spoiler: they're shaped like corkscrews and depending on how they impact stuff, you measure differrnt masses. They don't oscillate between identities, they just have an uneven, asimmetric structure and always rotate. They're deformed photons. Just out of curiosity...
I can imagine all kinds of harsh disfigurement under the seesaw of death. That's a pretty big lever and I'm sure it happened, but it's just as easy to imagine a kid falling out of a tree or a million other things - of which I've done most. I fell off a slide and broke my arm when I was 7 or 8. Would recommend. Thanks as always, Dr. Don!
So right handed neutrinos = possible candidates for dark matter ? I mean they should be massive according to that seesaw mechanism, and would only interact through gravity.
I have a question: if handedness is based on the direction in which it's moving, then wouldn't a change of reference frame change the handedness? If that's the case, how can an interaction occur in one reference frame but not in another?
I think the idea is that neutrinos move so close to the speed of light (because they have such low mass) that even though it would be theoretically possible to do what you say, it would be technically extremely difficult to get enough of a change of reference frame to make a difference -- you would have to get extremely close to the speed of light yourself, to reverse the neutrino's relation of spin to apparent direction, or use an extremely powerful gravitational field (black hole class) to turn the neutrinos around without disturbing their spin..
Thanks Don. We're still friends after all. The idea of neutrino having interaction affinity with Higgs field is pretty mind boggling in itself. Now that's some seesaw for thought.
1. Do left and right neutrinos ever flip flop, and if so, what causes that? 2. For each left handed neutrino floating around, Is there a right handed neutrino also floating around? If so, thats quite a lot of them, so where are they? Is the reason we don't see them that they aren't reactive and difficult to detect?
So, if right handed neutrinos are possibly very massive, and interact with things even less than left handed neutrinos, could they be dark matter if they do exist?
If these hypothetical right-handed neutrinos don't experience the strong, electromagnetic, or even weak forces - and maybe not even the higgs mechanism - how would we go about detecting them? Especially since they only interact with the gravitational force on a minimal (but non-zero) level, it seems almost impossible.
Spin refers to the splitting of an unpolarized particle beam in a specially shaped magnetic field into two polarized beams. This should be made more clear. It is always presented as some mystical property.
Since a neutrino has mass, they really are moving under speed of light. If you shoot a particle with speed even closer to speed of light, it will be catching up with the neutrino. Will the spin of right-handed neutrino become left-handed, if relative to the particle which is catching up, then?
If spin only occurs in the direction of movement, how does that account for the fact that all movement is relative? Does that mean that one observer can simultaneously observe a particle with a spin at an angle to that observed by an observer moving at a different velocity? What does that mean for the weak force's chances of interacting with it?
If the Weak force only acts on left-handed particles (and right-hand antiparticles), would it be reasonable to suppose some other possible force (and force-carrier) that acts solely on the right-handed particles (and left-handed antiparticles), as part of some sort of symmetry argument? If not, what prevents this?
I AM learning by reading and watching Cern, ect. I do not understand the tracks that are shown on the diagrams. Is this the display of spin and or the direction of the particle?
so hey I have a small question , isn't the eV a unit for energy ? I mean I know E=mc^2 so we can swap between mass and energy but the photon is a little problematic since it has energy E=hc/wave length but no mass , so we shouldn't say it's mass is 0 ev since ev is for energy and it has energy , just no mass ?
no you didn't get my question , I am perfectly fine with the fact that the photon has zero mass , it's just that the eV is used for energy not mass , and the photon does have energy
You know, I really like particle physics; it is a topic in physics I am especially passionate about. Any of you sages out there have an idea for me, a lowly high schooler, jobwise? Heck, I'd love to eventually work at Fermilab.
hi Don. if a particle from a distant star is a wave that collapses in my eye, the probability for its location is light years across. I know it's not a real wave, but there seems to some instantaneous action in the collapse?
Hi I love your channel. But I have a question because cern just found them. They go faster then light so what are the implications of this. Can you do a update video
@@cowboybob7093 im having trouble finding it again. The first glips was in 2014 but they thought it was a sincer malfunction But got it again in 2020 from another sensor. Cern was supposed to put up a science Journal to have other scientists verify but i cant seem to find it now. Said it bet light by 60 nano sec. Over a 300 mile span. I was just wondering what the background fields would look like for this partical. Im assuming since we haven't heard anything else they are thinking Error again.
