2:03 '' Take a picture where i look like i'm doing something''

@nish4218

7 жыл бұрын

lmao nice

@drditup

7 жыл бұрын

major part of a typical Phd is to look like you're doing something :P

@Robotech010

7 жыл бұрын

Every mathematician/physicist who has discovered a formula, take a cliché picture like that, just in case :)

@AmxCsifier

7 жыл бұрын

Lmao

@TheOfficialHerb

7 жыл бұрын

He has that same facial expression in every photo he appears in.

College math class throwback. Just nod and try to look smart, it'll be over soon.

@TheDutchCreeperTDC

7 жыл бұрын

lol

@b.sylphaen

7 жыл бұрын

I'm a writer, I suck at math. This may have been in chinese and it wouldnt have made a difference to me.

@HummelGeneral

7 жыл бұрын

Took physics in college, quit after second term D:

@stephenjefferson1891

7 жыл бұрын

I'm quite good at math and this still went over my head.

@anthonyw.2533

7 жыл бұрын

+amol katkar Hahahah relatable xDD

I love it how Physics has so many "We are 99% sure that the value is x, and 98% sure the value is y, the only problem is they are very different values, both calculated with high accuracy"

@oerlikon20mm29

2 жыл бұрын

I love how in physics you feel so good when you understand a subject, but then someone just says “hey by the way, you know electrons can just pop into existence for no reason?”

@shmerox7683

2 жыл бұрын

@@oerlikon20mm29 you shouldnt forget that they also pop out of existence. Its called quantum fluctuations. If you wanna look it up.

@kingdavid8657

2 жыл бұрын

It's almost as if the universes is so uniquely and accurately programmed that it would suggest that it was programmed by a being of unfathomable intelligence and it wasn't just so random accident or happenstance.

@oerlikon20mm29

2 жыл бұрын

@@kingdavid8657 no proof

@Adityarm.08

2 жыл бұрын

@@kingdavid8657 in case you're connecting it to religion: a being of unfathomable intelligence existing outside our spacetime would not even recognise humans as "important" or "alive" in the sense we do.

"not only is the universe stranger than we imagine, it's stranger than we can imagine."

@sagemeline

3 жыл бұрын

This is one of my favorite quotes ever.

@judgment5090

3 жыл бұрын

The universe is too weird for us to even begin scratching the surface of what reality truly is... until the next newton or einstein comes around anyways, then they make something that get us closer yet further away from the truth

@bigsmall246

3 жыл бұрын

@@judgment5090 we are always getting closer to the truth. We simply reach the next set of questions to be answered each time we get closer.

@itszain6317

3 жыл бұрын

@@bigsmall246 but still we aren't going to know everything about the universe.. some things will be left unanswered and the best we could do is assume and believe

@bigsmall246

3 жыл бұрын

@@itszain6317 why do we need to assume or believe anything that we do not know? Can't we just accept that we do not know it yet, which is why we investigate it in the first place?

To everyone saying this sounds weird, remember this 8-minute-long video is a summary of several thousand-page-long books.

@munendersingh5631

5 жыл бұрын

E

@baruchben-david4196

5 жыл бұрын

@Yusuf Jamal And some people complain about commenters.

@jadejajensen

5 жыл бұрын

...The people complaining in the comments who complain about comment complainers which are in turn a consequence of thousands of hours of complaints which are physical and metaphysical/hypothetical which were in turn a consequence of...

@full-timepog6844

5 жыл бұрын

@Xylok hundreds of thousands of years of calculations?!

@kristofferbrink2689

5 жыл бұрын

You’re right, but i’m still gonna make a little comeback. A picture say more than a thousand words and this is a video, sooo it says more than several thousand page books. This was just a fun comeback, please don’t get mad, because his comment is right

I aint no scientist but I have some time off work next week and I've decided to solve all these problems, so fingers crossed.

@anonimointernetual6603

4 жыл бұрын

He burnt his brain xD

@n0nenone

4 жыл бұрын

Are you alive ?

@sanchitkabra4839

4 жыл бұрын

do u even know what quantum physics is??

@n0nenone

4 жыл бұрын

@@sanchitkabra4839 If you think you know about it, you literally don't know about it. -_ Idk Idc

@suhshbekma

4 жыл бұрын

Are u there

Macroworld: Theory doesn't always match up because of friction Nanoworld: Ok, so friction is out of the game but now you gotta deal with virtual particles Thanks universe

@tomasmickus6254

3 жыл бұрын

There is hypothesis that everytime we come close to figuring out the universe it gets more complicated

@prismglider5922

3 жыл бұрын

@@tomasmickus6254 Did you comment this multiple times? You didn't even have a reason to comment it, it's a stupid hypothesis because there is no way to ever even attempt to disprove it.

@ujaanaich8216

3 жыл бұрын

Hi Saitama!

@anarchy8968

3 жыл бұрын

@johnnytheprick nah, even if there are other phenomena that distrupt the accuracy of our theories, they are still pretty accurate

@mohamedkashwani950

3 жыл бұрын

Idk how I just realized its virtual not vertical

"My electrons move funny because a ghost comes and shakes them...." Virtual particles in a nutshell...

