For a while it seems subatomic stories aren't so subatomic anymore. And I love how it's getting to be about all those other scales of Physics as well, after all, Physics Is Everything!
Another terrific video Dr. Don & thanks for answering my posted question! I'm certain that I will have more questions for you in the future.......... 😉😉👍
Of all the knowledge laid down here (which I do appreciate) I want to bring special attention to your humor. Knowledge and laughs. Love your delivery! You remind me of my favorite teacher from high school.
I've read and heard much of this before, but I love how everyone who talks about these idess explains them in a different way. This is why I never tire of hearing them :)
The pandemic and people working from home has led to a great deal of innovative and compelling content on TH-cam. I count this series among those that have blossomed this year. I hope the series can continue even as we return to normal, whatever _that_ is.
Starting at 2:03 in this video, the term “equal” is a term we all need to emphasize. The matter to antimatter ratio of 3,000,000,001 to 3,000,000,000 is the best explanation we have as to why antimatter is rare in our universe, but this ratio still represents an imbalance. If we fail to do our bookkeeping properly, then we will continue to have to accept these kinds of imbalances. The most notorious imbalance of all time is when we fail to question why particles, which we can call a “plus”, shows up out of nowhere in space - space, which we can call a “zero”. We have been conditioned to accept this imbalance without question. To keep our books straight, we need to account for where all this “plus” came from. Also, there is another “plus” that we see in gravity. Gravity just shows up out of nowhere and we need to account for this. The best explanation for these imbalances is that there are aspects of our universe that we do not understand. We are just beginning to recognize one of these aspects when we acknowledge so-called dark energy. I think so-called dark energy's existence is key in understanding how to balance our books. It should become increasingly clear that dark energy is the exact opposite of gravity, it's counterpart. This helps us account for the “plus” gravity by balancing it with a “minus” gravity. This brings our balance to zero, but we still have a universe full of “plus” particles that need to be accounted for. Antimatter would not be a viable candidate for this because there simply is not enough antimatter to balance all the “plus” particles. So antimatter should also have an opposite-particle of it's own that needs to be accounted for. When we have opposite gravity balancing with normal gravity, this strongly infers there must also be opposite particles balancing with normal particles. Those opposite particles most certainly exist by a means such that we cannot directly detect them. The best way to describe this mechanism is that those particles, along with the so-called dark energy, exist in a parallel dimension. This will give us opposite particles (by inference) that are paired up with normal particles. So now we have normal gravity paired up with opposite gravity, and normal particles paired with opposite particles. With this, everything adds up to zero and this balances our books. Anti-matter is just a fluke.
Here is another answer to the question Line Noise asked at 10:14 in the video. I believe he is asking how we can tell the universe is expanding when all our measuring instruments are also expanding. In other words, he is asking, if the universe expands 1% and our meter sticks also lengthen 1%, shouldn't we get the same measurement? While it is true that Dark Energy does not affect our measuring instruments because of the small distances involved, it would not matter if it did, because we do not determine expansion by measuring distance or calculating speeds by distance divided by time. We determine expansion by measuring the velocities at which galaxies are receding from us using the shift in the color of light we receive from the galaxies. The expansion stretches out the light (actually, all EM radiation) so its wavelength increases. Imagine drawing a wave on a piece of stretchable material like rubber, stretch the material and you will see the wave also stretches increasing its wavelength. We observe distant galaxies which are made up of stars emitting light which we can separate into spectra (rainbows). The elements, primarily hydrogen, emit light of characteristic wavelengths. When we look at the spectrum of wavelengths of the light from distant galaxies we find the lines have shifted toward the red end of the spectrum, thus the name "red shift." It is then just a matter of using the red shift to calculate the velocity. FYI, wavelengths increase from the blue end of the spectrum toward the red end. So red colors have longer wavelengths than blue colors. When we make these observations, we find distant galaxies are receding from us, and the farther away the galaxy, the greater the velocity. Making these measurements for large numbers of galaxies gives an astonishing result. The expansion can be calculated and seems to have a constant factor, which we call the Hubble Constant. The newest value of the Hubble Constant is just under 70 kilometers per second per megaparsec (km/sec/Mpc). One parsec is equal to 3.26 light-years distance. A light-year is just under 6 trillion miles or about 9.6 trillion kilometers. For example, a galaxy 10 Mpc away recedes at 700 km/s, while a galaxy at 20 Mpc recedes at 1,400 km/s. We can also use the size of the observable universe, and calculate back using the expansion rate to determine the age of the universe, that is, the time from the Big Bang it took to reach its current size. That still leaves the question of how we measure distances to far away galaxies. That is a another complete topic and involves using objects called Cepheid Variables. Wayne Y. Adams B.S. Chemistry (ACS Certified) M.S. Physics R&D Chemist (9 yrs) Physics Instructor (33 yrs)
i have a question At 3:25, an animation was shown that an electron and anti-electron, when combined, annihilate each other releasing two gamma rays. BUT doesn't the anti-electron should emit an anti-gamma ray , or there is nothing as an anti- gamma ray.. please answer,, BTW big fan
That’s really informative. Big fan of your videos. Please increase the session lengths if possible for more info😊 One quick question is there any substantial proof that ratio mismatch (3b and 3.1b) ? Could it be possible that it did not happen at all ? If yes then where would the theory point to.
This is a two parter: 1. Whats the difference between a black hole singularity and the singularity prior to the big bang? 2. What force/mechanism allowed the singularity of the BB to expand/explode and could that same mechanism cause a black hole to expand/explode? (Personal belief if we can figure out how to make a bh go boom, we can figure out how the bb happened. Since we dont have conditions similar to the era at the time of the bb, bh's are the only analog we have to conduct research on/with)
Question : Do we also expect the quantum fluctuation happening around us to produce matter and anti matter with the same disproportionality? (i.e more matter than anti matter? )
If virtual particles produced more matter than antimatter, I think that would violate conservation of energy, right? They can (as I, a non-expert, understand it) only violate conservation of energy for very short periods of time, so anything created would need to be destroyed pretty quickly. (That's, at least, my thoughts. I await any corrections.)
@@doctorbobstone yes, your explanation is what's being explained generally. But similarly there shldnt be any loose matter if all anti matter and matter are produced in similar fashion in the quantum state of the early Universe right? Were conservation laws violated than, or some symmetry were broken in the early Universe?
@@deeprecce9852 If you're converting a real photon into mass of equivalent energy, then energy can be conserved. The issue with virtual particles (AIUI) would be that if you have the net production of a particle with mass, you now have mass coming out of nowhere and hence conservation of energy is broken. So, real energy turning into real matter (with no antimatter) can't be ruled out just with energy conservation (though other symmetries and conservations might pose issues). But we haven't found evidence for anything which fits the bill yet.