@@cowboybob7093 no this was put up on cerns web site but they put out an Actual science journal to have scientists review the data i just cant seem to find it now. There a lot of stuff on the web lol
What does it mean that the spin is aligned in the direction of movement or against it? Because in the experiments of spin measurement for example, the particles can have arbitrary spin directions although they always move in the same direction. But here they now only spin in the direction of travel. And how does this work with relative motion?
***** Ok but you can switch reference frames. What happens if you manage to do that? And is it possible to measure the component of the spin parallel to the speed of a particle?
Imagine that at some known point in the relatively near future, the answer to "is the seesaw mechanism something real?" would be definitively answered, but that knowing that it would be answered soon didn't give you any information about whether the answer was likely to be yes or no. At what odds do you think it would be a good bet to bet that it is real? (I.e. what probability would you assign to it?)
So... Does that suggest that since left-handed neutrinos have really small masses, right-handed neutrinos (if they exist) have really big masses? And since we can't really see this right-handed neutrinos due to their sterile nature, would it perhaps be a possibility that what we hypothesize as "dark matter" are actually right-handed neutrinos at play?
All those stars producing objects that (for now) only seem to respond to gravity (right handed neutrinos,) shooting in every direction, eventually reaching apoapsis, and thus becoming part of the galaxy, that's why I opened the comments. A few comments made the connection, thank goodness.
I think that this because in particle physics, the energies are so small, that the values in joule are small and inconvenient, remember ev = 1.6*10^-19 joule, so it's probably that ev is more convenient to use on the quantum scale.
Besides being produced in nuclear reactions, do nutrinios have some role to play in the composition or fate of the universe? Do they matter (like say electrons or quarks, etc) or are they simply biproduct without any subsequent role to play?
sir do you agree as weak force favors left handed neutrinos, simalarly some kind of force can be weak force itself might have favored some property in case of matter and anti matter, so now we have more matter than anti matter.
NeonsStyle charge can either come from the Strong Force or Electromagnetism. Electromagnetism has two charges (positive and negative). The Strong Force has three charges (red, blue and green).
So has the mass of the three neutrinos ever been measured? Are all three assumed to be the same mass? If so, why the oscillation between electron, muon, and tau neutrinos? I am age 72, and remember the Homestake Mine experiment vividly.
I saw and was amazed by the image of the interior of the sun obtained by the neutrino detector in Japan. how can we increase the resolution of such an image? can we use the same principle from optics or radio? I mean interferometry. instead of building a huge super detector locally, could we build more but smaller ones? spread across the globe at depth?
So just how good (or not) can we detect less than a million electron volts? Could not sterile particles be the graviton, and we can finally get rid of the ether of our times -dark matter and dark energy??
Has it been experimentally verified that neutrinos have non-zero mass, or are experiments consistent with them being massless? (I know that the theory requires that neutrinos have non-zero rest mass; otherwise, the neutrino oscillations wouldn't have been possible.)
+MikeRosoftJH The oscillations have been experimentally verified. The theory of those oscillations suggest neutrinos have mass(es) but that has not been experimentally verified. It is, however, the most accepted theory at the moment. The biggest wrinkle in the theory is that every measurement of neutrino velocity has measured them to be traveling at the speed of light (within the margin of error of the experiment). If they are, in fact, moving at the speed of light then the theory behind the oscillations is wrong since they must be massless. These are two conflicting pieces of experimental evidence that have not been worked out yet. Great question.
This felt like an extremely educational jab at a council-person for removing seesaws from a park near Dr. Lincoln's house. Will nobody think about the children!? hehe
If I learned anything from the “Why is the Weak Force so Weak?" video, it’s that things that happen slowly are low energy/mass, whereas things that happen quickly are high energy/mass. So does that mean if sterile neutrinos have high mass, they’ll make an appearance soon? 😉
Thank you for all your wonderful tutorial, Dr. Lincoln. Sounds to me that when the zero force neutrinos combine you get a heavier neutrino...same size, twice the mass. All neutrons are not created equal.