@__jan

4 жыл бұрын

virtual particles are like an earthquake on-going everywhere in the universe. it's kind of confusing that they are called "virtual particles" at all, because they aren't really particles, they just behave like them.

@shubham-sc3jn

4 жыл бұрын

@@__jan isn't virtual kinda the opposite of real though?

@__jan

4 жыл бұрын

@@shubham-sc3jn i didnt say calling them virtual is wrong, the confusing part is calling them "particles"

@HarshKumar-sz8xk

4 жыл бұрын

@@__jan And that's why they are called "VIRTUAL particles". You do understand that prefix and suffix together make up the meaning of the name? For example, pseudo-science.

@LimbDee

4 жыл бұрын

Like when you live in virtue, you're not really living.

Hmmm, yes, I understand some of these words.

@B3nnub1rd

7 жыл бұрын

I think I understood some of the pictures too.

@MatthewKolmanovsky

7 жыл бұрын

I think bohr is that hairy pig, right?

@myherpesitch7763

7 жыл бұрын

hahaha.

@AvNotasian

7 жыл бұрын

I didn't realise this wasn't clear. What was the mystifying part? I may be able to help if you want.

@aka5

7 жыл бұрын

+NotAsian As you offer... My previous understanding was that virtual particles are those which exist only briefly for interactions such as EM repulsion/w boson in beta decay etc. Why are other examples such as the electron posotron pair in nuclei undetectable and why do they exist?

When I first saw this video I was still in highschool and I thought this is a fascinating effect I never really learn more about. Now I'm studying physics and in three days I'll have my first exam on quantum mechanics.

@jamessinka

2 жыл бұрын

Proud of you for following your intution

@khepri2420

Жыл бұрын

how are you doing now ? how was your exam ? I know I'm a year late but I'm too interested in this field and want to pursue it

@janandreslotsch7940

Жыл бұрын

@@khepri2420 lol, I actually passed it with a good grade.

@alonsoACR

Жыл бұрын

@@janandreslotsch7940 Are you gonna specialize in research? Of what field? I bet it must be exciting. If only I was younger I wish I could've been a researcher, like my father was.

6:36 I love how absurd the calculation of 10^112 ergs is. That’s about 5*10^35 (500 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000) times the estimated mass-energy equivalent of the universe.

@snakevenom4954

3 жыл бұрын

Just wondering, how much has the exponent changed in over two years?

@tesseract2144

3 жыл бұрын

@@snakevenom4954 None, and it won't change until we can figure out another theory that explains matter and energy and that is more precise than the QFT that we currently have. And the problem that we have is that we think that we need a quantum gravitationnal theory, and in order to test this kind of theory, we need to conduct experiments billions of billions times bigger than the LHC

@estring123

2 жыл бұрын

wow, this entire universe in a cm^3

@gekkkoincroe

2 жыл бұрын

I don't know what erg is why is it a constant and how did they calculate all the energy

2 жыл бұрын

@@gekkkoincroe Try asking Google or Wikipedia?

I had completely forgotten what was the title of the video at the end of 3 mins.

@karrr1573

3 жыл бұрын

ditto

omg, that vibration in a field graphic is by far one of the clearest and most mind blowing things I've seen in a long time... thanks guys.

Virtual particles? Psh. We need to build a wall around each nucleus.

@healthystrongmuslim

7 жыл бұрын

and make the virtual particles pay for it!

@chaosawaits

7 жыл бұрын

Make subatomic particles great again!

@fryncyaryorvjink2140

7 жыл бұрын

dark matter matters!

@NickGreyden

7 жыл бұрын

The problem is obviously with all the strange quarks and they shouldn't be allowed in our hadrons. They are all terrorists and aren't like us. They even are called strange!

@healthystrongmuslim

7 жыл бұрын

damn immigrants big banging our protons

Wait... I think I know a solution: Rather than there being separate fields for things like electrons and positrons, what if instead those were just bumps in opposite directions in the same field? Like an electron is a bump up, and a positron is a bump down? That would explain the excess energy from our calculations, and also explains why when they meet they annihilate. Like how when the crest of one wave meets the trough of another and they cancel out.

Great video! One minor critique I would have: I really feel like you should have brought up the Casimir effect in regards to virtual particles. I realize its a bit of a lengthy explanation to break down the experimental apparatus and whatnot, but I've always felt that it does the best job of helping get a real-world "feel" of virtual particles existing.

The universe is made of tiny colorful flavored balls. Combine them into new and interesting flavors! Amaze your friends and family!

@william41017

7 жыл бұрын

Are talking about quarks?

@MatBaconMC

7 жыл бұрын

How many different flavor combinations are there?

@martiddy

7 жыл бұрын

Sounds like a cereal commercial XD

@lkfwb

7 жыл бұрын

Thought it sounded more like a skittle (the colourful sweets) advert (commercial)

@boomboom-ny8kh

7 жыл бұрын

and short bus size fire balls that flys like Packman

Being super pedantic, I'll mention that what Sean said near 4:05 is not quite correct (but nobody really cares). 1) While it's true that there's exponential decay from higher powers of alpha, there's factorial growth from the fact that there's a LOT of more complicated diagrams. Since factorial growth overpowers exponential decay eventually, this sum is infinite. In simpler sums, mathematicians can use Borel summation to map the sum to a finite number. 2) Each of the diagrams with a loop in it is actually infinite. There's a dodgy process called renormalization that deals with these infinities in a systematic way. #2 is a fundamental part of QFT. Nobody ever talks about #1.

