We are witnessing the beginning of the Fermilab Cinematic Universe.

@kingnarothept6917

2 жыл бұрын

holy shit your right

@theultimatereductionist7592

2 жыл бұрын

Is Even Bananas considered canon?

The enthusiasm and clearly genuine joy you bring to the discussion of neutrinos makes learning about them such a pleasure. Thank you for all you do, Kirsty!

I could enjoy watching this video if it were to continue for a ever. Just as fun, interesting, informative and well presented as Don's- but different. Thank you!

So, as oscillating neutrinos change flavor, and therefore mass, do their velocities also change to conserve momentum? If so, how much change is there to gravity's effect on them when this happens?

@curiodyssey3867

2 жыл бұрын

Excellent question

@ampPLrant

2 жыл бұрын

If a neutrino changes flavor in a way that is statistically predictable (which as far as I know they do), could you flavor a solar system sized custard in layers by passing neutrinos through it and having them deposit different flavors in different layers.

Ok. So, I should stop trying to cook my banana custard with a neutrino beam? It's taking like forever!

This is such an amazing and fun series, always interesting, and very calming when I’m anxious

OMG the crossover event we've all been waiting for!

@seionne85

2 жыл бұрын

I've been missing Dr don's fireside chats lol! This series is absolutely amazing too though

That was fun and interesting. Looking forward to the future episodes. Thanks Doctors and keep up the good work.

Dr. Kirsty Duffy is such a breath of fresh air!

I guess Don offered a hint about how to detect cosmic background neutrinos - Aim detectors at neutron stars (... were in the past at the moment neutrinos might have passed through them), they block high energy ones.

@soaringeagle5418

2 жыл бұрын

Neutron stars emit neutrinos of their own. There would be no way to tell the Neutron star emitted ones from the back ground ones that passed through.

Finally, the crossover we've all been waiting for DON x DUFFY

Great presentation.

Awesome video Dr.Kirsty! Definitely a fan of 'Even Bananas'. I was wondering if you could perhaps explain how the scanning technology that monitors how muons decay into kaons and pions can/might be adapted for medical scans as I am aware that they can already detect muon particles as they go through a mountain. I also sort of understand the muon detectors but I can't see how they can be scaled down for use in medical scans.. Keep up the great work!

Drs Don and Duffy together in one video? Yes, the D&D video I've been waiting for!

If neutrinos are their own antiparticles, would that be like, the difference between a neutrino and an antineutrino being just a change of reference frame so as to reverse the helicity? Would whether they could annihilate (though I imagine that the probability of this would be exceedingly low?) depend on the handedness of the two? (Is the handedness of a neutrino its spin, its helicity, or something else?)

Great episode!

Another bunch of questions (some may be illogical, sorry for that); - Can neutrinos passes through a black hole? How neutrinos are affected by the black hole? - If passes, can we catch the neutrinos passing through a black hole? Do we have instruments to detect them? (Since black hole is extremely dense, interaction with neutrinos coming from cosmic background is likely, isn't it?) - Does blackhole itself emit neutrinos or antineutrinos? - Does temperature affect neutrinos? (Again for black holes, I have read that the average temperature of black holes are 2.7K, so is there any relation between temperature and neutrinos?) Thanks for this great video serie!

@denmaroca2584

2 жыл бұрын

Anything that crosses the event horizon of a black hole cannot come back out. So, a neutrino cannot pass through a black hole. Like everything else, it will end up at the singularity.

How can you (and don) make physics sooo cool ? !!

Loved the custard yolks!

Food puns make physics fun, love this series. It was great to see Don too, can't wait for the next video! Question, do neutron stars emit neutrinos?

@soaringeagle5418

2 жыл бұрын

Yes, they do.

@dr.kirstyduffy9015

2 жыл бұрын

@@soaringeagle5418 beat me to it! Yes, neutron stars do emit neutrinos. In fact, neutrinos are one of the most significant ways neutron stars emit energy. The neutrinos neutron stars emit are very low-energy neutrinos, so they can travel through the neutron star and get out without being trapped (the way people seem to write this in lectures is "neutron stars are transparent to their own neutrinos", which I like)

make a series on time and entropy please

awesome!!

