Best channel on youtube

Isn't it saddening that we know no matter how hard we keep pushing the frontiers of science we'll never get to know all. Yet it is so pleasing seeing us never stopping. At least not yet.

It's a journey of discovery, I hope to see many great discoveries in our lifetime. Thank you for this channel!

We need to fast-track this!

Dr Lincoln, As a huge fan of the videos on this channel and an avid high school student of STEM courses, I have to ask how one could participate in the world of experimental physics? What should my major be, and what schools are good choices? Is it a growing field? Thanks so much for your excellent, educational, and entertaining videos! - Jonathan

@elafsalah8419

4 жыл бұрын

High energy physics specialization of particle physics

I think that even more challenging than making stronger magnets is getting funding.

@ryanhaart

6 жыл бұрын

Cy Bacto And rightly so. Why should my taxes fund pointless experiments that serve no practical purposes?

Hehehe, I got that shirt for Christmas from my fiancee'. Another great video, well done.

@shadow404atl

7 жыл бұрын

Great message at the end of the video, I really do hope the new administration doesn't slash science funding.

Stronger magnets for less boring work... ^^

Question: Waht would be the collision energy of a collider consisting of two LHC rings intersecting where one accelerates protons and the other accelerates anti-protons? Each accelerator would have the same radius as the present LHC...

I have to admit, i like this channel better than pbs space-time.

@pedroassis2777

7 жыл бұрын

Jack Potts yep, I feel like pbs diverts from deep physics way too often, I wish I could help Fermilab with patron or something.

@noahshomeforstrangeandeduc4431

6 жыл бұрын

me too but its hard

I am excited to see if there are building blocks beneath quarks and leptons

@CraftyF0X

7 жыл бұрын

Preons and/or string. Probably none of them.

@THE_JACOB

7 жыл бұрын

I am also excited for other bosons as well or other particles completely

@dangoodbad1951

7 жыл бұрын

The deeper they dig they closer they get to God.

@procactus9109

7 жыл бұрын

The deeper they dig the more obvious God has never existed outside our own minds.

Would there be any advantages to build a future accelerator in space? The ones I can think of is no need to dig tunnels, and easy access to materials (if this is 30 years away or more).

New room temperature super conductors are a game changer now.... Will make construction and operation of collider's much easier and cost effective. שלום

@Nehmo

6 жыл бұрын

Are they advanced enough to make a good magnet?

Would stronger magnets affect the environment around the collider or the surface above ground?

Is Plasma Wakefield Acceleration not a viable option to achieve higher energies?

MIT's Plasma Science and Fusion Center has an idea for a tokamak that would sustain a significantly more intense magnetic field than what ITER would sustain. The reactor design uses high-temperature superconductors tapes and the head of the department seems confident that these are practical.

100 TeV? Boy that would take several powerplants just to fire up the whole thing...

sir can u please make a video about y the strong force is repulsive a at very short range?

Couldn’t you hv a straight collider with the ends having some extra strong magnets to turn the protons in the other direction?

Wouldn't Fermilab be a better site for such a large accelerator than CERN? The area is less built up (to the west of Fermilab there appears to be mostly open farmland), and you wouldn't have to tunnel under the Alps.

@michaelsommers2356

7 жыл бұрын

***** Funding will be an issue no matter where it is built, or proposed to be built. I was merely commenting on the desirability of the two sites -per se_, regardless of factors such as money and politics.

@paulmoir4452

7 жыл бұрын

I think you would have to first address the memory of the SSC, especially if you were asking for international support. It's hard to give money to a project when the host country might just cancel it.

@TheDuckofDoom.

7 жыл бұрын

If it isn't directly owned by a US federal government agency then they have no legal standing to shut it down, it's just private property and we have relatively strong property rights in the US.

When will we build an accelerator around sun so it is large enough to test string theory?