@gnanay8555

7 жыл бұрын

I care, so thanks ! :)

@Moejoe647

7 жыл бұрын

I also think that he failed to acknowledge that virtual particles aren't the entire explaination for the energy level shift. Special relativity and the spin-orbit interaction is also a fundamental part of the reason.

@SSGranor

7 жыл бұрын

He didn't bring up special relativity and the spin-orbit interaction because those are both already present in the Dirac equation.

@SSGranor

7 жыл бұрын

Strictly, renormalization isn't the process that deals with the infinities. In fact, renormalization is generally necessary even in cases where loop corrections are entirely finite. The necessity of renormalization basically amounts to the fact that the way interactions work in quantum field theory means that the parameters of the theory take on different values at different energy scales. Dealing with the infinities requires performing a regularization, which must be done before renormalization. (This is the step where you set a cut-off scale, introduce a Pauli-Villars term or evaluate everything in 4-\epsilon dimensions instead of 4.)

@TheRiekman

7 жыл бұрын

Sssssh!! People will start freaking out when they find out we divide infinity by infinity. If you ignore the problem it goes away. :P

5:46 I commend and applaud you for making this visualization, since i first understood fields, this was what i envisioned - thank you for making this graphical interpretation.

Now I know how my QA team feels when I give them the demo about the things I did in my current sprint.

I lost you at 10^-8 erg

@tonywells7512

7 жыл бұрын

An erg is equivalent to 10^-7 Joules, or one tenth of a millionth of a Joule.

@BloozBeast

7 жыл бұрын

+Tony Wells You must be fun at parties. Classic comment, but true.

@tonywells7512

7 жыл бұрын

BloozBeast I am awesome at parties after enough vodkas, don't worry.

@InorganicVegan

7 жыл бұрын

Yeah, the several different units are annoying. I'd like to see how Ergs make the math easier.

@InorganicVegan

7 жыл бұрын

tim turner Well, yeah. I figured that much. It's the same with Beer's law that uses centimeters instead of meters in the formula. I just wanted to see the specific physics of how it's used. I never saw an Erg before.

Man, its really hard to think of the universe as just overlays of fields. It feels and looks so physical and 3 dimensional.

@chromo1858

3 жыл бұрын

So does a dream.

@DBZHGWgamer

3 жыл бұрын

@@chromo1858 No, it really doesn't...

@chromo1858

3 жыл бұрын

@@DBZHGWgamer During the dream, it does seem real. When you leave the dream, it is only then you realize it was in your mind. If it helps, use the analogy of a very realistic computer simulation instead.

@savannahmavy7064

3 жыл бұрын

Well who knows, this is our point of view from a human being. A few hundred years ago (like ~200) us humans believed all matter were blocks, since how could matter be so complete and so perfect from our point of view and yet be so imperfect and riddled with holes if they were what we all know to be true today, that they are (more or less) spherical atoms?

@savannahmavy7064

3 жыл бұрын

You never know what biases we hold, some we know of, some we may never know of, at least in our lifetimes

It's amazing that year by year, you post things about more deeper fundamental concepts. This just keeps me excited. Thank you very much. Keep up the great work!

I think it's high time we dedicate an SI unit for energy instead of using ergs. That joule guy was pretty awesome, we could name it after him

@maulidonda

2 жыл бұрын

well an erg is just 10⁻⁷ joules so the same thing basically

@chrismanuel9768

2 жыл бұрын

We should really develop a quantum unit of measurement that represents the minimum amount of energy anything can have and use that when referencing quantum energy levels. I call it... quenergy.

@skylercole2314

2 жыл бұрын

@@chrismanuel9768 i love it

2 жыл бұрын

@@chrismanuel9768 There’s no minimum energy level for all systems.

@samuelmelcher333

2 жыл бұрын

@ There’s gotta be something, right? Like, it sounds crazy to say there’s a minimum amount of distance or time, but the Plank Length and Plank Time exist. Couldn’t there be some equivalent for energy?

One day they will find out its exactly 42 ergs.

@rocketappliantist4969

3 жыл бұрын

We gotta go to the mice for answers

@rocketappliantist4969

3 жыл бұрын

@@cdfzo read the Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy

@clodman84

3 жыл бұрын

@@rocketappliantist4969 thanks for the fish bro

@fractal_mind562

3 жыл бұрын

@@rocketappliantist4969 Is it a good book ? I've only ever seen the film

@rocketappliantist4969

3 жыл бұрын

BlaadeKing 1 never saw the movie, I read the book in high school and I really enjoyed reading it.

When you popped up at the end and said, "Hey..." my brain immediately filled that space with, "Vsauce, Michael here!"

Tip: stop video to part that you don't understand. Google all words you don't understand. Play video again when you are ready. This video is way longer! Wikipedia helps alot.