Yes Dr. Kirsty, you passed. And thanks for this series.

Great episode! I'm looking forward to the sterile neutrino episode. Question: What is the prediction, if there is any, of the ratio of neutrinos to anti-neutrinos in the cosmic neutrino background?

@dr.kirstyduffy9015

2 жыл бұрын

Excellent question! As far as I know the "standard" Big Bang models predict the same number of neutrinos and antineutrinos. But other models don't assume that, and since we haven't measured it directly I'm not sure we can say for sure which is right.

If neutrinos can be converted to and from antineutrinos by reversing their handedness, it should be possible to detect this with a neutrino detector having a high enough resolution to resolve the accretion disk of a black hole (like what the Event Horizon radio telescope did for the M87 black hole in radio waves), and the ability to distinguish neutrinos from antineutrinos. Then select a black hole that has an accretion disk hot enough to run the proton-proton chain series fusion reactions (which make neutrinos of known energy ranges), but not so hot as to generate free neutrons (which decay to make antineutrinos), and whose accretion disk is not too far off from being edge-on relative to us, so that one side is moving towards us (blue-shifting the neutrinos) and the other side is moving away (red-shifting them) (note: the black hole's gravity will superimpose a red shift on all of them). If neutrinos can be converted into antineutrinos by reversing their handedness, the black hole's gravity should do the job on any neutrinos that were emitted away from us and then had their paths bent around the black hole to get to us. Then you get 4 classes of neutrinos and antineutrinos: 1. Neutrinos that were emitted from the approaching side of the disk going towards us (in the direction of disk rotation) will appear on the approaching side as blue-shifted neutrinos. 2. Neutrinos that were emitted from the receding side of the disk going away from us (in the direction of disk rotation) would be turned into blue-shifted antineutrinos appearing to come from the approaching side of the disk. 3. Neutrinos that were emitted from the approaching side of the disk going away from us (against the direction of disk rotation) will be turned into red-shifted antineutrinos appearing to come from the receding side of the disk, but will be forbidden by the black hole's ergosphere (from the black hole's spin causing frame-dragging) from appearing to come from the inner parts of the disk. 4. Neutrinos that were emitted from the receding side of the disk going towards us (against the direction of disk rotation) will remain as red-shifted neutrinos coming from the receding side of the disk, but the ergosphere won't block all of the ones appearing to come from close to the black hole, because some of them will actually be from parts of the disk that are close to being in front of the black hole. If the above theory is wrong, and reversing the handedness of neutrinos does NOT turn them into antineutrinos, then the classes of neutrinos converted into antineutrinos above will instead be converted to sterile neutrinos and be undetected, or else appear as (up to now never observed) wrong-handed neutrinos. Edit: Looks like Sagittarius A* (the black hole at the center of the Milky Way) might have the characteristics you need for this experiment, and the Event Horizon telescope might even give us a radio image of it pretty soon. So then the challenge becomes to build the neutrino telescope with resolution to match.

Informative

Wow! That is so counterintuitive: that a lower energy neutrino would penetrate a neutron star farther than a higher energy neutrino!

Here is to hoping they find another flavour of neutrinos so that we can have even bananas

A question, is it possible to use neutrino beam in the same way we are using X-rays? So we would be able to see inside extremely big objects?

Does the cosmic background or neutron background radiation tell us anything about the universe being closed/open, finite/infinite?

If we take element 115 and bombard the centre with protons does it turn into element 116 ? Does this now produce an Anti Gravity Wave ?

If fruit is talking to you, you may have gone bananas.

If there's a lot of neutrino around us, and also antineutrino, because some process produces that, can we detect neutrino-antineutrino annihilation, at least in theory?

mam i think you told the problem about neutrino is solved by "THEORY OF DIMENSION" in which we asume that every thing is made of energy with time and space . if we asume time is form of energy that mean time is also conserved and we also add the unperfaction theorm . thank you

If neutrinos are their own antiparticles, what size is the cross-section of a neutrino annihilation? If the cross section with an nucleon is somewhere around 10^-38/cm², would a neutrino-neutrino interaction be at 10^-76/cm²?