Hoping for breakthrough in magnetic science then :)

[05:30] vs. [05:50]-we can assume the RE (rare earth) NbSn niobium tin was intended. [_historical note: Nb niobium ⁹³41 was previously known as Cb columbium_]

what I would like to know is what is at the heart of the current LHC? I'm guessing it's a giant magnetron but I'm not entirely, sure do any of you know?

do you know if SCC get revived?

is antarctica big enough?

so would 56T magnets mean this FCC could just be an LHC upgrade instead?

@DjChronokun

3 жыл бұрын

@Neil Rusling unfortunately I seem to be out of stock

does it have to be round? different magnetic at the corners

@davelowinger7056

7 жыл бұрын

like a egg

@billdecat855

7 жыл бұрын

SImple answer, yes. Now why does it have to be round is that to make it inline and long enough to reach the power levels it would have to go remarkably deep into the earth to stay straight, think about pushing a straight pin through an orange and how deep in the orange the center of the pin is even if both ends are at the surface. If it was was built on the surface it would bend with the curvature of the surface and if it is round the energies can be increased by travelling many, many circuits if the circle. As well the larger the circumference the "straighter" each degree of the circle is meaning less energy to make the beam bend around the circumference. So, if it was egg shaped the energy would need to fluctuate from low to high level to get the beam around the narrow end but circular can keep the energy level constant.

Cool. Question, the rings around that 'star' at 3:40, are they newton rings?

So we get a 10th of a trillionth of a second now. What's the prediction for the FCC?

Why not raise the beam up a level? make the circle a torus ?

The scary thing is it could take 20 years and discover nothing significantly new. Then what do we do. But I guess we have to find out

Taking this to it's logical conclusion, without involving space travel, just build the ring right round the Equator. Of course there may be certain technical challenges....

I think it's a bit misleading to show the circular trajectory which is curved between the magnets. It's straight of course.

Instead of digging a whole new tunnel with all new magnets why can't we just pour money into RND for better magnets and upgrade the ones in the LHC?

On the subject of Dark Matter, could the combined gravimetric forces of virtual particles momentarily entering our universe from the Quantum Vacuum (Quantum Foam) before exiting again explain the existence of so-called Dark Matter? February 5, 2017@10:37 AM.

@AlcyonEldara

7 жыл бұрын

On large scale, it should be pretty even. The vacuum energy is a candidate for DE, but there is "small" problem in the calculations (the order of magnitude is out by a factor of 10^120. Not a big deal, that's like comparing one particle to 10^40 observable universes).

Dimensions

I think we would be better off basing are theories of observations and trying to understand the process rather than just increasing the energy of the process.

@RedTriangle53

7 жыл бұрын

the problem is that when it comes to these experiments, the unknown is impossible to observe unless you can manage to produce enough energy to make it observable. For example to find the graviton we would have to produce enough energy to excite the gravitational field into producing a particle with enough energy to be detected. We can't find such a particle from looking at data that doesn't contain it. An example is photons. At one scale we have "virtual" photons, which are photons that carry the electromagnetic force, and when enough energy are put into these, they start interacting with matter in a different way, ie become detectable(or "visible" if you like). We can't see the virtual photons, but we can see the force they carry. Similarly we can't see the graviton, but we can observe gravity. To find the graviton we would have to create such a dense point of energy that the so-far hypothetical virtual gravitons could be excited into interacting with matter directly, or become unstable and give off the energy through radiation. If the energy of the current beams can't produce an effect like that, we won't find it before we develop a stronger beam. That being said, my understanding of it is only at a surface level. I'm sure there is more nuance to it than I said.

@galaxia4709

7 жыл бұрын

We're increasing the energy to base our theories on observations...

@frankschneider6156

7 жыл бұрын

To validate and verify theories you need observational data and that's exactly why these tools are being built. A collider is at least in principle nothing but a giant microscope. The problem is: the smaller the structures, the higher the frequency you need to see it and thus, the higher the energies required. At every collision point, there are massive detectors. These detectors are by far the most complex machines ever designed and built by mankind. And the data gathering IT structures behind them are more sophisticated than everything google has. Accelerators and colliders ARE the instruments used for observation. Without observation no validation/falsification of theories and thus no science.