@juan125873a

5 жыл бұрын

step 1 take a course in modern physics.

@VoltisArt

5 жыл бұрын

Step two, take same course again. Modern physics is changing faster each year. If it's not your job to keep up with this stuff, it's really hard to get a firm grasp on much of what these people are discussing. Petrus' suggestion is a good way to get little bites of info at your own pace, (admittedly with some very likely distractions along the way,) and decide when you've had enough brain food to sate your appetite. Wikipedia and KZread are both good for learning shotgun style, absorbing small amounts of many subjects. Just try to avoid the free energy scam videos!

@eval_is_evil

5 жыл бұрын

Step 3 : realise that Wikipedia is a haven for misinterpretation of data.

@anandsuralkar2947

4 жыл бұрын

Cool

@anandsuralkar2947

4 жыл бұрын

@@juan125873a lol

Fun to see this video. A few years ago I met Derek at the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical physics and he told me that he was working on a video on virtual particles and we discussed it for some time. Didn't notice this video till now.

*wait. what.* consider sub

@leopard8152

7 жыл бұрын

:|

@albertb8999

7 жыл бұрын

what?

@thomasjansen9866

7 жыл бұрын

vat?

@tehjamerz

7 жыл бұрын

Erg

@derschmiddie

7 жыл бұрын

Dont you know? An Erg is a Dyn times a Centimeter.

I wish I could actually understand what was being said in the video

@joji683

7 жыл бұрын

i love his vlogs more.

@alexsh4517

7 жыл бұрын

vlogs?

@spaceface105

7 жыл бұрын

Alex SH Search 2veritasium

@alexsh4517

7 жыл бұрын

spaceface105 found it, thx tho...

@DenisMorissetteJFK

6 жыл бұрын

They will eventually get it right.

Derek, I just found your Veritasium videos very recently here in 2019. I (48 yrs old ) was an engineering student myself and so much of your life story is relatable. I'm so inspired by both the chances you took to make your Veritasium channel and your success in doing so. I really enjoy your videos, your hard work is very appreciated! PS did you use a friggin shadeball for your black hole in your black hole video? ROTFLMAO

This explained so much. Thank you. After watching the video about the quantum experiments with the slits i was thinking about a concept like this. The discrepancys probably will be found when zooming out, and better understanding.I would not be surprised we forgot something like the amount of energy that is being diverted to connect all the black holes to each other on a sub time level.

Well, early comment sections are so boring.

@tehjamerz

7 жыл бұрын

Actually its a storm drain

@mrnarason

7 жыл бұрын

Yep, I'm sorry for those who never took a physics class and even bother commenting on irrelevantly.

@erictaylor5462

7 жыл бұрын

It takes time for me to find a good video and make a good comment.

@zes3813

7 жыл бұрын

wrg

@GioGziro95

7 жыл бұрын

Reading the comments three months after. Still boring. Maybe I'll try putting my computer into a microwave with the comments section open to make it EXCITING!

I'm surprised to see no mention of the casimir effect in this video - isn't that rather good evidence for the existence rod virtual particles? Also, please correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Hawking radiation and the evaporation of black holes caused by virtual particles manifesting on the edge of their event horizons?

@creaturecreations2102

7 жыл бұрын

I believe you are correct my good human, but he did not bring it up. It is pretty heavy but interesting nonetheless

@garethdean6382

7 жыл бұрын

Hawking radiation is still theoretical. The Casimir effect is evidence for virtual particles (But there are other explanations.) but it doesn't let you measure the particles themselves. Like the energy levels it's indirect.

@Blox117

7 жыл бұрын

Yes, that is how the black holes lose mass.

@ElectricAir42

7 жыл бұрын

He said In the video that the virtual particles are electron/positron pairs but this is plain wrong I wrote a really long comment about it

@mrgarlic2639

7 жыл бұрын

This has to relate somehow to Kerbal Space Program...

"Science changes the way we think" ~ a very common line There is so much to learn about this universe Thanks to you for letting my curiosity still alive ❤

One of the best Veritasium videos to date! More like these, from the front lines please.

Wow! After just 3 weeks of Physical Chemistry (quantum physics and later on its applications to chemistry), I understood a surprising amount of this!

@boxhead171

7 жыл бұрын

urgh I hated phys chem in 1st year xD

@beatlesloversprims

7 жыл бұрын

What are you majoring in?

@BettyAlexandriaPride

7 жыл бұрын

I also want to know what you're majoring in.

@TakenTooSeriously

7 жыл бұрын

What is your majoring on?

@boxhead171

7 жыл бұрын

Chemical engineering

Legend says if you are early, Erg will reply.

@DWZBT

7 жыл бұрын

Psyche, it's only me

@suit1337

7 жыл бұрын

i'm dissapointed, nobody registered "Erg" as an account just to reply :)

@rudravarma4659

7 жыл бұрын

Ichigo...

@erg9719

7 жыл бұрын

Challenge accepted.

Man.. your videos always end with me want more. Always! I am like.. whaaat... we were just getting into things and its already over, even when it's a 20 minute video. I guess on the plus side, it means your content is super engaging and on the downside, I guess I am hoping you'd create deeper dive content as well that would go on for like two hours or something.