@@doctorbobstone thanks for the reply again! But i am still confused, 2 question: 1) the early Universe ( with its real energy ) shld create both matter and antimatter right or u are saying they can create matter without antimatter? 2) my understanding is due to the Uncertainty principle quantum fluctuation ( current times) too uses real energy, and conservation is achieved as long as the pairs destroy each other over very short time..so whats the difference between this quantum f.and thoes of the early Universe?
@@deeprecce9852 (1) AIUI, we only know of processes which produce equal amounts of matter and antimatter, but as mentioned in the video, we observe that for every 3 billion photons in the CMB, one matter particle was created, apparently without a currently extant antimatter counterpart. This is the open question: How's that work? 😁 (2) Yeah, if it could happen in the early universe, it seems reasonable that it could happen now (with some, possibly very low, probability). But since (AIUI) virtual particles can't violate conservation of energy over the long term, anything that's created would have to be annihilated, too. So, either it can't happen with virtual particles in the first place or maybe there's a decay path (which would also be big news, I assume) or... something else? I don't know enough about quantum to know what the possibilities are here.
I'm wondering, if the big bang expanded in all directions and time, would it be possible that it also expands back in time and that, for some reason, antimatter preferred that direction? I know that that's not something that can be tested but does it at least make any sense?
Bjarni Valur You mean antimatter, my friend, but I follow your logic. The problem I see with that is that we typically say time started with the Big Bang. If it didn’t, somehow adding antimatter to a balanced system would result in an over abundance of antimatter, and we’d still wind up with an imbalance.
I’m not an expect but dark matter doesn’t interact with photon or anything we know of but gravity. String theory might hold the solution to dark matter, but even that predicts different kinds of dark matter and makes the math difficult
3:40 I don't find it that difficult to imagine really. I'd argue the big bang resulted in a pattern similar to Eta Carinae with one sphere of expansion being matter and the other antimatter and any annihilation events closer to the point of origin only serving to further divide them. But I'm just conjecturing.
I’m having a blast too :) Speaking of blasts, has it been conceived that most of the antimatter could have been blasted back into the pre-big bang universe? If it does indeed behave as “time-reversed matter” might it not collect in a pool of reversed-expanded space? The Penrose diagram then could need another dimension, perhaps. Not a time-like or light-like path, but a third path, not describable by the 2D Penrose diagram. There’s a dirty limerick in there somewhere, but it’s a little early in the morning for that ;) Thanks again for the interesting videos.
@@dentoncrimescene I don't think so , how many dimensions matter have we even not know that ,we only see 3 dimensions because light travel in 3dimension
@Dr. Don Lincoln. How would I go about getting a job at fermi lab ? I am currently a senior in high school and am unsure what to take in college but very interested. I think I have watched almost all of your videos lol. Any help ? It would be very much appreciated.
This is a ton of fun. Having followed physics since the discovery of the top quark, it’s interesting to me that theories about dark energy that were pure imagination 25 years ago are now testable today. What crazy left-field hypotheses today are likely to be subject to experiments in the next few decades?
Big thanks to you Don (and your team!) for all your hard work trying to make sense of our questions, and I truly appreciate it when the answer is ‘we don’t know yet’ - a great antidote to political and religious certainties being falsely peddled Now I’m not sure if this falls under your ambit but thinking about the universe we have today can we draw any conclusions about starting state, and alternative paths not travelled? Is it conceivable alternative starting conditions might give rise to different physical laws in the universe produced? I apologise for not having the necessary vocabulary to convey my query properly... I was contemplating the Earth and the Goldilocks Zone and tying to understand if our universe is also benefiting from a Goldilocks ‘Big Bang’.... and yes, we have a sample of 1 to go on :-)
The quantum mechanical asymmetry is the result of the difference between dark matter and dark energy. Since its not possible to have a negative volume of space. Dark matters negative polarity inverts into a type of torus.. the point of the torus in the center actually contains the energy of the volume of dark matter. Which interacts with dark energy to create matter.. gravity is created when the excess space created by schrodingers equation leaks past the electron orbits warping the field of space around the matter. Its easier to think of gravity in person.. we are actually falling through the radiated space from earth.. add up all the quantum interactions in the planet and the radiated space is equal to the planets gravity. Its hard to be specific because I'm just talking about space tho.
In most physics shows when they talk about particle colliders the hosts only mention collisions between a particle and a static object (like a wall) or a head on collision of 2 partciles. Does the angle of collision and number of particles affect the output of the collision? If so, how?
I'm just curious, were the other nine reincarnations very short lived or do they happen outside of the time interval between the famous Einstein's death and your birth?
@@JustinMShaw well not all reincarnations were good indeed. The third for instance was a drunk and didn't amount to much. The eight finally figured out time travel and ended up marrying in the 24th century.
Hi, Don. About the asymmetry that you've mentioned. I read it somewhere about something called Broken Symmetry. Also, i do some research and found that Broken Symmetry actually won Nobel Prize in Physics. The citation said it explains the origin of at least 3 family of quarks. But, you know i'm still newbie at physics. Could you explain it to me? PS : I'm a graduate student studying Condensed Matter Physics. So i have no idea what it is.
Hi! You might be interested in my channel. I'm a particle physicist. Most of what I do is statistics, but some particle physics sneaks in, too. Tomorrow's video will be about how we measured the number of light neutrinos in electron-positron collisions. In case you're interested....
Energy doesn't just disappear. In order for matter to go away, it would need to break down. As a layman, I assume the anti-matter detection of gamma rays of a specific frequency/energy could have also detected disappearing mass.
@@BenjaminCronce A clash of clouds of matter and antimatter would result in gamma rays, but from this rays we couldn't tell anything, because so could other incidents result in similar gamma rays. However such clashes of clouds are inevitable, and that's when the amount of matter decreases, as a material thing that had a property of a kilogram changes into an immaterial thing probably photon by simple rule E=mc2. The amount of matter therefore is like a weather. In history of the universe there are some days when there's more matter, and then are the days when there is more photons, I think. In the big bang situation all is energy, no matter is there because lack of space.
@@KasiusKlej last sentence: nice thinking. So - was cosmic inflation based on the creation of the first Higgs boson? Or the first Top Quark, the heaviest fermion? As it created the space it required for existence? But - do these elementaries have mass yet? Damn, isn't this complicated?