STERILE NEUTRINO BLUES I'm like a sterile neutrino. Nobody sees me go by. I'm like a sterile neutrino. Nobody sees me go by. If I don't find a boson, lord knows I'm gonna die.
"If you want to know my opinion ... I don't really have one". This is how a real scientist thinks. They are after evidence, they don't care of opinions. Not even their own opinions. If spin is relative to the direction of the movement, could we describe it like a thread of a screw?
A neutrino has to be a "second stage" compound component part in the wave packet of a more binary particle that imparts the duality/ handedness to its construction. (?) ..A matter of "wave alignment" that goes with harmonics that are either frequency up and measurable, or frequency down and too weak to detect except by inference, as the Higgs mechanism had been? (or that can be the other way around?) Because of the number indication, I've supposed that Quarks and heaviness were transverse orthogonal boundaries "within" the spin-plane, at the combined axis of connection,..because of the way they behave when transmitted "away" from that point - reminiscent of a 3 phase generator and circuit that resonates like a guitar string in the third and second octaves together, star/delta combined. But if I've thought of it, every Electrical Engineer who ever went near an accelerator should have much better intuition about it, and massive amounts of analyzed data to check against (?) All concepts of atoms as power nodes with QM characteristics of musical instruments that was taught; "Chemical Bonding....Quantum Mechanics".
Where does the need come from to have right-handed neutrinos? How did they come into play? I'm perfectly fine with the weak force not interacting with right-handed particles. Right-handed particles are just too stable to decay, no? O sorry, I think you're explaining this at the end ;) And boo btw, and I'm sorry to say this because I think what you are doing is fantastic and this is one of my favorite shows to watch, but I don't think there is any excuse in our modern time to incorrectly show Higgs when talking about the actually also incorrectly called higgs-boson, frankly. And "higgs-theory" and "higgs-mechanism" is certainly wrong.
My understanding is that some theorists think there is a "right handed" weak force we haven't seen yet that pairs with the current, "left handed" one familiar to current particle physics. He already mentioned that gravity, the strong force, and electromagnetism don't care about this particle 'chirality', or 'handed-ness'. However, at high energy our familiar weak force unifies with E&M and the Higgs. It is like reassembling a mirror from its broken shards. If we add in the new right handed force then this new super combo will be symmetric under a swap of left and right again, which makes sense given that all but one of its known shards still are, and we get right handed neutrinos from the same mechanisms that produced our familiar ones. Now here's the cool part. Because the lefty and righty weak forces are distorted mirror reflections of each other you should be able to do a math transformation "swap-lefties-for-righties then righties-for-lefties" (or vice versa) and end up back where you stared UP TO SOME CONSTANT multiple of your original mass state. That's where your seesaw comes from- the newly restored left-right symmetry of the universe means the product of lefty and righty neutrino masses must be some constant. And it would hold REGARDLESS of whether the neutrinos' mass comes from the Higgs or not. The righty neutrinos then having a "Higgs normal" mass like 1 or 100 GeV automatically gives us the tiny masses we see for the familiar, lefty neutrinos. That also makes them perfect DM candidates, and possibly even a solution to where all the missing antimatter is.
Best part was taking a shot at the weakness of this new generation lmao. and physics is my favorite but way to throw that in there..haahahahah seesaws the end of mankind
Kudos for being a cautious scientist and not even mentioning anything dark about this matter.
Well said, ScienceNinjaDude!
Fantastic video, thank you! Even humour is better than most comedy tv shows, excellent job!
Certainly better than "The Big Bang Theory"...
It’s true, the entire fantastic, similar to Harry Potter’s…
Love those talks about neutrinos, they are one of the most mysterious particles in the universe.
The most mysterious *confirmed* particles ;)
spoiler: they're shaped like corkscrews and depending on how they impact stuff, you measure differrnt masses. They don't oscillate between identities, they just have an uneven, asimmetric structure and always rotate. They're deformed photons. Just out of curiosity...
Today I learned: Sterile Neutrinos *might* harm kids on seesaws.