Thank you Dr Müller, for building and maintaining Veritasium. Its a brilliant concept, and your implementation has been genius. Bravo, and well dome, sir.

@karelsebek3724

7 жыл бұрын

Opps, done not dome. Autocorrect is my friend. ;-)

Looking down on these comments, I conclude the following: "Erg."

@jochenbach3541

3 жыл бұрын

Junge wieso bist du auch noch hier

@XZenon

3 жыл бұрын

@@jochenbach3541 Junge ficken sie sich Was antwortest du auf 4 Jahre alte Kommentare

@jochenbach3541

3 жыл бұрын

@@XZenon ja ich habs halt jetzt erst entdeckt du Kugelfisch

@danielbavisetti8731

3 жыл бұрын

@@jochenbach3541 gejr Kris jaemdi loenhat

@Joltzis

2 жыл бұрын

1 X 10^-7 joule fyi

QFT is so interesting, but I just can't wrap my head around these equations, at least currently...

@nunyabisnass1141

7 жыл бұрын

mastapima agreed. I am not a physicist. In fact I struggle with algebra. But based the information I have read, fields seem to be just are. Which by itself isn't an easy thing to grasp especially if you're stuck in a hard philosophical sense of causality....but I digress. So what I tell people instead, there are many things that we don't understand all of the way down to their most minute quantities, but accepting their utility because they work well with what we have, is good enough for now.

@volbla

7 жыл бұрын

I had a maths professor who told us that he had once asked his professor how to think about the wave-particle duality, because he couldn't make any intuitive sense of it. The professor had replied that you shouldn't try to think about it intuitively but rather think of it in terms of equations. I was going to say that this shows how limited our understanding is, but it's probably more like the difference between the micro and the macro world. There are so many intricate details to the universe which don't have a very noticable effect on a larger scale. Shit's pretty bonkers.

@PropheticShadeZ

7 жыл бұрын

this comment chain i find very interesting because i look at these equations in completely the opposite way, i find the equations irrelevant and the intuitive understanding much more important. the hardest part i have had to wrap my head around was the concept of higher dimensions other than our own and how they interact with us. if you want me to try and explain it in full reply and i would be happy to discuss it with anyone

@Cubinator73

7 жыл бұрын

Not yet.

@mradversary1537

7 жыл бұрын

Read Feynman.

This channel have done a very good job on explaining so many complicated scientific jargon into the simplest word it could be.

I'm glad there are people like you around making it easier for those like me to expand my ideas of the world I live in. I appreciated it. Please keep doing it!

Absolutely love this video in terms of style and content, much more like this please!

@JohnnyDoeDoeDoe

7 жыл бұрын

In addition, it would be nice to sometimes see an in-depth companion video!

I guess you could say they havent been DIRACtly observed

@JorgetePanete

6 жыл бұрын

Jason Lee KY haven't*

@sethcatalano6352

5 жыл бұрын

Lmfao god tier

@eval_is_evil

5 жыл бұрын

Well played ,thumbs up

@laposgatti3394

3 жыл бұрын

I gauss you're right

@Anonymous-df8it

2 жыл бұрын

@@laposgatti3394 gauss so!

I need more Sean Carroll. He's one of my favorite science orators by FAR.

This hurts my everything.

7 жыл бұрын

unacceptable!

@ridheesh4765

5 жыл бұрын

I know that feeling, I have my physics exam in a week, it's on special relativity and took me months to wrap my head around the stuff

@MigattenoBlakae

3 жыл бұрын

Ridheesh You should’ve traveled closer to the speed of light whenever you studied. Come on dude, real-world application is everything!

I just learnt all that orbital stuff at school last month. I feel smart.

@chrisv4496

7 жыл бұрын

Shame it doesn't apply anymore - it's all probability fields, not orbits.

@jessemastenbroek7343

7 жыл бұрын

Orbitals not orbits, it's different. An orbital is the probability field

@ashtray4754

7 жыл бұрын

Yeh, school tends to lie to us alot. I guess to make it simpler.

@ashtray4754

7 жыл бұрын

We just learnt the different energy level stuff. S,p,d,f.. orbitals... Ionisation energy.. I'm only 16 lol... I'm not quite the genius yet.

@Odin1465

7 жыл бұрын

and if you want to be really strict with the terminilogy an orbital isn't a probability field, but a 1-particle-wavefunction ^^. it's the probability field or more precise the "sphere-areafunction" ( sry for literal and probably bad translation ) -1 dimension ( because otherwise 4-D ) that we get portraied in these graphics as an orbital.

You didn't mention the Casimir effect which provides evidence for virtual particles.

@googleeatsdicks

7 жыл бұрын

I was thinking the same.

@adi331

7 жыл бұрын

Me 2

@ellinaras4566

7 жыл бұрын

i wasnt

@Jeyricho

7 жыл бұрын

*me, an intellectual*: **knowingly nods head** schrodinger's cat.

@Odin1465

7 жыл бұрын

yeah, but the casimir effect shows that there must be virtual particles and we all agree on that, but as he said you can't measure the individual virtual particle e.g. just like you do with the spherical charge distribution of an electron

Very good video! I loved the direction it took and the topics discussed!