@@chriszachtian It's complicated unless you simplify a quark and a boson, they are both things, so they fall into that category. With some properties. A thing can have size, weight, it's own clock and spin and not much more, but it also can have nothing of this or part of this properties, and be a half material thing or even totaly immaterial thing. Then it's obvious that things don't create space. Space is separate dimension. And an answer to the second question is cosmic inflation is a mystery, perhaps it is based on some natural constant, but it is certainly not time based as you are suggesting. It is a mystery because this constant has first been found, then it turned out next day it's changing over time, so it's not a constant at all, but still, cosmic inflation is based on it.
Hey in a recent episode you talked about how spaghettification only happens around solar mass black holes saying how at 15km from on the difference in weight at 1m would be in the millions of newton but at 15km from a super massive black hole the difference in weight for 1m would be extraordinarily small So my question would be : how close could we actually get to a super massive black hole, if at 15km the effects of the event horizon are so subtle? Also does that mean that a spaceship or some objects may only slingshot around solar mass black holes? Anyways great videos, I absolutely love the great videos you're putting up!!
Close. But the issue is that the gravity is very strong and it is hard to break away. Plus there is an accretion disk near SMBHs, which would generate radiation that would fry you. However, if you can ignore those, if you fell towards a SMBH, you'd slingshot near it. Thanks for the kind words BTW.
At 2:10, isn't this incorrect? Of course, what makes up our observable universe today was in a much smaller volume then. But the whole universe - wasn't it infinite also before inflation and the following expansion? I know that it expanded some 10^30 times (doubled 100 times) or so during inflation, but if it was infinite before, it didn't get bigger, just less dense? Or?
I’m having a hard time understanding the cosmic microwave background. If it is the “after effect” of the Big Bang, then it seems to me that it would physically be outside of the observable universe, in which case how are we able to view it?
It was formed about 380,000 years after the Big Bang and is essentially like a firewall. We can measure back to it but we can't get through it. www.esa.int/Science_Exploration/Space_Science/Planck/Planck_and_the_cosmic_microwave_background
Ni999 thanks for the link. I’m confused because some drawings show the CMB as being outside of the universe, like this: en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observable_universe#/media/File%3AObservable_universe_logarithmic_illustration.png
@@smcic You're misinterpreting the diagram you referenced. The outer edge of the circle is the Big Bang; everything within that is the universe -- time increases along the radius of the circle, with today at the center. The dark region just outside the galaxies is not the edge of the universe, but rather represents the dark time between the cosmic microwave background and the formation of the first stars and galaxies.
Pseudorandomly I think I understand the diagram (or maybe not), but why is the CMB shown as being further away than the first galaxies? We can’t see the first galaxies right? So how can we see the CMB, which was created before those? Maybe I’m way off on this, sorry...
Trying to raise the level.of conversation here. The title reminded me of a phase my youngest son went thru when evertime he was asked where something was he'd answer "up my bum" Where your homework? Up my bum. Wheres your footy boots? Up my bum. Wheres all the antimatter? Up my bum. Now I've introduced next level intellect, back to your bosoms, fermions, leptons and other baryonic matter
Hi Don why is CMB the reminiscent of photons and not any other energy particle (like gamma rays? Wouldnt they be more abundant when most of matter and anti matter annihilated?)
In the particule accelerator, do anti-matter annihilate on the sides of the accelator tube, causing damage or even sparks of light visible on camera? Does the theory of equal antimatter/matter particles or is there a slight edge to regular matter?
Q : Dr. Lincoln, I one old video, you said that the mass of the proton is mostly due to the potential and kinetic energy of the quarks. But in another more recent video that the speed of a free particle does not increase its mass (gravity field depends only on the rest mass). Can you resolve that paradox for us ?
Hello, Dr. Don @Fermilab. As I know Richard Feynman proposed idea that antimatter electron is and electron that travels backwards in time. Does it apply to all antimatter? What if Big bang happened in all directions, both space and time. And that ratio 3000000000:1 in our timeline which favors matter, backward in time will favor antimatter. And this way there will be no theoretical problems regarding E=mc^2. I think that we can't experiment and test this theory, since we can't have a glance backward in time before Big bang. But maybe this idea can be written using formulas. And that way those formulas will be more elegant, without the need of some extra coefficients.
Don, a while ago you mentioned that experiments were being made to test if antimatter "falls up" but it is heavily expected for it not to. If antimatter breaks this expectation and does have an opposite reaction with gravitation, would that not cause it to separate itself from matter? Maybe this would make the antimatter regions beyond the visible horizon possible?
Made a video a while back suggesting that because antimatter has a reverse direction in time it's all on the other side of the big bang. But I'm pretty sure it's wrong because it's a bad understanding of time. But why doesn't anyone else suggest this?
Greetings professor, What is your take on LHC creating mass from energy ? How is it possible that products were stable for a enough time to get detected or get transformed to W bosons ?? They should have got annihilated before being detected. Or it is a step towards deciphering abundance of matter over antimatter ?
Hello there ! This question belongs to the previous episode probably but i came up with it only after watching your answers to the viewers' questions in this episode. So if dark energy works at large scales, and even if our local group's gravity dominates dark energy (eventually leading to Andromeda's collision with us), shouldn't dark energy's force be "calculable"/observed in this particular scenario? Andromeda's speed should be greater than it is now, without the "drag" force of dark energy (implying there is a medium between is a bad analogy but you get the point). Thank you very much !
Hi Dr. Lincoln! Do you think concepts like Super Symmetry could explain baryon asymmetry? Also, can you please feature for once one of my questions?? :( i have asked things in every single episode but yet to be covered by you :( still love Fermilab tho!!
Don't take it personally. There are hundreds of questions. And, to answer this question, yeah - sure - if SUSY is a real thing. But we have no evidence that it is.
0. Which is also why we don't see antimatter. Because 0 split into dark matter and dark energy during the initial expansion and matter is the intersection between dm and de with time dialated towards the future. Blackholes support the state of time we experience today.
Thanks Dr. Don. Trying to think of a question makes my brain hurt. You've talked about the Cosmic Microwave Background, which are the photons from when the universe became transparent after the Big Bang. Now that we detect gravitational waves, is there a gravitational wave background noise? Does the annihilation of matter and antimatter produce gravitational waves? I'm not sure anything is opaque to gravity so I would assume it could reveal earlier things. Maybe the early universe was just too uniform for it to be of any use. Thanks!
Primordial gravitational waves probably exist, but we don't have the technology to see them. But we're working on it. There is an orbital gravitational wave detector on the planning boards that will get us partway there.
@@Puffadderr ah, I was under the impression that antimatter has negative mass and would bend spacetime differently. But from what I've just read, the mass is the same as its counterpart, it's just other properties like electric charge that are the opposite
Hello there, I was wondering if it's possible to estimate the temperature of dark matter in space, or if it has been done already. And how does the kinetic energy of dark matter particles influence experiments in detecting them (or does it at all)?