Remember when this channel was 100% excelent?

Really interesting and fun video. I would like to hear the finish to the "custard walks into a bar" joke.

@trigonzobob

2 жыл бұрын

A custard walks into a bar and orders a beer. The bartender, seeing that it's just a custard, can't help snickering under his breath, and doesn't comply. The custard then restates its order for a beer. The bartender then starts laughing out loud as do all the other patrons of the bar. The enraged custard then exclaims, "What do you think I am, some kind of yolk?"

@fps079

2 жыл бұрын

@@trigonzobob Thanks for that!

Can two supermassive negatively charged black holes made of electrons split a proton kept at midpoint of the line joining those two black holes. And vice-versa.

What function do neutrinos provide in the universe, since they seldom interact with anything?

Can the flooded copper mines in Michigan's upper peninsula be used as neutrino detectors?

@soaringeagle5418

2 жыл бұрын

The Sudbury Neutrino Observatoty is in an abandoned nickle mine in Ontario.

Why don’t bananas snore? Because they don’t want to wake up the rest of the bunch. 💕 ☮ 🌎 🌌

As there are alot of neutrinos, what could be the neutrino- neutrino interection looks like and interection under weak forces

You could save on eggs by giving your custard layer a tiny frontal area and then aim your neutrino very accurately. So the follow on question is... What is the volume of a cylinder a few molecules wide, but that insanely long?

A question... WHY would neutrinos from a second after the big bang, be so low in energy? Is it some kind of "red shift" effect, as with the CMB photons? Or is it to do with neutrino mass? Or simply the actual process that would have created them in the first place? And what would that process have been? The same as now? Presumably this would only have occurred when the Weak force decoupled from the EM force? Lots of questions, sorry!

@dr.kirstyduffy9015

2 жыл бұрын

Yes, your first guess is right - it's a red shift! 1 second after the Big Bang we think the neutrinos were produced with higher energies, but over the 14 billion years since then the universe has expanded and red shift has caused the neutrinos to go lower and lower in energy, just like with CMB photons. Wave-particle duality tells us that a particles' wavelength is inversely proportional to its energy, so as the wavelength gets longer, the energy goes down.

Does neutrino exist in normal atoms just like electrons and quarks ? Great series. Thank you.

@soaringeagle5418

2 жыл бұрын

No. Normal atoms consist of protons, neutrons, and electrons. In the case of hydrogen its possible to just have an ionized hydrogen atom (a single proton without an associated electron). In a star, the initial hydrogen fusion process pushes 2 protons together, which then fuses into a deuterium nucleus (1 proton and 1 neutron bound together) and releases an anti-electron and a neutrino. The anti-electron annihilates a normal matter electron and that process releases 2 gamma ray photons.

@mnada72

2 жыл бұрын

@@soaringeagle5418 Thank you. Great explanation.

Do neutrinos "redshift" like photons when they travel through expanding space?

That was a lot of plain old factual information for a short KZread video. Nice work.

What power of a gravity wave could pass through a human such that we could feel the spacetime distortion but without killing us? Or, put another way: how far from 2 colliding blackholes would we have to be to feel the spacetime distortion from the gravity wave but not have it kill us? And, what would the spacetime distortion feel like?

If I start reading physics today,,,,how much time I'll take to reach your level and work in dune.

Why do we not eliminate c and replace with h/s? This would make more evident that gravity is a measure of spatial density. That light is lensed around gravitational girls because the medium, space, is more dense there. And we should have applied an eisteinDicke cosmology which shows that the Hubble constant is not from expansion but from the curvature to the manifold from the vacuum energy. That we have an observable universe limit shows we are effectively inside a black hole. Btw. There is clearly only one kind of neutrino which has 3 aspects. Neutrinos function usually as charge un\coupling devices. Pure spin with no charge. Mostly working that Aharanov bohm aspect no doubt. Their mass likely derives from the spin interacting with the vacuum energy.

It's been awhile since I watched previous episodes of Even Bananas, so I don't remember whether the following questions have already been answered: 1. Does "higher energy" neutrino just mean a neutrino with greater velocity? 2. Why do lower energy neutrinos have a lower probability of interacting with other matter?