@Dyslexic-Artist-Theory-on-Time

7 жыл бұрын

Your comment is very logical! However, I believe it is more logical to try to understand the process at lower temperatures. The process remains the same all we are doing is creating particles relative to our energy. This is not going to help us understand how photons and electrons interact forming wave particle duality. Because that process is relative to the atoms of the periodic table and unfolds at a lower energy level than particle accelerators that just break the atoms up!

@frankschneider6156

7 жыл бұрын

An artist theory on the physics of 'Time' as a physical process. Quantum Atom Theory Don't get me wrong, but you are mixing up a lot here: We are talking here about elementary particles and processes, not atoms. Wave particle dualism doesn't exist. It is just that all elementary objects of the standard model exhibit sometimes a behavior that can be explained by a wave, and sometimes they behave as if they would be particles. They are neither and certainly not sometimes a wave and sometimes a particle, they are something different, that we don't understand, but exhibits behavior that can mathematically described by applying either model at different times. And this is not restricted to interacting photons and electrons. It's valid for all Fermions and Bosons. These are mental models we make trying to understand reality, but they are not reality, they are man made models. If you want to look at the inner parts of an atom, you need to break them up to see what results and thus be able to make conclusion about the constituents of it, thus you need to apply enough energy to overcome the strong force holding the nucleons together. (an alternative approach is scattering, but let's ignore that for the moment). If you want to look at the inner parts of a nucleon, you need to break them up, thus you need enough energy to overcome the strong force holding the quarks together (at least in principle, as due to the color confinement there are some complications with this) and so on. So to go deeper into the structure of matter or to create particles with a higher mass as result, you need more energy, which you apply by accelerating (and thus heating up) the particles. This is exactly what accelerators and colliders do. Insert energy to break stuff up to see what's the result. The smaller the particles to break up, or the larger the particles that should result from these processes the more energy you need to apply. Doing this at low temperatures is impossible, as Temperature equals particle speed and also doesn't make sense, as something like a wave function collapse (assuming something like this would exist) is completely T independent. You can't "freeze it out". QM properties are also completely independent of the position of an element within the periodic table. We are talking elementary processes here and they are in no way bound to complex structures like atoms, they are universal. Further you shouldn't mix up particle physics with quantum mechanics. Of course they re they are related, but not identical. Different fields of research require different tools. In QM you usually don't require accelerators, but play around with exotic stuff like quantum eraser experiments. And if you let me make a final comment on your name / nick: you don't need quantum processes to explain time and its arrow. You just need entropy and the statistical Boltzmann interpretation of it. All elementary processes on a basic level are reversible (at least to my knowledge there is not a single exception, although this doesn't mean they have to be symmetrical). That they don't seem to be on a macroscopic level (we don't see a ball jumping onto a table all by itself while the environment gets colder outside of ghost movies), is what we interpret as irreversible flow of time into just one direction: from the past to the future (thus from a state of lower entropy to a state of higher entropy), which is just a statistical (thus mathematical) effect due to the large number of states and particles involved. No QM necessary here.

Is the world strongest magnets capable of reaching 32 Tesla?

Bonneville Salt Flats solar and wind power so then when you guys are done with it. the rest of us can use it

Nah, don't let China host it, I wouldn't even dare imagine what it'll be like

I'd say just go the whole hog! Build one around the whole planet, somehow avoiding tectonic shifts by using science.

@Nehmo

6 жыл бұрын

Ultimately, we must build one in space.

0:29 How do one build a container to handle such high temperatures?

@AlcyonEldara

7 жыл бұрын

Temperature is just a measure of the average motion of atoms. A small number of atoms moving at a very high speed has a high temperature, but it can be absorbed easily.

Nothing major has come out of LHC recent high energy run , in fact after higgs I haven't heard of anything spectacular new discovery yet. Will going to even higher energies yeild something?

@billdecat855

7 жыл бұрын

The potential to find "HIGGS" more energetic and massive cousins like all the other particles in the standard model as well as potential to discover Dark Matter.