"They are indispensable for calculation, obviously.. but you can never directly observe them." Kind of like the complex number "i" which has lots of applications in engineering calculations, but it's not a real number.

@JeffLearman

4 жыл бұрын

It's not a real number, but it really is a number!

@apifunctions1095

3 жыл бұрын

It's a real number. Just not termed as "Real" because we do not know it's value. More like a lateral number just because we do not possess the intelligence to comprehend it so we came up with a completely different dimension for measuring it.

@sankang9425

3 жыл бұрын

Imaginary numbers are real

@bigsmall246

3 жыл бұрын

Imaginary numbers are just a mathematical concept that happens to coincide well with many physics equations. They just represent vectors orthogonal to real numbers. That's the only reason we use them.

@lucast2212

3 жыл бұрын

@@bigsmall246 Just as natural numbers. They are just a mathematical concept that happens to coincide well with counting things.

Love the way the first 100 comments have nothing to do with the video

@pinkgoergefloyd8340

7 жыл бұрын

*all

@theRealRindberg

7 жыл бұрын

Like yours :P

@AntimonidTriniobu

7 жыл бұрын

thats because early people comment before they watch the video, if they didnt, someone else would beat them to it

@fishyeverything8530

7 жыл бұрын

Like mine

@UnordEntertainment

7 жыл бұрын

And yours. (Not mine cuz I'm past the first 100 comments ;¬) )

Keep up the mind boggling stuff! I like a video I have to watch several times before getting.

It's always good to say you don't know. Love it. Great video. Great explanation of what we don't know. Thanks.

I'm excited to (maybe be able to) see in the future what the corrected/updated diagrams that explain this look like

Sean Carroll=instant like.

@filipedias7284

5 жыл бұрын

I'll never forget that debate where he shredded Lane Craig...

"Quark," says the durck.

I quite liked your illustration of the various quantum fields (electron, top quark etc.). Do you maybe have a video on that, or do you plan on making one on that topic?

I discovered this channel few weeks ago....Absolutely love it...I mean really....I am watching all the episodes one by one....💜💜

Thank you for this information, I really really love to learn about physics, even though I am not that smart.

Wait! What?! 10^112 erg is 10^105 joules, right? It's not even possible to describe just how much energy this is! Where can I find more on this topic?

@somedude4122

7 жыл бұрын

FREE ENERGY FROM VACUUM. Now I'll have to fix my BS sensor again....

@NomadUrpagi

6 жыл бұрын

Go to the nearest physics professor

@Mernom

5 жыл бұрын

@@somedude4122 It's not. To extract energy, an energy gradient is requierd, and regardless of how much there actually is, the zero point energy is the absolute lowest energy point. You can't excract it without breaking the laws of thermodynamics, and if you can do that you don't need to bother with the zero point energy, as you can just extract it from anything and everything.

@somedude4122

5 жыл бұрын

@@Mernom OK... why are you telling me about that?

@eval_is_evil

5 жыл бұрын

@@somedude4122 it is relevant to what you said . He told you that free vacuum energy is not possible . You however made it look like the commenter or scientists in the video implied that it's possible . It was a straw man from your part.

Thank you so much for uploading this video. It is helping me get through the pandemic!

This is the reason I love this channel, I know I'm getting smarter and learning things that are important for the future, yet I can watch it for an hour straight, and still have to idea what's going on.

You think science is advanced? humankind has barely scratched the surface of science

@JBinero

7 жыл бұрын

Science is a method.

@Nor1ar

7 жыл бұрын

+Jakub Mik Exactly.

@Lorpark

7 жыл бұрын

+Jakub Mik we do know that our universe has a certain density, and that ordinary matter just makes up a 5 % of it... So where are the other matter or energy coming from?

@MicrosoftNestleTea

7 жыл бұрын

+Jeroen Bollen I think they meant the Science community,

@JBinero

7 жыл бұрын

MicrosoftNestleTea We scratched the surface of the community?

I did my MS in Physics. I was sad that my degree is of no use. Now I'm happy that I understood the video because I was taught all these in college! XD

@Sid_R

3 жыл бұрын

I hope you find a use in the future.

@bezahltersystemtroll5055

2 жыл бұрын

how could a master in physics be of no use? I thought this type of hard science was in demand ._. pls explain?

@FranktheDachshund

2 жыл бұрын

The insight and understanding you have of the physical world has got to be worth something to you.

@1Plebeian

2 жыл бұрын

@@FranktheDachshund It makes your weed highs really intense.

@whoami6608

Жыл бұрын

@@1Plebeian 😅

It's amazing how Professor Carroll can explain that like I explain algebra as a math teacher. He knows it well enough to teach it, incredible

My favourite scientific paradox, captured so nicely. Thankyou.

As much as I love physics, sometimes I think we are too deep to see the meaning of things. Like a picture make out of pixels if you look at one pixel to try to understand the meaning of the picture it will be impossible. Sometimes is better to step back to see the whole picture. I love Veritasium keep the great work.