@dr.kirstyduffy9015

2 жыл бұрын

Thanks for the questions, and thanks for watching! 1. Yes! A particle's kinetic energy depends on it's velocity, so a higher-energy neutrino will have larger velocity and be moving faster. 2. I'm honestly not sure if I know the reason *why* lower-energy neutrinos are less likely to interact (disclaimer: I'm not a theorist!). One reason is to do with the fact that we need to conserve energy. If you have an interaction that produces a muon, then your initial neutrino has to have enough energy to produce a muon (using E=mc2 we can work out how much energy we need to produce a muon, which has mass 105 MeV/c2) - if it doesn't, then the interaction can't happen. That's not *all* of the answer, because a neutrino that has juuuuuust enough energy to produce a muon is still less likely to interact than one that's at very high energy. I think the full answer involves some more intense quantum mechanics about how these interactions really happen - I'll think about it and see if I can get you a better answer!

@brothermine2292

2 жыл бұрын

@@dr.kirstyduffy9015 : Perhaps a future episode of Even Bananas could show the "interaction probability versus energy" curve, and discuss whether it's just theoretical or has been empirically verified. How it was calculated. And if empirically verified, how the experiment(s) worked.

Still waiting for the link to the paper about neutrinos going through a neutron star.

@cloudpoint0

2 жыл бұрын

Probably this one from above: Neutrino Emission from Neutron Stars: arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0012122

@martinsoos

2 жыл бұрын

Yes, but I had to click on the PDF file in blue in the download file box in the upper right of the screen. At quick glance it seams to be second hand and about as iffy as my channel. My big question is why range of radio to gamma falls outside the usual bell curve of heat radiation. But I am back to the 145 pages to re read what I quick scanned. And thanks for the directions.

As we understand everything keeps on throwing Neutrinos, does this leads to expension of space?

I have a different questions : why considering sapce fabric 2d to represent gravity rather it is 3 dimensional radial force inward to a object. Dark matters is only interact with gravity at large this will be proved soon. And why ripples of gravitation waves in like ripples in pond (wrong explanation we were using ) Rather they are shock waves.

@caterscarrots3407

2 жыл бұрын

Probably because a 2D slice of space is much easier to animate than a 3D block, especially for the gravitational wave example.

Strawberry, chocolate, and pistachio!

Loved the Dad jokes 👌

Isn't a human sized pile of bananas also a new life form? :D

@tpog1

2 жыл бұрын

kzread.info/dash/bejne/lot2z8OEm5aYlqg.html

@seionne85

2 жыл бұрын

@@tpog1 😂😂😂

_”I don’t know how your lifesign scanner would differentiate between a human and a human-sized pile of bananas. 🤔”_ Frankly, that seems like a feature request for Lifesign Scanner 2.0… 😜

Seems like quantum affects would make it less transparent given that tunneling allows for the fusion of matter.

If neutrinos have a reasonably strong interaction with dark matter, would that go unnoticed? Could a neutrino / dark matter interaction show up as the phenomenon known as neutrino oscillation, with the larger mass of the muon neutrino and the tau neutrino being due to the unstable combination of an electron neutrino with particles of dark matter? (Obviously, I'm just speculating. My ignorance is fertile ground for wild speculations.)

What's yellow and highly dangerous? Shark infested custard. (I laughed like a drain when i first heard that, probably aged 7.) YMMV!

@dr.kirstyduffy9015

2 жыл бұрын

This is HILARIOUS and I only wish I'd heard it before we filmed this episode

@timbeaton5045

2 жыл бұрын

@@dr.kirstyduffy9015 You are at liberty to use it whenever you like. I'm sure due to its age, that it must be out of copyright, by now!

What law says massless particles HAVE to travel at light speed (in the same medium as light)? What observation or theory or law or other principles would be violated if massless particles did NOT travel at light speed (in the same medium as light)?