Question I didn’t get to ask at your TOE lecture: Will a theory of everything be something that includes an explanation of itself, or will it be more like a brute fact that just explains the physical laws of our universe without its own explanation? Could there be no theory of everything, but just a never ending amount of more fundamental laws
Hi Don, what do you think of the theory that a CPT-symmetric “anti universe” was created at the moment of the Big Bang, where all particles are anti-particles and time is flowing backwards?
I can almost picture a horribly confusing reality where all the antimatter is actually the self-same universe with time flowing background.... like maybe the universe is its own mirror universe.
Time is the result of space in motion. But as you near a black hole the space reaches its speed limit which is c.. the better explanation will be found when we better figure out the interaction between dark matter and dark energy..
E = MC2 is an approximarion since the terms that account for momentum are missing. Massless photons have energy, this is via their momentum. How this affected the matter, anti-matter distribution, who knows but this momentum is what ensured we all did not just flash out of existance when mater and anti-matter collided.
Love the videos. Is there any possibility that some of the matter/anti-matter asymmetry could result from yet unknown properties of dark matter and/or dark energy?
Hi Dr. Don! Love your videos! I understand your answer to the first question, but it relies on the fact that dark energy is kept at a constant density even with the expansion of the universe. Do we know why that is the case? Also how did we prove that the density could not change? Finally, if dark energy can be created, why can’t regular energy? Why doesn’t gravity increase at the same rate as dark energy?
Hi, Dr. Lincoln, we have a couple of "criticals" in physics such as temperature and mass, which change the behaviour of matter drastically within a small change of an attribute. Do our observations contradict the idea that there are several critical masses of matter? Not in the term of radioactivity but gravity. I mean does our knowledge allow that dark matter, in fact, is not out there but the effect we blame onto it would be the non-linear increase of gravity due to stepping over critical amounts of the total masses involved in a galaxies?
Something that I find confusing: When the Universe cooled after the Bang, where did the energy go? If my cup of coffee cools, the energy goes into the air- but if the entire universe was hot, I don't see what the heat sink could have been that cooled it.
Hi Don, you mentioned that over smaller volumes like our solar system or the virgo supercluster the matter is close enough to withstand dark energy based expansion? so is the expansion of the universe non-homogeneous? Is different parts of the universe expanding at different rates?
In the beginning you talked about converting energy to mass. I have come to the understanding that the energy in a given system already constitudes part of the mass...it IS mass already. Following my understanding, you should have said:"Energy can be converted to solid/solidified mass and vice versa." I'm pretty sure my understanding might be wrong, but is it?
Your understanding is half right, but incomplete. There are two types of given systems. The systems of pure energy, like a photon for example, and those that are of mixed type, like a glass of water for example. So a glass of water has some potential energy, and it already constitutes part of the mass, but to say potential energy can be solidified and a glass can be made heavier, I don't think it happens in that exact way, sorry to say, my understanding is not perfect either.
You (and others) have mentioned that if we pull the quarks inside a proton or neutron they will not get disconnected. If we apply more energy then new quarks will be created. Does this process also keep the matter and anti-matter balance?
Has anyone ever tried to apply control theory to the expansion of the universe? Or even to the growth of dark matter? Since the expansion is a retro feed system, can you calculate a controller to stabilizee the growth? Anyone know an article about it?
i hope u guys dont stop making videos for all of us who still care about physics
For a while it seems subatomic stories aren't so subatomic anymore. And I love how it's getting to be about all those other scales of Physics as well, after all, Physics Is Everything!
Another terrific video Dr. Don & thanks for answering my posted question! I'm certain that I will have more questions for you in the future.......... 😉😉👍
"The universe was once more smaller and hotter"
Weren't we all?
😅
That’s what happened! Entropy
I’m twice the man than I was when I graduated high school...by gross weight.
Thank you Fermilab and Dr. Lincoln. This channel and PBS Space Time is a weekly high for me.
Dr. Don you are a national treasure, thank you for this work!
Very droll.... I look forward to Subatomic Stories every week! They are short, punchy and understandable. Kudos Dr Don et al!
I have to say, I prefer the new post-covid format of your videos. Bravo. Keep these coming :)
Of all the knowledge laid down here (which I do appreciate) I want to bring special attention to your humor. Knowledge and laughs. Love your delivery! You remind me of my favorite teacher from high school.
I've read and heard much of this before, but I love how everyone who talks about these idess explains them in a different way. This is why I never tire of hearing them :)
The pandemic and people working from home has led to a great deal of innovative and compelling content on TH-cam. I count this series among those that have blossomed this year. I hope the series can continue even as we return to normal, whatever _that_ is.
I attended your "Einstein's Unfinished Dream" Webinar at 5:00 am in India. It was amazing and has increased my curiosity towards the cosmos.
This is the golden, there hasn't been a subatomic stories episode as this one... so funny.
Great service for the entire humanity of the world of so many diverse countries and nations.
Thank you so much dear teams of @Fermilabs.
Really appreciate all of your videos. Thank you and your _team_ for doing them.
The simplest (best) explanation of E and M and the antimatter catastrophe ; )
Ty
Now I want to see a duel between Dr. Don and the Emperor.
Yes we're having a blast. Please keep it up
Starting at 2:03 in this video, the term “equal” is a term we all need to emphasize. The matter to antimatter ratio of 3,000,000,001 to 3,000,000,000 is the best explanation we have as to why antimatter is rare in our universe, but this ratio still represents an imbalance. If we fail to do our bookkeeping properly, then we will continue to have to accept these kinds of imbalances.
The most notorious imbalance of all time is when we fail to question why particles, which we can call a “plus”, shows up out of nowhere in space - space, which we can call a “zero”. We have been conditioned to accept this imbalance without question. To keep our books straight, we need to account for where all this “plus” came from. Also, there is another “plus” that we see in gravity. Gravity just shows up out of nowhere and we need to account for this. The best explanation for these imbalances is that there are aspects of our universe that we do not understand. We are just beginning to recognize one of these aspects when we acknowledge so-called dark energy. I think so-called dark energy's existence is key in understanding how to balance our books.
It should become increasingly clear that dark energy is the exact opposite of gravity, it's counterpart. This helps us account for the “plus” gravity by balancing it with a “minus” gravity. This brings our balance to zero, but we still have a universe full of “plus” particles that need to be accounted for. Antimatter would not be a viable candidate for this because there simply is not enough antimatter to balance all the “plus” particles. So antimatter should also have an opposite-particle of it's own that needs to be accounted for.