I wish this would be built in the US.

@Nehmo

6 жыл бұрын

Why? Patriotism? The US makes and distributes weapons. Science is for those people with funny-sounding names.

@KuK137

4 жыл бұрын

One pretty much like this one was supposed to be built in USA, even tunnel was dug up and finished, but republithugs killed it in 90s...

5:50 Someone interested in solving this issue should watch these next kzread.info?search_query=material+science+lecture+playlist

Nolite id cogere, cape malleum majorem.

I'll be dead by then.

millenium long or century long? I mean with the pace of technological innovations of these years, who says that such an FCC could not be finished in 20 years from now? also: if you say that you just need to increase the power of the magnets...I mean if you quadruple or eightuple the power of existing magnets on the LHC the new collider is practically behind the corner without building an enormous ring...

Why can't we use electronic fields to bend the bean?

Dr. Lincoln, what makes you think those decisions are above your pay level? You have a PhD in particle physics! Why aren't you important enough to pitch in?

i prefer future circular colliders over past circular logic :D ETA: damn, for once i post the first comment and did not make a FIRST comment...... dang

(y)

Once 'The Boring Company' is down and drilling it might not be that expensive to build

LHC was the last one.

We need to take a break from making ever-larger accelerators and figure out how to make better accelerators -- not just a factor of 2 more efficient, but MUCH more efficient, thus greatly reducing the required cost and space.

not a very convincing argument "we don't know if we will find anything". Is that really the cutting edge science attitude?

why not make it 2-300 tev right away? bet people will wanna get that in 60years anyway when the realize that a 100 tev wasn't enough either..

@frankschneider6156

7 жыл бұрын

Nobody is gonna pay. Nobody is gonna pay for a 100TeV anyhow and certainly not for a 300 TeV.

@kohZeei

7 жыл бұрын

Frank Schneider true but we should

@loganpoppe3494

7 жыл бұрын

I've had the same thought. It won't hurt lower-energy experiments to have a bigger radius, it'll just cost more. But the cost now will be less than the cost way in the future and it'll give more capacity than we may ever need.

@frankschneider6156

7 жыл бұрын

Logan Poppe Yes I agree, that it would be a wise invest for mankind to make, but don't forget that you are just arbitrarily spending other people's money. In democracies the majority of the population decides (by their votes) what the money is spent on, and usually Joe Sixpack selects free beer, porn and baseball over scientific research. When you are a kid, it's smart to beg your parent not for the unaffordable toy that you possibly REALLY want, but for the toy that you want and that has a reasonable chance that they agree to buy it for you, as otherwise you'll possibly end up with none and a pair of socks. Finally building a bigger machine now won't necessarily be cheaper, to the contrary. If you calculate the inflation rate adjusted, discounted cashflow NPV, you'll see that bigger machines being built in the future with more advanced technology will be significantly cheaper to built in the future than now.

@BullShitThat

7 жыл бұрын

With that logic, you might as well be making an argument for 1000TeV

In a previous video you said 1 million times hotter than the sun. You some how lost 10 times the difference.

Welcome to ..name number and demotion..

*MONEY?* How much *MONEY?*

@frankschneider6156

7 жыл бұрын

A lot more than Mr. Gates has.

why don't build a gigantic collider in outer space ?

@anselmschueler

7 жыл бұрын

Space radiation interference. Stability loss. Cost of sending into space. More engineering needed. Network infrastructure. Travel cost.

@shikhanshu

7 жыл бұрын

Colliders will not benefit much from being in outer space. LIGO on the other hand, will immensely benefit from being in outer space!

@frankschneider6156

7 жыл бұрын

No local workforce that can be employed and the Martians refuse to work with us after that incident with Orson Wells some time ago.

@GottfriedLeibnizYT

7 жыл бұрын

LoL do you even know how much it costs to transport 1 Kg of any material to outer space?

Stop biting your nails Dr. Lincoln, they look disgusting.

spend billions of dollars just to "understand the universe..."