Where I could send questions like that? Because I've got a goooood one :D If neutrino particles have super small mass that they barely interact with matter, and they pass through our thumb in billions every second- how do we know that in particle accelerator like LHC streams of protons are coliding with protons, not proton-neutrino-proton? ;p

❤

Why aren't Neutrinos, Aether's oscillating Inertial Plane? After Aether splits into e-, Inertial plane and e+.

So my question is: what keeps electron and proton apart? I know there is a probability 'sphere' around the nucleus (and the entire universe). But why is rhe probability in such a way?

@L4wr3nc3810

2 жыл бұрын

And why is it wrong to assume there is another 'repellent' force keeping these twi partićes apart?

I have 2 questions: 1. What is the biggest source of neutrinos in the universe (by biggest I mean emitting the most neutrinos per second)? 2. Why is Kirsty Duffy so pretty?

@soaringeagle5418

2 жыл бұрын

In answer to 1. - In just the first few seconds after a star begins its transformation into a neutron star, the energy leaving in neutrinos is equal to the total amount of light emitted by all of the stars in the observable universe.

She's a smoggie! Few words sounded northern but would have guessed home counties.

@dr.kirstyduffy9015

2 жыл бұрын

I am! I think I sound completely southern, though, except I say "bath" instead of "barth"

@TurinTuramber

2 жыл бұрын

@@dr.kirstyduffy9015 Yes my ears twitched when you said 'pAss (not paRse)...through a neutron star'. So I knew you were from north of the Watford Gap! but it's definitely subtle. Enjoying the videos. Thanks

Is "custard shouldn't have legs" a theory or a hypotesis?

@brianewman

2 жыл бұрын

it's an opinion

What does it mean when a particle is its own antiparticle?

@gyro5d

2 жыл бұрын

You're in the Inertial Plane.

It seems like there is no way for us to know/measure how many neutrinos there actually are in a certain volume. Also, I'm really surprised that some of them can pass through a neutron star... I mean, density is one thing, but what about gravity? Won't it slow them down and stop them? And the time dilation will slow them even more...

Come on Kirsty, the three flavours of neutrinos are all banana flavoured.

Great videos! Are you perhaps also a fan of Gwen Stefani?

It would be cool if you could make an episode on using neutrino emission to map locations of nuclear reactors on Earth. This effectively means it's already impossible for a rogue nation to hide nuclear reactors from the international community, so it has some geopolitical significance. I don't know if the heat maps I have seen were just proofs of concept to show it can be done, or if this is now done regularly by the big neutrino detectors dotted around the globe.

@dr.kirstyduffy9015

2 жыл бұрын

This is super cool, and a great idea for an episode - thanks! From what I understand, I think this is mostly in the proof-of-concept stage. We know that nuclear reactors produce neutrinos, and we know that there's nothing you can do to "hide" the neutrinos (you can't stop them getting out because they'll travel through anything) so it would be really cool if we could use neutrino detectors for nuclear monitoring. The bit that we're working on now is the detector technology - proving that the detectors are sensitive and really able to detect neutrinos from nuclear reactors. To go into more detail (because I think this stuff is really awesome), there are two ways you could possibly use neutrinos to monitor reactors: 1) Have a neutrino detector that measures the total rate of neutrinos passing through the detector, and look to see if that matches with what you expect from all known sources (the sun, centre of the earth, and of course the known reactors in the region). In theory, if you measure more neutrinos than expected that could be evidence of an unknown reactor. The challenge is that there are neutrinos coming in from everywhere (so you need to know your "known sources" very well), and the neutrino flux from a reactor gets weaker the further away you get (like how the light from a torch is hard to see when you're miles away). So you need really sensitive detectors! There's an experiment in the UK (with US collaborators) trying to do this called Watchman - they are putting a detector about 40 miles away from a known nuclear reactor and trying to see if they can tell when the reactor is on or off. 2) The other thing you can do is try to use neutrinos to work out what mixture of fuels is in the reactor. Different isotopes of uranium and plutonium give off slightly different energy neutrinos, so if you can measure the neutrino energies well enough you can work out what's inside. People are looking into whether you could do this with a neutrino detector small enough to fit in a shipping container - the idea would be that you could drive your detector up next to a reactor, measure the neutrinos, and work out what's inside. That's also in development and there are a lot of ideas that people are testing - look up the PROSPECT experiment for one!