When we have opposite gravity balancing with normal gravity, this strongly infers there must also be opposite particles balancing with normal particles. Those opposite particles most certainly exist by a means such that we cannot directly detect them. The best way to describe this mechanism is that those particles, along with the so-called dark energy, exist in a parallel dimension. This will give us opposite particles (by inference) that are paired up with normal particles. So now we have normal gravity paired up with opposite gravity, and normal particles paired with opposite particles. With this, everything adds up to zero and this balances our books. Anti-matter is just a fluke.
I'm having a blast learning from you, Doc. Thank you.
I love these videos. My poor (old) man's continuing credit/education.
How can dark energy increase over time if we consider laws of thermodynamics?thank you .
Please post the zoom webinar held on 6 sept.
Things moving away from each other can only increase entropy right? My best guess to your question
I doubt Immanuel Kant would agree that "physics is everything". I still love your series and look forward to every episode.
Really enjoying these, inspiring! Thank you.
Here is another answer to the question Line Noise asked at 10:14 in the video. I believe he is asking how we can tell the universe is expanding when all our measuring instruments are also expanding. In other words, he is asking, if the universe expands 1% and our meter sticks also lengthen 1%, shouldn't we get the same measurement? While it is true that Dark Energy does not affect our measuring instruments because of the small distances involved, it would not matter if it did, because we do not determine expansion by measuring distance or calculating speeds by distance divided by time.
We determine expansion by measuring the velocities at which galaxies are receding from us using the shift in the color of light we receive from the galaxies. The expansion stretches out the light (actually, all EM radiation) so its wavelength increases. Imagine drawing a wave on a piece of stretchable material like rubber, stretch the material and you will see the wave also stretches increasing its wavelength. We observe distant galaxies which are made up of stars emitting light which we can separate into spectra (rainbows). The elements, primarily hydrogen, emit light of characteristic wavelengths. When we look at the spectrum of wavelengths of the light from distant galaxies we find the lines have shifted toward the red end of the spectrum, thus the name "red shift." It is then just a matter of using the red shift to calculate the velocity. FYI, wavelengths increase from the blue end of the spectrum toward the red end. So red colors have longer wavelengths than blue colors.
When we make these observations, we find distant galaxies are receding from us, and the farther away the galaxy, the greater the velocity. Making these measurements for large numbers of galaxies gives an astonishing result. The expansion can be calculated and seems to have a constant factor, which we call the Hubble Constant.
The newest value of the Hubble Constant is just under 70 kilometers per second per megaparsec (km/sec/Mpc). One parsec is equal to 3.26 light-years distance. A light-year is just under 6 trillion miles or about 9.6 trillion kilometers. For example, a galaxy 10 Mpc away recedes at 700 km/s, while a galaxy at 20 Mpc recedes at 1,400 km/s. We can also use the size of the observable universe, and calculate back using the expansion rate to determine the age of the universe, that is, the time from the Big Bang it took to reach its current size.
That still leaves the question of how we measure distances to far away galaxies. That is a another complete topic and involves using objects called Cepheid Variables.
Wayne Y. Adams
B.S. Chemistry (ACS Certified)
M.S. Physics
R&D Chemist (9 yrs)
Physics Instructor (33 yrs)
i have a question
At 3:25, an animation was shown that an electron and anti-electron, when combined, annihilate each other releasing two gamma rays. BUT doesn't the anti-electron should emit an anti-gamma ray , or there is nothing as an anti- gamma ray..
please answer,,
BTW big fan
Photons are their own anti-particles. A gamma ray and an anti gamma ray are the same thing.
Gamma rays are both matter and antimatter. It's kind of like matter being +/- 1, but photons are +/- 0.
That’s really informative. Big fan of your videos.
Please increase the session lengths if possible for more info😊
One quick question is there any substantial proof that ratio mismatch (3b and 3.1b) ? Could it be possible that it did not happen at all ? If yes then where would the theory point to.
Whether leptogenesis is correct or not, it is a mystery. We do know is we need more Dr. Don fish.
This is a two parter:
1. Whats the difference between a black hole singularity and the singularity prior to the big bang?
2. What force/mechanism allowed the singularity of the BB to expand/explode and could that same mechanism cause a black hole to expand/explode?
(Personal belief if we can figure out how to make a bh go boom, we can figure out how the bb happened. Since we dont have conditions similar to the era at the time of the bb, bh's are the only analog we have to conduct research on/with)
Question : Do we also expect the quantum fluctuation happening around us to produce matter and anti matter with the same disproportionality? (i.e more matter than anti matter? )
If virtual particles produced more matter than antimatter, I think that would violate conservation of energy, right? They can (as I, a non-expert, understand it) only violate conservation of energy for very short periods of time, so anything created would need to be destroyed pretty quickly.
(That's, at least, my thoughts. I await any corrections.)
@@doctorbobstone yes, your explanation is what's being explained generally. But similarly there shldnt be any loose matter if all anti matter and matter are produced in similar fashion in the quantum state of the early Universe right? Were conservation laws violated than, or some symmetry were broken in the early Universe?
@@deeprecce9852 If you're converting a real photon into mass of equivalent energy, then energy can be conserved. The issue with virtual particles (AIUI) would be that if you have the net production of a particle with mass, you now have mass coming out of nowhere and hence conservation of energy is broken.
So, real energy turning into real matter (with no antimatter) can't be ruled out just with energy conservation (though other symmetries and conservations might pose issues). But we haven't found evidence for anything which fits the bill yet.
@@doctorbobstone thanks for the reply again! But i am still confused, 2 question:
1) the early Universe ( with its real energy ) shld create both matter and antimatter right or u are saying they can create matter without antimatter?
2) my understanding is due to the Uncertainty principle quantum fluctuation ( current times) too uses real energy, and conservation is achieved as long as the pairs destroy each other over very short time..so whats the difference between this quantum f.and thoes of the early Universe?
@@deeprecce9852 (1) AIUI, we only know of processes which produce equal amounts of matter and antimatter, but as mentioned in the video, we observe that for every 3 billion photons in the CMB, one matter particle was created, apparently without a currently extant antimatter counterpart. This is the open question: How's that work? 😁
(2) Yeah, if it could happen in the early universe, it seems reasonable that it could happen now (with some, possibly very low, probability). But since (AIUI) virtual particles can't violate conservation of energy over the long term, anything that's created would have to be annihilated, too. So, either it can't happen with virtual particles in the first place or maybe there's a decay path (which would also be big news, I assume) or... something else? I don't know enough about quantum to know what the possibilities are here.