Suppose that's why they removed most of them from playgrounds
I blame gravity.
I can imagine all kinds of harsh disfigurement under the seesaw of death. That's a pretty big lever and I'm sure it happened, but it's just as easy to imagine a kid falling out of a tree or a million other things - of which I've done most. I fell off a slide and broke my arm when I was 7 or 8. Would recommend.
Thanks as always, Dr. Don!
So right handed neutrinos = possible candidates for dark matter ?
I mean they should be massive according to that seesaw mechanism, and would only interact through gravity.
you, sir deserve a nobel prize!
i love the fact that fermilab is inspiring interest in science. i wish usgs and noaa did these sort of videos.
thanks don et al.
Amazing video, the manner that you treat this hard physics seems easy
Wouldn't we note when a sterile neutrino was emitted by a change in the momentum of the emitting particle?
The problem is only non-strile neutrino interact via weak interaction and are emitted that way
I have a question: if handedness is based on the direction in which it's moving, then wouldn't a change of reference frame change the handedness?
If that's the case, how can an interaction occur in one reference frame but not in another?
I think the idea is that neutrinos move so close to the speed of light (because they have such low mass) that even though it would be theoretically possible to do what you say, it would be technically extremely difficult to get enough of a change of reference frame to make a difference -- you would have to get extremely close to the speed of light yourself, to reverse the neutrino's relation of spin to apparent direction, or use an extremely powerful gravitational field (black hole class) to turn the neutrinos around without disturbing their spin..
The spin is probably relative to the refrence frame of the quantum fields of the neutrinos.
I think the issue here might be helicity vs. chirality, the latter not depending on frame of reference.
Thanks Don. We're still friends after all. The idea of neutrino having interaction affinity with Higgs field is pretty mind boggling in itself. Now that's some seesaw for thought.
1. Do left and right neutrinos ever flip flop, and if so, what causes that?
2. For each left handed neutrino floating around, Is there a right handed neutrino also floating around? If so, thats quite a lot of them, so where are they? Is the reason we don't see them that they aren't reactive and difficult to detect?
Excellent, so if the mass of the Neutrino is millions of times smaller that an electron we might be able to "see" the electron one day, right?
is that the majorana mechanism?
So, if right handed neutrinos are possibly very massive, and interact with things even less than left handed neutrinos, could they be dark matter if they do exist?
[02:09] What is the interaction found or looked-for: deflection, absorption, conversion....
Thank you, I so enjoyed the update.
If these hypothetical right-handed neutrinos don't experience the strong, electromagnetic, or even weak forces - and maybe not even the higgs mechanism - how would we go about detecting them? Especially since they only interact with the gravitational force on a minimal (but non-zero) level, it seems almost impossible.
Spin refers to the splitting of an unpolarized particle beam in a specially shaped magnetic field into two polarized beams. This should be made more clear. It is always presented as some mystical property.
Since a neutrino has mass, they really are moving under speed of light. If you shoot a particle with speed even closer to speed of light, it will be catching up with the neutrino. Will the spin of right-handed neutrino become left-handed, if relative to the particle which is catching up, then?
If spin only occurs in the direction of movement, how does that account for the fact that all movement is relative? Does that mean that one observer can simultaneously observe a particle with a spin at an angle to that observed by an observer moving at a different velocity? What does that mean for the weak force's chances of interacting with it?
yes, it should mean that. i think it is related to chirality vs helicity -- one can be reversed by apparent motion, the other cannot
If the Weak force only acts on left-handed particles (and right-hand antiparticles), would it be reasonable to suppose some other possible force (and force-carrier) that acts solely on the right-handed particles (and left-handed antiparticles), as part of some sort of symmetry argument? If not, what prevents this?
How do I donate to fermilabs to have them install a seesaw in their complex?
I think i might be a particle because people keep calling me a bozo.
I AM learning by reading and watching Cern, ect. I do not understand the tracks that are shown on the diagrams. Is this the display of spin and or the direction of the particle?
Thank You.
I have a question and many others. Are we considered in a paradigm shift because of the higgs field discovery?
Can you make a video about the current hypotheses about the possible graviton or how gravity works?