@eckligt

2 жыл бұрын

@@dr.kirstyduffy9015 Wow Dr Duffy, your detailed response really made my day! I wasn't aware of the second strategy at all. I searched a bit online now, and I think the thing I had heard about previously is what is described in this Medium post: medium.com/the-physics-arxiv-blog/physicists-produce-antineutrino-map-of-the-world-8885539b25a7 Note the heatmap in the article, which clearly shows locations of nuclear reactors. Maybe I had previously misunderstood this illustration, thinking that the researchers had combined multiple neutrino detector results (using information on the direction of detected neutrinos) to form a sort of "neutrino tomography", so the highlights would be real neutrino data. But reading the article again now, it could also be understood to be a calculation, based on IAEA data, of whence reactor-generated neutrinos ought to originate. It's not really clear to me, so perhaps you could shed some light on this.

@dr.kirstyduffy9015

2 жыл бұрын

@@eckligt Oh this is cool, I hadn't seen it before! I think you're right - it looks like this heatmap is a prediction based on the known location and size of reactors around the world, and then calculating how many neutrinos from each reactor you'd expect to see in a particular size of neutrino detector. So I think it's not so much "this is where the neutrinos come from" but more "this is where you'd see most neutrinos if you stuck a detector here" (those things are pretty similar but I think there's a subtle difference. For example, if you put a detector in the middle of a bunch of reactors you'd no neutrinos to be *produced* there, but lots of neutrinos to be *detected* because they'd be coming from all sides). I think the aim of the researchers making this heatmap was to work out where *not* to put their detector if they don't want to measure reactor neutrinos, but of course it gives a really interesting picture of where all the reactors in the world are and what you'd measure if you tried to see them with neutrinos!

Would the intense gravity of a neutron star speed-up a low-energy neutrino so much that it becomes a high-energy neutrino?

Does the fact that neutrinos are so difficult to measure, even from the first second of universe, say something about the first seconds of the universe?

I will assume that your favorite custard dessert is one that has bananas in it!

I think someone was hungry when they did this show. Lol

@standavid1828

2 жыл бұрын

@MichaelKingsfordGray lol

I don't see how physicists could be confident that any "particles" of the Standard Model are truly fundamental, because they often change form... for example by decay, or by annihilation, or by oscillation to other "flavors," etc. It seems like a hint that the Standard Model "particles" are bound combinations of more deeply fundamental properties, that can sometimes be unbound and recombined. A few of the Standard Model particles seem more likely candidates for "fundamental"... for example, an electron neutrino seems more likely to be fundamental than the heavier flavors of neutrinos. And perhaps electron neutrinos are more likely than electrons to be fundamental... in particular, perhaps an electron is an electron neutrino bound to a negative charge.

@promethium-145

2 жыл бұрын

This is an interesting point. In the proper sense of the word, elementary particles don't decay. They change flavor. For example, a Top Quark is very energetic, with 171 GeV. In 5*10^-25 seconds, it emits a W Boson, becoming a Bottom Quark. Top Quarks are still elementary, they're not made of smaller particles. But here's where it gets complicated: particle mass isn't intrinsic. When we measure 171 GeV for the Top Quark, we're measuring the energy confined in the interaction between the Top Quark and Higgs Field. How much Higgs interaction a particle experiences depends on an asymmetric property that I don't understand too well. But I am 100% sure that all Quarks, Leptons and Bosons are elementary particles, sans their interaction with the Higgs Field. Each of them, except Gluons and Photons, have a certain amount of asymmetry, allowing them to interact with the Higgs Field.

@brothermine2292

2 жыл бұрын

@@promethium-145 : Since "particles" are actually believed to be excitations (vibrations) of quantum fields, it seems plausible that what's actually "elementary" are the fields and the excitation energy. An amusing historical anecdote about the Higgs boson is that the original version of Higgs' paper didn't mention it and was rejected. He'd written about the Higgs field, not the boson, which is merely a label given to an excitation of the field. The paper was accepted after he revised it to add a paragraph about the boson implied by the field. My guess is that Higgs was forced to pretend to accept the "particle" mental baggage that still plagues physicists and the way physics is taught. Perhaps that mental baggage is preventing a breakthrough.