Hey Don,
Could the breaking of CPT Symmetry explain the matter anti-matter problem during the beginings of the universe?
Another excellent, informative and entertaining chapter. Thank You.
I'm wondering, if the big bang expanded in all directions and time, would it be possible that it also expands back in time and that, for some reason, antimatter preferred that direction? I know that that's not something that can be tested but does it at least make any sense?
Bjarni Valur You mean antimatter, my friend, but I follow your logic. The problem I see with that is that we typically say time started with the Big Bang. If it didn’t, somehow adding antimatter to a balanced system would result in an over abundance of antimatter, and we’d still wind up with an imbalance.
@@ryantwombly720 Uhm... right, yes... I was thinking of one thing but wrote the other.
Fixed
That doesn't happen in labs. Antimatter in labs hangs around in the present and is still there in the future.
I wonder if lightspeed constant and dark energy density related. So, if dark energy was weaker, lightspeed was slower/faster?
I’m not an expect but dark matter doesn’t interact with photon or anything we know of but gravity. String theory might hold the solution to dark matter, but even that predicts different kinds of dark matter and makes the math difficult
At 10:15 even though gravity domaintes dark energy at low volume but why can't we measure it's effect ?
It's small until the volumes get big.
Dark energy may be small but it could still be measurable at small scale
Doing great job Doc!!!👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏
3:40 I don't find it that difficult to imagine really.
I'd argue the big bang resulted in a pattern similar to Eta Carinae with one sphere of expansion being matter and the other antimatter and any annihilation events closer to the point of origin only serving to further divide them. But I'm just conjecturing.
That runs into the same problem: there is no known mechanism to separate matter from anti-matter like that.
@@Kelan-pn6em wouldn't even an infinite plane have two sides?
From where do fabric of spacetime get energy to expand?
Please do an episode on the 15-foot bubble chamber sitting outdoors at Fermilab. How did it work?
It worked very well.
Hi Don.. that leptogenysis episode is indeed great.. that fish character with the glasses and mustache resembles someone and is very charismatic 😁
Inspired by the Don Knotts' movie "The Incredible Mr. Limpett."
I’m having a blast too :)
Speaking of blasts, has it been conceived that most of the antimatter could have been blasted back into the pre-big bang universe? If it does indeed behave as “time-reversed matter” might it not collect in a pool of reversed-expanded space?
The Penrose diagram then could need another dimension, perhaps. Not a time-like or light-like path, but a third path, not describable by the 2D Penrose diagram.
There’s a dirty limerick in there somewhere, but it’s a little early in the morning for that ;)
Thanks again for the interesting videos.
I agree Peter. Check out my drawings along these lines on instagram. @theoryofeverything2011
:)
Sire you have an good idea ,I like that .
So the antimatter travels one way through time and matter goes the other?
@@dentoncrimescene I don't think so , how many dimensions matter have we even not know that ,we only see 3 dimensions because light travel in 3dimension
Time is not symmetric alone, right?
@Dr. Don Lincoln. How would I go about getting a job at fermi lab ? I am currently a senior in high school and am unsure what to take in college but very interested. I think I have watched almost all of your videos lol. Any help ? It would be very much appreciated.
Can dark energy be used for warp drives?
This is a ton of fun. Having followed physics since the discovery of the top quark, it’s interesting to me that theories about dark energy that were pure imagination 25 years ago are now testable today. What crazy left-field hypotheses today are likely to be subject to experiments in the next few decades?
Big thanks to you Don (and your team!) for all your hard work trying to make sense of our questions, and I truly appreciate it when the answer is ‘we don’t know yet’ - a great antidote to political and religious certainties being falsely peddled
Now I’m not sure if this falls under your ambit but thinking about the universe we have today can we draw any conclusions about starting state, and alternative paths not travelled? Is it conceivable alternative starting conditions might give rise to different physical laws in the universe produced?
I apologise for not having the necessary vocabulary to convey my query properly... I was contemplating the Earth and the Goldilocks Zone and tying to understand if our universe is also benefiting from a Goldilocks ‘Big Bang’.... and yes, we have a sample of 1 to go on :-)
That surprise Palpatine insert at the end was priceless.
THANK YOU... PROFESSOR LINCOLN...!!!
Could you please elaborate in those odd quantum mechanics phenomena that generated some of the asymmetry?
The quantum mechanical asymmetry is the result of the difference between dark matter and dark energy.
Since its not possible to have a negative volume of space. Dark matters negative polarity inverts into a type of torus.. the point of the torus in the center actually contains the energy of the volume of dark matter. Which interacts with dark energy to create matter.. gravity is created when the excess space created by schrodingers equation leaks past the electron orbits warping the field of space around the matter.
Its easier to think of gravity in person.. we are actually falling through the radiated space from earth.. add up all the quantum interactions in the planet and the radiated space is equal to the planets gravity.
Its hard to be specific because I'm just talking about space tho.
What's your opinion regarding GEODEs?
In most physics shows when they talk about particle colliders the hosts only mention collisions between a particle and a static object (like a wall) or a head on collision of 2 partciles. Does the angle of collision and number of particles affect the output of the collision? If so, how?
Is the dark energy the same thing as the vacuum energy?
8:36 my first ever mention in a TH-cam comment! Tx Dr. Don!
Surely I am related to Einstein: I'm his tenth reincarnation, hence the X. 😉
Congratulations! So, are you related to the Einstein Bros. of bagel fame?
I'm just curious, were the other nine reincarnations very short lived or do they happen outside of the time interval between the famous Einstein's death and your birth?
10th reincarnation is quite nonsense, but he was said to be erotomaniac so it is possible he had quite a lot of offsprings :)
@@k7jeb I have no idea what you are trying to say. What does Einstein have to do with bagels? 🤔
@@JustinMShaw well not all reincarnations were good indeed. The third for instance was a drunk and didn't amount to much. The eight finally figured out time travel and ended up marrying in the 24th century.
How do you count all the protons or particles in the universe?
How can we post viewers question for fermilab
Post them in the comments. A tiny fraction is selected.
Hi, Don.
About the asymmetry that you've mentioned. I read it somewhere about something called Broken Symmetry.
Also, i do some research and found that Broken Symmetry actually won Nobel Prize in Physics. The citation said it explains the origin of at least 3 family of quarks.
But, you know i'm still newbie at physics. Could you explain it to me?
PS : I'm a graduate student studying Condensed Matter Physics. So i have no idea what it is.
Hi! You might be interested in my channel. I'm a particle physicist. Most of what I do is statistics, but some particle physics sneaks in, too. Tomorrow's video will be about how we measured the number of light neutrinos in electron-positron collisions. In case you're interested....