Clyde Cowan helped me write a paper, "The Neutrino Story," when I was in 7th grade.
so hey I have a small question , isn't the eV a unit for energy ? I mean I know E=mc^2 so we can swap between mass and energy but the photon is a little problematic since it has energy E=hc/wave length but no mass , so we shouldn't say it's mass is 0 ev since ev is for energy and it has energy , just no mass ?
no you didn't get my question , I am perfectly fine with the fact that the photon has zero mass , it's just that the eV is used for energy not mass , and the photon does have energy
You know, I really like particle physics; it is a topic in physics I am especially passionate about. Any of you sages out there have an idea for me, a lowly high schooler, jobwise? Heck, I'd love to eventually work at Fermilab.
why did you show the W and Z bosons as being massless?
hi Don. if a particle from a distant star is a wave that collapses in my eye, the probability for its location is light years across. I know it's not a real wave, but there seems to some instantaneous action in the collapse?
Hi I love your channel. But I have a question because cern just found them. They go faster then light so what are the implications of this. Can you do a update video
Please post the title of a page or article where this finding was announced, very interesting. (Please don't use a URL, they are unreliable in YT.)
@@cowboybob7093 im having trouble finding it again. The first glips was in 2014 but they thought it was a sincer malfunction But got it again in 2020 from another sensor. Cern was supposed to put up a science Journal to have other scientists verify but i cant seem to find it now. Said it bet light by 60 nano sec. Over a 300 mile span. I was just wondering what the background fields would look like for this partical. Im assuming since we haven't heard anything else they are thinking Error again.
@@coreymorris1693 _Faster-than-light neutrino anomaly_ - title of a Wikipedia article, is this what we're looking for?
@@cowboybob7093 no this was put up on cerns web site but they put out an Actual science journal to have scientists review the data i just cant seem to find it now. There a lot of stuff on the web lol
What does it mean that the spin is aligned in the direction of movement or against it?
Because in the experiments of spin measurement for example, the particles can have arbitrary spin directions although they always move in the same direction.
But here they now only spin in the direction of travel. And how does this work with relative motion?
*****
Ok but you can switch reference frames. What happens if you manage to do that?
And is it possible to measure the component of the spin parallel to the speed of a particle?
Imagine that at some known point in the relatively near future, the answer to "is the seesaw mechanism something real?" would be definitively answered, but that knowing that it would be answered soon didn't give you any information about whether the answer was likely to be yes or no.
At what odds do you think it would be a good bet to bet that it is real?
(I.e. what probability would you assign to it?)
If sterile neutrinos don't interact with the weak force, does this mean that they can't be created via the weak force? How DO they get created then?
around since the big bang along with the primordial black holes that form the main centers of mass of most galaxies?
So... Does that suggest that since left-handed neutrinos have really small masses, right-handed neutrinos (if they exist) have really big masses?
And since we can't really see this right-handed neutrinos due to their sterile nature, would it perhaps be a possibility that what we hypothesize as "dark matter" are actually right-handed neutrinos at play?
All those stars producing objects that (for now) only seem to respond to gravity (right handed neutrinos,) shooting in every direction, eventually reaching apoapsis, and thus becoming part of the galaxy, that's why I opened the comments. A few comments made the connection, thank goodness.
why is it when talking about the Standard Model, physicists use eV instead of J although J is the SI unit of energy?
I think that this because in particle physics, the energies are so small, that the values in joule are small and inconvenient, remember ev = 1.6*10^-19 joule, so it's probably that ev is more convenient to use on the quantum scale.
Besides being produced in nuclear reactions, do nutrinios have some role to play in the composition or fate of the universe? Do they matter (like say electrons or quarks, etc) or are they simply biproduct without any subsequent role to play?
sir do you agree as weak force favors left handed neutrinos, simalarly some kind of force can be weak force itself might have favored some property in case of matter and anti matter, so now we have more matter than anti matter.
I have a weird question how are the coupled to electrons tau and muons
Are there particle interactions missing energy (how neutrinos were found originally)....
How do you know which way is up on the neutrino so that you can know which direction it's spinning?
i think "up" is in the direction of motion
If right-handed neutrinos do not react with weak force, can they really be produced in weak-force interactions?
