination with particle physics and particle physics in the 5th grade. We were working with prisms, and when I saw white light be transformed into the colors of the rainbow, I determined right then that I wanted to know everything I could about light. I never went to university, so everything I know is self taught.
As long as you keep wanting to learn and do it. Congrats!
Fascinating conversation, Thank you Dr. Becky
Great video and conversation.Loads of enthusiasm from both sides. I learn't some surprising things in that video. Its always important to learn new things.
Trying to keep up with his warp speed commentary was tough, but did catch a number of fascinating tidbits. You did a very nice job of drawing him out...
Love the extra detail. Thanks for posting.
So glad I watched to the end. His explanation of how the Higgs gives "mass" to quarks, but it's the binding energy that makes baryons heavy was brilliant. (Hope I have it right.)
I also loved his interpretation of the "god ---- particle."
Thank you Becky!
Just love the enthusiasm of you both. Got less than half of it but watching it again and again till I get it! (going to take a long time)
I liked the question at the end on how the mass related to the Higgs boson relates to the mass of general relativity. It was a great way to relate the activity of the LHC into astronomy. I always find it interesting how studying the smallest things helps us understand the biggest things.
This video made my day. Wonderful!
Omg I learn some much listening to these people talk.
I didn’t understand a single word of that yet it was absolutely fascinating to hear about this discovery.
Science is my Marijuana: too much science makes me dizzy.. like getting high on knowledge. I barely understand it, but I'm addicted to listening to it.
LHC is your THC?
@@MarkTillotson , 👏 Take your thumbs up and leave.
Great interview Dr. Becky! I wish that he had reviewed what particle was bombarded in order to find the Higgs Boson & what other particles were also observed during this event. It would have been nice if there was a blackboard that he could have used to illustrate some of the things that he was talking about. Anyway, looking forward to your next video.........Stay safe...........👍👍😉😉
"Subatomic particles which are traveling at the speed of light, more or less" scratch the 'more'.
I'm glad you had a moment like I usually do with physics. "I don't know what's going on but It all makes sense." Then you get another piece of information and it suddenly makes more sense, but you still don't know what's going on.
Set playback speed to 75%, this guy talks fast even for a native English speaker to cope with !
Dingo Nates Thanks so much for this tip! I hadn’t known that you could change the playback speed. Brilliant
Sounds just right to me but then I am English and my family all keep saying “slow down!” to me. lol!
!!!
TY This was a wonderful conversation.
24:30 Does this extend to higher levels of structure? Do atoms have mass because of the binding electromagnetic energy of protons and and electrons and molecules likewise?
I'm pretty sure that when a real physicist answers that question, the answer will be, "Not really," because, remember the Rutherford experiment - shooting beta particles at gold foil - finding that basically all the mass of the atoms was located in the tiny nucleus, meaning that atoms are mostly empty space. Also, generating a current within a conductor drives electrons up to 1/10th light speed, if I remember correctly, and yet you do not observe any obvious inertia or reverse impulse on the conductor as you apply that voltage (or magnetic field) from changing the momentum of the electrons. That said, you *do* feel a reverse force due to the induced magnetic field the flowing electrons generate, but this is fairly easy to separate from the effect the electrons mass causes. Electrons have mass, but pushing them around is much, much easier than pushing nuclei around. Another example - photons (including radio transmissions) are created by inducing electrons to move back and forth very quickly, and while this takes EM power, you don't observe the mass of antennas moving around (significantly) in response.
I had to check if the playback speed was on x2 at the beginning
The last paragraph of that discussion prompts an obvious question, leaving us hanging!!...: if LEP was cleaner, how does LHC "filter out" that noise created by, as he said, Hadron jets, etc???
Also, I have a used to tatters set of Burnham's Celestial Handbook. Did you burn through a set too?
24:25 > excellent and clear explanation!! Thank you. 👍
Is it too late to redo my Maths A level at age 45? I scraped a pass first time round along with physics as I was a bit slack… So hopefully work harder now Im older and wiser?
You're never too old to learn, and math is one subject I've always loved, so go for it! 😊
Absolutely not at all. I came back to physics in my 40s and now I am a physics teacher and now I am going through relearning all my physics from university and now I find it way easier to study than I ever did in the past.