2:47
wasn't antimatter stored in the form of energy?
This is possible if there is a way to turn antimatter and antimatter into energy. But I never heard about that.
matter and antimatter annihilate to form energy rather than matter
@@chriszachtian antimatter and matter convert in energy antimatter annihilation
Did the amount of matter decreased from the time of Big Bang to now ?
Great video thank you and god bless you.
Energy doesn't just disappear. In order for matter to go away, it would need to break down. As a layman, I assume the anti-matter detection of gamma rays of a specific frequency/energy could have also detected disappearing mass.
@@BenjaminCronce A clash of clouds of matter and antimatter would result in gamma rays, but from this rays we couldn't tell anything, because so could other incidents result in similar gamma rays. However such clashes of clouds are inevitable, and that's when the amount of matter decreases, as a material thing that had a property of a kilogram changes into an immaterial thing probably photon by simple rule E=mc2.
The amount of matter therefore is like a weather. In history of the universe there are some days when there's more matter, and then are the days when there is more photons, I think. In the big bang situation all is energy, no matter is there because lack of space.
@@KasiusKlej last sentence: nice thinking.
So - was cosmic inflation based on the creation of the first Higgs boson? Or the first Top Quark, the heaviest fermion? As it created the space it required for existence? But - do these elementaries have mass yet? Damn, isn't this complicated?
@@chriszachtian It's complicated unless you simplify a quark and a boson, they are both things, so they fall into that category. With some properties. A thing can have size, weight, it's own clock and spin and not much more, but it also can have nothing of this or part of this properties, and be a half material thing or even totaly immaterial thing.
Then it's obvious that things don't create space. Space is separate dimension.
And an answer to the second question is cosmic inflation is a mystery, perhaps it is based on some natural constant, but it is certainly not time based as you are suggesting.
It is a mystery because this constant has first been found, then it turned out next day it's changing over time, so it's not a constant at all, but still, cosmic inflation is based on it.
Hey in a recent episode you talked about how spaghettification only happens around solar mass black holes saying how at 15km from on the difference in weight at 1m would be in the millions of newton but at 15km from a super massive black hole the difference in weight for 1m would be extraordinarily small
So my question would be : how close could we actually get to a super massive black hole, if at 15km the effects of the event horizon are so subtle? Also does that mean that a spaceship or some objects may only slingshot around solar mass black holes?
Anyways great videos, I absolutely love the great videos you're putting up!!
Close. But the issue is that the gravity is very strong and it is hard to break away. Plus there is an accretion disk near SMBHs, which would generate radiation that would fry you.
However, if you can ignore those, if you fell towards a SMBH, you'd slingshot near it.
Thanks for the kind words BTW.
Acc to einstein special relativity if length contracts so does the volume
So do we observe a change in density of a moving object too ????
At 2:10, isn't this incorrect? Of course, what makes up our observable universe today was in a much smaller volume then. But the whole universe - wasn't it infinite also before inflation and the following expansion? I know that it expanded some 10^30 times (doubled 100 times) or so during inflation, but if it was infinite before, it didn't get bigger, just less dense? Or?
This channel edifies me on the virtues of the human experience. I'll go iron my laundry now.
Is there any chance of gauge symmetry being broken during the first moments of big bang? It happens with energy, cant it with charge?
I’m having a hard time understanding the cosmic microwave background. If it is the “after effect” of the Big Bang, then it seems to me that it would physically be outside of the observable universe, in which case how are we able to view it?
It was formed about 380,000 years after the Big Bang and is essentially like a firewall. We can measure back to it but we can't get through it.
www.esa.int/Science_Exploration/Space_Science/Planck/Planck_and_the_cosmic_microwave_background
It is not the case that the CMB would be outside the observable universe. It was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be everywhere.
Ni999 thanks for the link. I’m confused because some drawings show the CMB as being outside of the universe, like this: en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observable_universe#/media/File%3AObservable_universe_logarithmic_illustration.png
@@smcic You're misinterpreting the diagram you referenced. The outer edge of the circle is the Big Bang; everything within that is the universe -- time increases along the radius of the circle, with today at the center. The dark region just outside the galaxies is not the edge of the universe, but rather represents the dark time between the cosmic microwave background and the formation of the first stars and galaxies.
Pseudorandomly I think I understand the diagram (or maybe not), but why is the CMB shown as being further away than the first galaxies? We can’t see the first galaxies right? So how can we see the CMB, which was created before those? Maybe I’m way off on this, sorry...
Trying to raise the level.of conversation here. The title reminded me of a phase my youngest son went thru when evertime he was asked where something was he'd answer "up my bum"
Where your homework?
Up my bum.
Wheres your footy boots?
Up my bum.
Wheres all the antimatter?
Up my bum.
Now I've introduced next level intellect, back to your bosoms, fermions, leptons and other baryonic matter
Hi Don why is CMB the reminiscent of photons and not any other energy particle (like gamma rays? Wouldnt they be more abundant when most of matter and anti matter annihilated?)
In the particule accelerator, do anti-matter annihilate on the sides of the accelator tube, causing damage or even sparks of light visible on camera? Does the theory of equal antimatter/matter particles or is there a slight edge to regular matter?
Q : Dr. Lincoln, I one old video, you said that the mass of the proton is mostly due to the potential and kinetic energy of the quarks. But in another more recent video that the speed of a free particle does not increase its mass (gravity field depends only on the rest mass). Can you resolve that paradox for us ?
Hello, Dr. Don @Fermilab. As I know Richard Feynman proposed idea that antimatter electron is and electron that travels backwards in time. Does it apply to all antimatter? What if Big bang happened in all directions, both space and time. And that ratio 3000000000:1 in our timeline which favors matter, backward in time will favor antimatter. And this way there will be no theoretical problems regarding E=mc^2. I think that we can't experiment and test this theory, since we can't have a glance backward in time before Big bang. But maybe this idea can be written using formulas. And that way those formulas will be more elegant, without the need of some extra coefficients.
Don, a while ago you mentioned that experiments were being made to test if antimatter "falls up" but it is heavily expected for it not to. If antimatter breaks this expectation and does have an opposite reaction with gravitation, would that not cause it to separate itself from matter? Maybe this would make the antimatter regions beyond the visible horizon possible?
Made a video a while back suggesting that because antimatter has a reverse direction in time it's all on the other side of the big bang.
But I'm pretty sure it's wrong because it's a bad understanding of time.
But why doesn't anyone else suggest this?
Greetings professor,
What is your take on LHC creating mass from energy ? How is it possible that products were stable for a enough time to get detected or get transformed to W bosons ?? They should have got annihilated before being detected.