@promethium-145

2 жыл бұрын

@@brothermine2292 But remember the wave particle duality. Quantum objects are both wave and particle, so apart from Higgs interaction, they can be considered elementary. It's bizarre, but interesting. Actually, let's go a step further. Particles can only have electric charge if they interact with the Higgs Field. So truly "elementary" particles are the entities in the Standard Model, without both charge and mass! Crazy, right?

FACT: When u rub a banana, a neutrino Genie comes spewing out faster than speed of light & penetrates everything in its immediate vicinity.

@danuttall

2 жыл бұрын

That sounds more like a tachyon genie instead. Neutrinos are usually just below the speed of light.

But there ARE even bananas in the Even Bananas logo, the other 3 are just the anti-bananas representing the positron, the anti-muon and anti-Tau

I really want a new show called Odd Bananas, and there's millions like me, i'm sure !

How anti neutrinos or antimatters disappear? 🤔

Okay, there are _"antineutrinos"._ Are there any _uncle-neutrinos?_ {I'll see myself to the door...😊}

In other words, neutrinos can _"mut the custard"._ 😊😊😊

What would it mean if neutrinos were their own anti partical.

@promethium-145

2 жыл бұрын

A Neutrino has a spin of -1/2, while an anti Neutrino has a spin of +1/2.

Here's a question for next time. During beta decay, an electron is produced, but why is an antineutrino produced rather than a neutrino? Also since matter outnumbers antimatter, then does that mean antineutrinos outnumber neutrinos, if matter produces antineutrinos?

@dr.kirstyduffy9015

2 жыл бұрын

The complicated answer to why it's an antineutrino not a neutrino is conservation rules - quantum mechanics tells us that certain things have to be conserved in particle interactions or decays. The two that are important here are charge (so the total charge before the decay has to equal the total charge after the decay) and lepton number. You can't make charge (or leptons) out of nowhere, it always has to balance. "Lepton" refers to a certain type of particle, including electrons (or positrons) and neutrinos (or antineutrinos). Electrons and neutrinos have lepton number "+1", and positrons and antineutrinos have lepton number "-1". So: in beta decay we know we have neutron -> proton + electron (or positron) + neutrino (or antineutrino) Applying conservation of charge: we know neutrons are neutral, so after the decay we have to also have total charge = 0. Protons have charge +1, and neutrinos have no charge, so our electron (or positron) must have charge -1 to balance out: that means it has to be an electron, not a positron. So now we can do lepton number! Neutrons and protons have lepton number 0, so we can ignore them (except we know that the total lepton number after the decay has to be 0 too). Electrons have lepton number +1, which means our neutrino/antineutrino must have lepton number -1: that means it has to be an antineutrino. About whether that means antineutrinos outnumber neutrinos - that's a very interesting question! It's definitely true for cases where they are produced in beta decay (for example, inside the earth, in nuclear reactors, and in bananas). But there are other ways to produce neutrinos with matter. For example, you can have a process called "electron capture" where an electron hits an atom and turns a proton into a neutron. That's very similar to the beta decay interaction, but sort of in a different order -- now, we have lepton number +1 before the interaction, so we need lepton number +1 afterwards (i.e. we need to make a neutrino, not an antineutrino). So natural forces can make both! Having said that, I'll think some more about whether there are *more* antineutrinos - I'm not sure but you make a very good point!

@whiteman2707

2 жыл бұрын

@@dr.kirstyduffy9015 And I suppose if neutrinos are their own antiparticles, then it won't make a difference anyways, and we just call it a neutrino or an antineutrino just on convention.

@dr.kirstyduffy9015

2 жыл бұрын

@@whiteman2707 Yeah exactly! If neutrinos are their own antiparticles then that would mean the "law" of lepton number conservation I mentioned above isn't actually a real thing, so the argument I made wouldn't actually work. In that case yeah, we'd probably keep calling it a neutrino or antineutrino by convention but it wouldn't be for the reasons I gave

@whiteman2707

2 жыл бұрын

@@dr.kirstyduffy9015 If lepton numbers are moot with neutrinos/antineutrinos, then can you still call them leptons?