@@michaelcornish2299 That's very interesting. I heard Brian Cox once say he wasn't naturally good at maths but he had to grind it out through sheer practice. So are average students just slower at grasping concepts than naturally gifted ones but will get there given enough time and limitless resources ie online education Or do they just hit an intellectual brick wall once the concepts hit a certain level, no matter how hard they work?
@@jayx8804 . That is a very good question and a very tricky question to answer. I think there is probably a bit of both involved but one thing that is crucial is the desire to understand and a willingness to work but there are probably limits but I think this is the important point that those limits are greater than most people believe they are so I like to encourage that people always try their best and I can ask no more. I myself feel that I have gained greater understanding of the seemingly simplest concepts by teaching. I hope that answers your question.
He lost me at transparent lead. :(
I suspect he meant transparent to gamma rays, not visible light. But it is a wild idea.
@Dr Deuteron Ah. Thank you.
I read somewhere that lead tungstate (PbWO4) is used in some detectors, seriously dense for a transparent material (a bit more dense than steel)
Lead tungstate - a compound of lead tungsten and oxygen PbWO4
Never could figure out how the sum of masses of the quarks can be less than the mass of the proton without it decaying into individual quarks -- for a stable particle, binding energy should be negative (a mass defect, just like a nucleus has less mass than the sum of its nucleons).
great interview, if this Astrophysicist thing doesn't work out for you, you can always become an interviewer... 👍🍁🤠
Ah few beautiful moments in this one but at 25:00 is most crucial at least for myself to get a grip on what the Higgsy actually does.
Incredible ! "can explain 4% of the observable universe" - how fun ! "We don't yet work with gravity. So there's work to do." So exciting.
Is the force of gravity linear in regards to mass? Or is it more exponential? Like does something twice as massive as Earth have twice the gravitational force? Or does it have more or less than twice?
The attractive force between two objects of mass M and m is GMm/(r*r) where G is Newtons gravitational constant and r is the distance between them. Newton's second law says F=ma, where F is the force on an object and a is the acceleration. Putting ma=GMm/(r*r) the m cancels and so the acceleration of a body in a gravitational field is independent of the mass of the body. This is why objects of different mass fall to earth at the same speed as long as air resistance isn't a significant factor.
@Just Looking Weight is just the force pulling an object towards Earth - F=mg, where g is the acceleration due to gravity (9.81 m/s^2 for earth) - so you get a force proportional to the mass of the object.
There are actually two forms of mass, inertial and gravitational. Inertial mass is a measure of the amount of "stuff" in an object. Imagine an object out in space, well away from any stars, planets etc. with a rocket strapped to it. Light the rocket and measure the acceleration of the object. This will be proportional to the amount of "stuff" and will vary for different objects. Gravitational mass is a measure of the force with which an object reaches out to pull on other objects. As far as we can tell, these two values are identical, although no one truly understands why. Einstein's relativity requires them to be the same.
So what we need a...."Higgsbreaker?" for interstellar travel?
To paraphrase Ross from Friends, this must be how regular people feel when they meet celebrities ☺️
Higgs boson gives mass to quark but proton gets its mass from the force that binds quarks together..woah
3000 coauthors?! That doesn't leave any room in a journal for the actual report!
Satyendra Nath Bose Indian..
The class of particles that obey Bose-Einstein statistics, bosons, was named after Bose by Paul Dirac . It's amazed me that single mind's predicts proven by 3000 minds when technology so advances..
18:35 I want to know more about this hidden valley!
Ooo I’m on this topic in physics in college now
If dark energy is a propurty the quarks . Could that be negative mass
When was this? Just saw this guy on Lex Friedman.
Lex Fridman
@Peter Mortensen Lex Fridman
Were there any particle physicists who repelled you?
Love this!!
Hey Becky! he just said "more or less the speed of light" . He doesn't mean anything went faster than light did he?
Correct, he used it as the English phrase equivalent to "near to", not as a literal bigger or smaller.
That was interesting. Thanks.
No no. It's called the "God particle" because it "loves church...I mean mass"
Because you have to believe in it with blind faith since there's no proof!
Thanks for sharing 🙂
But how fast does it melt that gold i could use a forge to melt 18000 tons of gold eventually
He's passionate!
Higgs Boson giving us mass is a misconception needs a little more detail. That is what I thought since first hearing about it.