Or it is a step towards deciphering abundance of matter over antimatter ?
Hello there ! This question belongs to the previous episode probably but i came up with it only after watching your answers to the viewers' questions in this episode.
So if dark energy works at large scales, and even if our local group's gravity dominates dark energy (eventually leading to Andromeda's collision with us), shouldn't dark energy's force be "calculable"/observed in this particular scenario? Andromeda's speed should be greater than it is now, without the "drag" force of dark energy (implying there is a medium between is a bad analogy but you get the point).
Thank you very much !
I think your subscribers number answers your question, we love it!
Hi Dr. Lincoln! Do you think concepts like Super Symmetry could explain baryon asymmetry?
Also, can you please feature for once one of my questions?? :( i have asked things in every single episode but yet to be covered by you :( still love Fermilab tho!!
Don't take it personally. There are hundreds of questions.
And, to answer this question, yeah - sure - if SUSY is a real thing. But we have no evidence that it is.
My observations of the comment thread are consistent with the hypothesis that I am the first, plus/minus observational uncertainty
Hi Dr. Don, where did the energy that made the matter and anti-matter in the early universe come from?
0. Which is also why we don't see antimatter. Because 0 split into dark matter and dark energy during the initial expansion and matter is the intersection between dm and de with time dialated towards the future. Blackholes support the state of time we experience today.
Thanks Dr. Don. Trying to think of a question makes my brain hurt. You've talked about the Cosmic Microwave Background, which are the photons from when the universe became transparent after the Big Bang. Now that we detect gravitational waves, is there a gravitational wave background noise? Does the annihilation of matter and antimatter produce gravitational waves? I'm not sure anything is opaque to gravity so I would assume it could reveal earlier things. Maybe the early universe was just too uniform for it to be of any use. Thanks!
Primordial gravitational waves probably exist, but we don't have the technology to see them.
But we're working on it. There is an orbital gravitational wave detector on the planning boards that will get us partway there.
does antimatter also bend spacetime? what would happen to light passing nearby an hypothetical antimatter sun?
Yes. Antimatter has mass so it bends spacetime.
@@Puffadderr ah, I was under the impression that antimatter has negative mass and would bend spacetime differently. But from what I've just read, the mass is the same as its counterpart, it's just other properties like electric charge that are the opposite
Hello there, I was wondering if it's possible to estimate the temperature of dark matter in space, or if it has been done already. And how does the kinetic energy of dark matter particles influence experiments in detecting them (or does it at all)?
BIG fan of yours by the way
I love how he completely blew off the last question with a joke. LOL
Question I didn’t get to ask at your TOE lecture: Will a theory of everything be something that includes an explanation of itself, or will it be more like a brute fact that just explains the physical laws of our universe without its own explanation? Could there be no theory of everything, but just a never ending amount of more fundamental laws
Hi Don, what do you think of the theory that a CPT-symmetric “anti universe” was created at the moment of the Big Bang, where all particles are anti-particles and time is flowing backwards?
I can almost picture a horribly confusing reality where all the antimatter is actually the self-same universe with time flowing background.... like maybe the universe is its own mirror universe.
Hi dr. ,
Can you please explain the actual reason of gravitational time dilation!
Why time slows near black hole?
Time is the result of space in motion. But as you near a black hole the space reaches its speed limit which is c.. the better explanation will be found when we better figure out the interaction between dark matter and dark energy..
E = MC2 is an approximarion since the terms that account for momentum are missing.
Massless photons have energy, this is via their momentum.
How this affected the matter, anti-matter distribution, who knows but this momentum is what ensured we all did not just flash out of existance when mater and anti-matter collided.
Love the videos.
Is there any possibility that some of the matter/anti-matter asymmetry could result from yet unknown properties of dark matter and/or dark energy?
Can you suggest a book to start a graduate course in physics. Starting at high school level. With the maths
Hi Dr. Don! Love your videos! I understand your answer to the first question, but it relies on the fact that dark energy is kept at a constant density even with the expansion of the universe. Do we know why that is the case? Also how did we prove that the density could not change? Finally, if dark energy can be created, why can’t regular energy? Why doesn’t gravity increase at the same rate as dark energy?
These videos are great
Hi, Dr. Lincoln, we have a couple of "criticals" in physics such as temperature and mass, which change the behaviour of matter drastically within a small change of an attribute.
Do our observations contradict the idea that there are several critical masses of matter? Not in the term of radioactivity but gravity. I mean does our knowledge allow that dark matter, in fact, is not out there but the effect we blame onto it would be the non-linear increase of gravity due to stepping over critical amounts of the total masses involved in a galaxies?
Something that I find confusing: When the Universe cooled after the Bang, where did the energy go? If my cup of coffee cools, the energy goes into the air- but if the entire universe was hot, I don't see what the heat sink could have been that cooled it.
The cup doesn't have less energy, it has the same amount, the coffee cup instead got larger so that heat is spread out more. I think.
Hi Don, you mentioned that over smaller volumes like our solar system or the virgo supercluster the matter is close enough to withstand dark energy based expansion? so is the expansion of the universe non-homogeneous? Is different parts of the universe expanding at different rates?
No. It's like water flowing past two kids holding hands. The expansion occurs, but the grip is stronger.
Can the asymmetry be related to Hawkin radiation
Can a black hole evaporation event trigger vacuum decay ? Is it safe to let black holes evaporate ?
Glad I saw it early , hey don explain about Hawking radiation in detail , please
In the beginning you talked about converting energy to mass. I have come to the understanding that the energy in a given system already constitudes part of the mass...it IS mass already. Following my understanding, you should have said:"Energy can be converted to solid/solidified mass and vice versa." I'm pretty sure my understanding might be wrong, but is it?
Your understanding is half right, but incomplete. There are two types of given systems. The systems of pure energy, like a photon for example, and those that are of mixed type, like a glass of water for example. So a glass of water has some potential energy, and it already constitutes part of the mass, but to say potential energy can be solidified and a glass can be made heavier, I don't think it happens in that exact way, sorry to say, my understanding is not perfect either.
@@KasiusKlej The various forms of energy would be a great topic for DrDon to enlighten us on!
@5:08
Scientists: We don't know why there is matter in the universe.
Fermilab: We have great nu's for you!
You (and others) have mentioned that if we pull the quarks inside a proton or neutron they will not get disconnected.
If we apply more energy then new quarks will be created. Does this process also keep the matter and anti-matter balance?
Has anyone ever tried to apply control theory to the expansion of the universe? Or even to the growth of dark matter?
Since the expansion is a retro feed system, can you calculate a controller to stabilizee the growth?
Anyone know an article about it?
Thank you, for your answer!