@dr.kirstyduffy9015

2 жыл бұрын

@@whiteman2707 Ooh GOOD question. I actually don't know!

T-T-Teessider!

lovely lady

Very banana show :-)

If you neuter a proton, do you get a neutrino?

@brothermine2292

2 жыл бұрын

Neutron.

What happens if you shoot neutrinos at a diamond ???

@johnkotches8320

2 жыл бұрын

About the same as shooting them at any other matter. Not much.

@ericmelto7810

2 жыл бұрын

@@johnkotches8320 I figured. Being the hardest that meant the most compact atoms. I’m probably wrong but what if we could make a special molecule with packed in atoms that are most likely to react with neutrinos and bring it down to 2 kelvin. Would that maybe create more reactions?

@johnkotches8320

2 жыл бұрын

@@ericmelto7810Hardness has nothing to do with how compact the atoms in the molecules are. Diamonds are hard because of the shape of the molecule and the particular way the bonds are built with the electron shells.

@soaringeagle5418

2 жыл бұрын

@@ericmelto7810 Neutron stars are the most compact matter in the universe. If you add more mass to a Neutron star it will eventually become a black hole and no one knows for certain what happens to the matter in a black hole.

@ericmelto7810

2 жыл бұрын

@@johnkotches8320 you are right again. You must be a master teacher somewhere

That's just an animation of Don! What happened to the real Don? WHAT'S HAPPENING?

Somehow what you're doing at 3:15 seems inappropriate, but I'll be damned if I can state what's actually wrong about it.

Something something cake

Because the fourth banana is you

So my bananas produce anti-matter, why do they not self annihilate in the fruit bowl, why can't I watch them doing this?

Why is your custard like water?

@eyeofthasky

2 жыл бұрын

cuz a custard in england is just a sauce like sabayon, but "custard" can be anything as long it has egg in it it seems ... it can be liquid, or be baked to be solid, or anything inbetween. whats >your< custard?^^

@guff9567

2 жыл бұрын

@@eyeofthasky I have never seen custard as water. NEVER. That is NOT custard 100% guaranteed. Custard is not egg. It is starch .

@eyeofthasky

2 жыл бұрын

@@guff9567 wikipedia disagrees -- i do not know the word custard or the thing at all, its not part of any of my cultural heritages, but i know sabayon/zabaione and that according to wiki *_*is*_* classified as custard, but its a more cremy or better said very foamy than a liquid. the base is always yolk as a binding ingredient, some custards may additionally have starch in them, but not solely. imagine creme brulee (which is a non-liquid custard) with starch, it would be a compact cake :D well, but all types of custard for me make no sense to be named custard in english, the word itelf is from a french word meaning "crust" (all custards are called "creme" in french, thanks!, cuz they r) -- bake a custard until its crispy like a piece of pastry, _then_ the name is appropriate lol

@guff9567

2 жыл бұрын

@@eyeofthasky Since when is Wikipedia a cook? Custard is mere flavoured cornstarch: "Conventional custard powder that we purchase in the supermarket is basically a combination of cornflour, riboflavin (a vitamin), conventional salt, and some amounts of flavor"

@eyeofthasky

2 жыл бұрын

@@guff9567 cornstarch or corn in general is an american thing, as the history of custards goes back further than that, and many cuisins do not use cornstarch at all (cuz yikes...), that argument does not hold true in general. u may say "american custards", then yeah that might be valid, i dont follow what trends and madnesses go on beyond the great pool

7:18 "you can think of a neutron start as a single atomic nucleus the size of a medium city that contains only neutrons" FIRST... PHYSICIST... EVER... to have put it this way. Seriously, I NEVER heard ANY other physicist say it this way (even though we've all thought it).

At a glance, I thought the thumbnail said "WIENER QUESTIONS," then showed her dunking a banana in...liquid nitrogen? Or something. And I was like Fermilab what unholy hell are you researching over there? Please go back to messing with spacetime or something.