@0xf7c8

2 жыл бұрын

No. We want to understand a pixel is just a byte stored somewhere, no what the picture represent. That's our everyday life

@alonsoACR

Жыл бұрын

This is where deduction and induction breaks down I guess. Learning the bits to understand the whole has become too unwieldy.

6:25 Isn't this just the very same question that is answered by the theory of, and the very definition of, layered dimensions and paralleled universes occupying the same "subjective space"? Especially if the virtual particles do always exist and are constant, only they faze/frequency shift in and out. Meaning, just because we see and perceive empty space, doesn't mean that there isn't something in that space on a parallel plane. And the equation might just balance out once the right number of layers of reality ( and the energy contained within each, and across them all) are accounted for. If some planes are larger or smaller than others, and relative energy flows are more or less intense. All we need to do is figure out which planes we would need to visit by emulating the faze/frequency shifting particles, in order to travel through, and then shift back into, our own universe and have "travelled a huge distance" in next to no time with very little fuel consumption. GET ON IT MATH WIZZ ;)

@supershmooperme

7 жыл бұрын

This is the first actually interesting youtube comment i've read in a while lol

@caveymoley

7 жыл бұрын

Elliot McGrath aww thanks :)

@garethdean6382

7 жыл бұрын

Aproblem is that if that's the case we expect virutal particles to 'clump'; the interactions between matter on various planes (ESPECIALLY if it's 'phasing in and out') will cause some volumes of space (Specifically those near matter) to attract and thus have far more virtual particles than others. But as far as we can tell virtual particles are constant, any volume of space has the same 'virtual composition' as any other. Phasin should also affect our matter, we should see 'real' particles vanishing for short periods, which would affect pretty much everything.

It is always a treat to listen to Sean Carroll talk.

I really enjoyed this video because sometimes I get discouraged with my dream of becoming a mathematician physicist computer scientist because I feel like everything has already been discovered before I got the chance to, but these kind of things remind me that there is still plenty stuff that nobody has figured out yet.

I came early Better wipe my keyboard now

@Robsdingo

7 жыл бұрын

Profile pic goes for it

@healthystrongmuslim

7 жыл бұрын

reported spam

@nish4218

7 жыл бұрын

i came so early better comment on this comment

@OJ-14

7 жыл бұрын

gachiGASM

@N3G4T3

7 жыл бұрын

The profile picture is what gave it away.

at first "oh I see,alright I got it" 2 minute later "wait what...😦"

This topic is quite amazing. It's great that science has reached up to this close to understand our life and universe but i think we'll never find the answer to this puzzle. Anyway great video!

Interesting that quantum mechanics and counting cards have something in common. Feynman diagrams show that more and more complex diagrams lead to diminishing returns in terms of prediction. It’s the same for more and more accurate card counting methods- the most complex systems only for e you a light edge over the simplest red seven count. Good stuff.

This is amazing! I've been thinking about this lately but I never got past high school so everything is a bit sketchy but I thought the universe was made of fields the exact same way they explained it, I just didn't have a fancy name for it x) Glad to know I was on a good line of thought ^^

2:28 What kind of microwave did they use? Can I do the experiment too with my own microwave?

@chrissa1896

7 жыл бұрын

1. Get an electron that is not too depressed, so you have no problems to excite it to the next energy level. 2. Put it into your microwave. 3. ????? 4. Profit.

@pol...

7 жыл бұрын

When he said microwave he didn't mean microwave as in a "machine that warms food" but as in "waves with a wavelength that is in the micrometer order of magnitude" :D

@AnimilesYT

7 жыл бұрын

Smalde Ohh. Well, who would've guessed :p

@TheStormweaker

7 жыл бұрын

Guess what wavelength is used by microwaves? :)

@TheStormweaker

7 жыл бұрын

You can do this experiment by putting a neon tube in your microwave, it's this exact phenomenon that will occur. But i don't know about safety though, it might explode so don't try

Amazing animations and explanation!!

thanks for you. it was amazing ep .pls can you explain weak hyper charge

So reality is just fields in space, and physical objects are just energetic disturbances in these fields?

@olfmombach260

7 жыл бұрын

That is what I understood; every particle is a wave/vibration in his field.

@hugofontes5708

7 жыл бұрын

macroscopic stuff → particles → perturbation wave thingis on fields so, yeah, stuff is actually thingies

@Ozmandius

7 жыл бұрын

now start rearranging the theory of relativity to put mass in front (M=eblahblahblah) .. and have some fun realizing either you know nothing. or the scientists don't.

@hugofontes5708

7 жыл бұрын

heretic30176 M=E/(c^2) I think I missed your point

@jasonmathias5343

7 жыл бұрын

heretic30176 Wouldn't it mean the same thing? Since E=M and M=E

Are the excitations in the fields (electron fields etc), these "particles", somehow connected to the wave functions, described by Schroedinger equation?Is that what the wave function actually describes, excitations in quantum fields? Or are these two phenomena completely different?

@Zaytoven21

7 жыл бұрын

no they are completely different.i can explain further if you want.