Love you sir .. you present such strange concepts with great visualisation 🤗👍
Fascinating. So does where does charge come from? What is it exactly? ie -ve electron. I'm guessing it's got nothing to do withe this -ve & +ve spin.
NeonsStyle charge can either come from the Strong Force or Electromagnetism. Electromagnetism has two charges (positive and negative). The Strong Force has three charges (red, blue and green).
This is why math was considered sorcery for so long. I love it
So has the mass of the three neutrinos ever been measured? Are all three assumed to be the same mass? If so, why the oscillation between electron, muon, and tau neutrinos? I am age 72, and remember the Homestake Mine experiment vividly.
I saw and was amazed by the image of the interior of the sun obtained by the neutrino detector in Japan. how can we increase the resolution of such an image? can we use the same principle from optics or radio? I mean interferometry. instead of building a huge super detector locally, could we build more but smaller ones? spread across the globe at depth?
Interesting, and insightful.
So just how good (or not) can we detect less than a million electron volts? Could not sterile particles be the graviton, and we can finally get rid of the ether of our times -dark matter and dark energy??
Great to watch your presentations:)
Don, i feel you're pulling our leg.
Is this the spin direction? or the Z-component (movement axis) of the spin? I feel like i'm being tricked.
Has it been experimentally verified that neutrinos have non-zero mass, or are experiments consistent with them being massless? (I know that the theory requires that neutrinos have non-zero rest mass; otherwise, the neutrino oscillations wouldn't have been possible.)
+MikeRosoftJH
The oscillations have been experimentally verified. The theory of those oscillations suggest neutrinos have mass(es) but that has not been experimentally verified. It is, however, the most accepted theory at the moment. The biggest wrinkle in the theory is that every measurement of neutrino velocity has measured them to be traveling at the speed of light (within the margin of error of the experiment). If they are, in fact, moving at the speed of light then the theory behind the oscillations is wrong since they must be massless. These are two conflicting pieces of experimental evidence that have not been worked out yet. Great question.
Don can you do a video on different baryons like the omega 3/2
Thanks for a great video! I do not understand spin. It is so counterintuitive.
I would love to hear an expansion of the idea around minute 5:04.
Great video like always!
This felt like an extremely educational jab at a council-person for removing seesaws from a park near Dr. Lincoln's house. Will nobody think about the children!? hehe
Any more videos on chirality not being a symmetry of the universe? Really enjoyed this one!
Thanks for this video
Can sterile neutrinos be dark matter?
!Good explanation!
I would love learn more about quantum physics, do somebody has idea of some book that have focus on this topic, since the basic to the advanced?
***** i'm very Grateful for your reply, i will look into futher
What level of physics are you at?
Great video. I laughed at the end, too.
Are these massive sterile neutrinos the theoretical WIMPs that could be dark matter?
Wouldn't a sterile neutrino be a warm WIMP?
thanks
Thanks!
If I learned anything from the “Why is the Weak Force so Weak?" video, it’s that things that happen slowly are low energy/mass, whereas things that happen quickly are high energy/mass. So does that mean if sterile neutrinos have high mass, they’ll make an appearance soon? 😉
Imagine being around forever and never being discovered.
Fantastic!
Sterile neutrinos also have a sperm count of zero.
My local park still has a see saw :D
would left handed neutrinos be responsible for dark matter?
THANK YOU PROFESSOR LINCOLN...!!!
All it matters is EQUILIBRIUM ...for harmonious stability...!!!
We just have to guard the half life...!!!
Is it possible that dark matter is an unbelievable amount of neutrinos that came from the unobservable part of the universe?
Thank you for all your wonderful tutorial, Dr. Lincoln. Sounds to me that when the zero force neutrinos combine you get a heavier neutrino...same size, twice the mass. All neutrons are not created equal.
STERILE NEUTRINO BLUES
I'm like a sterile neutrino.
Nobody sees me go by.
I'm like a sterile neutrino.
Nobody sees me go by.
If I don't find a boson,
lord knows I'm gonna die.
"If you want to know my opinion ... I don't really have one". This is how a real scientist thinks. They are after evidence, they don't care of opinions. Not even their own opinions.