When he was speaking about the lead crystals, I think he meant to say, Lead Floride crystals.
Because lead itself, alone, is not clear, no mater what crystal structure it has.
[checks phone] wait a minute this isn't a Wednesday!
Wibbly-wobbly... timey-wimey...😁
Heavens , I thought it was Thursday.
So am I, let's all have a drink!
Something is on my mind, I need to ask someone who is really clever, so I
came here. Do you think gravity is really a 'thing', a real 'force'?
Einstein said gravity is a description of the curvature of spacetime. So
gravity is just an apparent force, so this is why a gravity particle or
graviton will never be discovered. So we learn general relativity, the
geometry of spacetime, to understand what we think of as gravity.
Particle physics is a totally different ball game. What do you think?
I think Einsten's representation of gravity as space curvature is only a geometric approximation, the way we represent electric and magnetic fields geometricaly as field lines. I think general relativity is already demonstrably invalid because its math contain singularities, points of infinite density that can have no physical reality. I think we can fairly confidently state that gravitons exist because we have detected gravitational waves, and wave-particle duality seems to be a thing with everything else we have observed in the universe. And finally, I think you shouldn't take what I have just said too seriously because it is only the opinion of someone who reads a lot and who is no physicist. Hopefully, someone with better credentials will chime in.
According to Einstein it isn't a real force, but a fictitous one, because it depends on the observer and their frame of reference: th-cam.com/video/NblR01hHK6U/w-d-xo.html and th-cam.com/video/qD9idUQG7ng/w-d-xo.html
The reason why a thing like a graviton was expected is that gravity cannot be ignored on a quantum level. Even though it is absurdly weak compared to the other forces, there are scenarios in which it becomes infinitely strong even at quantum scales (think black hole singularity + Heisenberg uncertainty principle and stuff). Einsteins equations break down in those instances, and quantum mechanics has not yet found a solution that could take over the burden. So, quantum gravity is not needed, because Einstein's theory is wrong - but because it cannot apply in those realms. In a sense both theories are incomplete, but they _should_ compliment each other... hence the search for a unification.
Happy Intl. Astronomy Day!
Pretty interesting!!! 😃
On a Saturday? Cool
Transparent lead...? makes me reminisce about transparent aluminum of Star Trek Voyage Home fame.
Transparent aluminium has been invented. ALON (Aluminium Oxynitride)
JOHN 3:16-18👑
You've done alot of particle physics stuff lately. A dormant interest?
When you realize that apparently English is not even your native language.
Very difficult for me to understand Dr. Harper because he talks so fast.
You can change the playback rate with the little cog icon. I know I do!
Did you like “our” Sam Harper?
She is typical Dutch in her behavior!
Transparent lead...
You should see Dr Stone. Its the polar opposite of Rick and Morty.
It's optimistic inspiring and based on Real science.
Rick&Morty is nilistic and another one of those sci-fies that pulls concepts out their 🐴
I think you should have told Dr. Sam Harper to cut down his consumption of coffee.
Maybe it's adrenochrome, not coffee
@@0ned Good point! I missed that. She should have told him to stop putting adrenochrome in his coffee. Stirring in a cube of sugar should provide him with all the energy he needs.
@@mhorram or maybe it was Ritalin
@@0ned So, the rabbit hole at CERN goes deeper and deeper.
I admit the guy is extremely energetic but I think taking ritalin and adrenochrome and a cube of sugar with his coffee would be dangerous (it's the sugar cube that does it). Having said that, I forgot to check out whether or not he was wearing a caffeine patch.
We are probably both wrong. He was probably just excited at seeing Dr. Becky. Certainly works for me!
Gravity goes out into other dimensions... this is what I think dark matter is, other dimensions.
These are like bootleg recordings...the cern tapes.
What if gravity was a combination of all attractive forces
I love to watch you guys casually talking about stuff I cannot even remotely wrap my head around. Sadly I am in no way firm in physics and have a hard time to umderstand beyond Pluto or Elektrons and you talk about "The Higgs" or the gamma ...frankly you Scientist are little children in their own (and awsome!) playground and enjoying the fact that you have no real clue even what you don't understand, aren't you? 😉
Dr Sam Harper looks a lot like the german Comedian Johann König
build a warp engine, already
Creepy scientist.