@Lorpark

7 жыл бұрын

+Romero mukkolath i'm not him but i'd like a further explanation

@Bleagle

7 жыл бұрын

excellent question, but I have no idea.. it seems probable. another thing comes to my mind: de Broglie wavelength of matter and string theory, where every particle is just a vibrating string with specific frequency. (How) are all these connected?

@Zaytoven21

7 жыл бұрын

Lorpark​ see Schrödinger's wave equations actually describes the orbitals(basically a orbitals are those area which have the highest probability of finding a electron in the nucleus) the ORBITS bohr described are actually wrong because it doesn't satisfy Heisenberg's uncertainty principle(which states that you can't predict the velocity and the position of a electron altogether) Schrödinger's wave equation basically describes wave motion of electrons.

@hauslerful

7 жыл бұрын

Contrary to what Romero says, they are strongly connected, indeed. Think of the schrödinger equation as a much more simplified version of the dynamics of the electron field for a very special case of an excitation. Schrödingers equation doesn't allow electrons to be created or destroyed, nor do they interact with other particle fields. It's what you get when you take a special kind of excitation in the electron field (called a fock state) and observe how it "behaves" when there's no significant interaction otherwise. You can simplify a lot of things and will be able to recover the schrödinger equation. Actually it's even more complex than that. The electron you would describe with schrödingers equation is not even a solitary excitation of the electron field, but rather a complicated composition of excitations of the electron field, the higgs field and the electron neutrino field. They interact with each other and form an "effective object" we can observe as an massive electron.

This video is amazing. Really exciting observation

For the first time I understand the Lamb Shift. Awesome channel!

3:44 I understood the part where he said "which is a small number." X(

which hyper-visor are these virtual particles running on?

@rogerstorrs8679

6 жыл бұрын

A very small one ;)

@harpreetsinghmann

6 жыл бұрын

They arise from uncertainty principle of time with energy: (ΔT) (ΔE) ≥ ℏ/2, Small amount of energy/mass can come into existence for a really really small amount of time.

@spitfire184

5 жыл бұрын

VM Ware; look out for them also in Windows Server 2050.

Erg! Yes, this is quite right...Understanding all this much better now! Love them Feynman diagrams.

keep posting videos like this and as always keep inspiring

Hi! Is 2s level more energetic than the 2p level? I thought it was the oposite...

@Schmidt975

7 жыл бұрын

Yes, they made an error there: in hydrogen the 2s(1/2) should be lower in energy than the 2p(1/2)

@acutepotato6792

4 жыл бұрын

@@Schmidt975 but wait... hydrogen doesn't have a 2s orbital, it's in the first period. It certainly doesn't have a p orbital either o_o

@Schmidt975

4 жыл бұрын

@@acutepotato6792 One could indeed think so. However, reality is slightly more complicated. The periodic table indeed orders elements by the orbitals that would be occupied in the ground state of the corresponding atoms (that is: cooled down to absolute 0 Kelvin). However, most elements also possess many unoccupied orbitals that you can excite the electrons into, when you heat them up. In the example of Hydrogen, you have a singly occupied 1s orbital, but unoccpied 2s, 2p, 3s, 3p, 4s, 3d, 4p ... orbitals in the ground state. At a finite temperature (for example room temperature) you'll even occasionally find electrons occpying these orbitals (though at such low temperatures rather rarely). A transition from a high excited state to a lower one (or the ground state) releases energy (light), while excitation into excited states requires energy. As such: the excited states are responsible for the spectra of the elements. Atomic hydrogen, for example, has very beautitful spectral lines from transitions into the 2s and 2p orbitals from higher orbitals, called the Balmer series.

@acutepotato6792

4 жыл бұрын

@@Schmidt975 that makes alot of sense. I didn't know that, thanks for the explanation :)

ever think virtual particles arent popping in and out of existense. maybe they are just the points of wave interferences from waves in a volume of space?

@bigsmall246

3 жыл бұрын

The heisenberg uncertainty principle has 2 versions: momentum/position and time/energy. If you measure your momentum perfectly, your position uncertainty becomes large. Similarly, virtual particles (E=mc^2) can pop into existence (consuming seemingly 0 energy) and hang around for a very short amount of time.

@savageraccoon787

2 жыл бұрын

Maybe, and then you could think of them like ripples on the same surface area but on opposite sides which pop into existence and then the ripples cancel each other out.

I honestly think these guys don't get enough attention , all their videos are awesome

Great job on becoming a correspondent on Bill Nye' s show. You did an awesome job.

Damnit Derek! I'm going to have to watch this at least twice. Ok, so you have a certain probability that a particle will exists some where. Is that probability different from the field? Are they different calculations? Does the field define the probability of the particles existences?

@garethdean6382

7 жыл бұрын

The shape of the wave in the field gives you the probability of a particle 'existing' at any certain point.

As a chem major, I understood 99% of this. Great video!

@regular-joe

5 жыл бұрын

I would love it if you'd be willing to describe that a bit? (It's not what I'd have expected to hear?)

Your videos are absurdly good!

I wasn't expecting this video to be like this when I thought to watch it. It was awesome

Ahhh Now I don't get it

When you don't go to uni because you're sick and can't think. But you accidentally watch a video about your last physics topic

I love this stuff! I'm so excited!

Always interesting, thanks.