If spin is relative to the direction of the movement, could we describe it like a thread of a screw?
A neutrino has to be a "second stage" compound component part in the wave packet of a more binary particle that imparts the duality/ handedness to its construction. (?)
..A matter of "wave alignment" that goes with harmonics that are either frequency up and measurable, or frequency down and too weak to detect except by inference, as the Higgs mechanism had been? (or that can be the other way around?)
Because of the number indication, I've supposed that Quarks and heaviness were transverse orthogonal boundaries "within" the spin-plane, at the combined axis of connection,..because of the way they behave when transmitted "away" from that point - reminiscent of a 3 phase generator and circuit that resonates like a guitar string in the third and second octaves together, star/delta combined.
But if I've thought of it, every Electrical Engineer who ever went near an accelerator should have much better intuition about it, and massive amounts of analyzed data to check against (?)
All concepts of atoms as power nodes with QM characteristics of musical instruments that was taught; "Chemical Bonding....Quantum Mechanics".
Where does the need come from to have right-handed neutrinos? How did they come into play? I'm perfectly fine with the weak force not interacting with right-handed particles. Right-handed particles are just too stable to decay, no? O sorry, I think you're explaining this at the end ;)
And boo btw, and I'm sorry to say this because I think what you are doing is fantastic and this is one of my favorite shows to watch, but I don't think there is any excuse in our modern time to incorrectly show Higgs when talking about the actually also incorrectly called higgs-boson, frankly. And "higgs-theory" and "higgs-mechanism" is certainly wrong.
My understanding is that some theorists think there is a "right handed" weak force we haven't seen yet that pairs with the current, "left handed" one familiar to current particle physics.
He already mentioned that gravity, the strong force, and electromagnetism don't care about this particle 'chirality', or 'handed-ness'. However, at high energy our familiar weak force unifies with E&M and the Higgs. It is like reassembling a mirror from its broken shards. If we add in the new right handed force then this new super combo will be symmetric under a swap of left and right again, which makes sense given that all but one of its known shards still are, and we get right handed neutrinos from the same mechanisms that produced our familiar ones. Now here's the cool part. Because the lefty and righty weak forces are distorted mirror reflections of each other you should be able to do a math transformation "swap-lefties-for-righties then righties-for-lefties" (or vice versa) and end up back where you stared UP TO SOME CONSTANT multiple of your original mass state. That's where your seesaw comes from- the newly restored left-right symmetry of the universe means the product of lefty and righty neutrino masses must be some constant. And it would hold REGARDLESS of whether the neutrinos' mass comes from the Higgs or not. The righty neutrinos then having a "Higgs normal" mass like 1 or 100 GeV automatically gives us the tiny masses we see for the familiar, lefty neutrinos. That also makes them perfect DM candidates, and possibly even a solution to where all the missing antimatter is.
seesaws are dangerous? in what universe? i used to play the shit out of them.
Good video btw.
I hate seesaws my mom always jumped to fast so I would only be touching the seesaw with my hands for more than half of the motion of you get my jist
With so little data, it's a nearly untestable fantasy.
I get it finally, thanks! So now I know, mass is charge.
Yay!!!
Love the work you guys do! also first!
Notification Squad!
I demand another baby bison!!!
Well... I liked the video, but i think it seemed a bit like saying "whatever".
If every lifeform in the universe thought seesaws were dangerous too and ditched them en mass, dark matter could be made from seesaws. ;)
When one gets small, the other gets big, hint hint? ;-)
So is this another candidate for dark matter?
The just found them!
I thought it was the Lil Jon Effect
Seesaws are litigiously dangerous.
yis
Beam me up/down Scotty
MBraithwaite Yorkshire Viking
Playgrounds are fun physics labs for children
The Sterile Neutrino is dead, long live the sterile neutrino
Best part was taking a shot at the weakness of this new generation lmao. and physics is my favorite but way to throw that in there..haahahahah seesaws the end of mankind
Spin of a neutrino is of no consequence except in the mind of mathematics and physics theorists. Not in the real world.
GET GOT STERILE NEUTRINOS ARE kinda sorta CONFIRMED