Fantastically easy to follow. This man is an absolute legend.

@helpmefortheloveofshrek6623

2 жыл бұрын

I’m using him to learn about quantum mechanics because he’s somehow able to pack just enough info and still make sense.

@GreenfieldPortfolioResearch

Жыл бұрын

i absolutely agree.

I've watched quite a few videos on this subject and Arvin has by far done the best job in explaining it. Well done Arvin, first class channel

The craziest thing about fine structure constant is that Pauli (who was absolutely posessed by this number), when he was sick and dying, was taken (without neither him, nor doctors realizing it) to the hospital's room no. 137.

@KeithKessler

2 жыл бұрын

That's amusing. Do you have a source for that?

@LaplacianFourier

2 жыл бұрын

Coincidence is frequently mistaken for miracles

@-1-alex-1-

2 жыл бұрын

@@KeithKessler I think the episode is described in the book "137: Jung, Pauli and the Pursuit of a Scientific Obsession" by Arthur Miller. But it is also mentioned in the Wikipedia article ("Wolfgang Pauli") at the end of "Early years..."

@KeithKessler

2 жыл бұрын

@@-1-alex-1- Thanx

@abelis644

2 жыл бұрын

@@LaplacianFourier Are there ever true coincidences? The word Kabbalah, the ancient Jewish school of mysticism that is supposed to answer ALL questions about the Universe, has a Gematria (numerical value) of... 137. 😶🤷‍♂️

“If you can’t explain something to a first-year student, then you haven’t really understood.” - Richard Feynman Now that's what you are doing !!! The way you explain each of your video makes any average person understand it !!! You are a good teacher and content creator !!!

@dcode1000

2 жыл бұрын

I thought it was”if you can’t explain it to a kid” 😂😂 but I get the just

@hakiza-technologyltd.8198

Жыл бұрын

Dark matter /energy paradox SOLVED m.kzread.info/dash/bejne/jIWCubiKk5jZfqw.html

@vhawk1951kl

Жыл бұрын

What experience have you of "the average person"? The average person can only possibly be imaginary can it not?

@vhawk1951kl

Жыл бұрын

Ithink Feynman understood perfectly well that all that atomectron mumbo jumbo was pure religion cum imagination-it's the old invisible aeroplanes scam, 54 32 1 1 ..... I must merely wait for my Voila!

@vhawk1951kl

Жыл бұрын

and what exactly do you get from these" explanations? Ah yes: "teachers says" that every time a bell rings an angel gets its wings, because...? Because " teacher says" so it must be so. ace " explanation" that.

This is one of the criminally underrated channel on KZread. You're an amazing educator, sir.❤️

@medexamtoolsdotcom

2 жыл бұрын

Criminally underrated? He has more than half a million subscribers. I have seen youtube channels that produced great content and had like 500 subscribers.

@tomasneel1980

2 жыл бұрын

What’s criminal is how theorists turn a blind eye to thermodynamics and entropy. Every theorists admits, to continue on with theory’s, they have to ignore it.

@djuk6573

Жыл бұрын

Rubbish, he's overrated if anything, he had a ridiculously weak grasp of the subject and is awful at trying to explain. Dunning kruger in person.

@WreckedRectum

Жыл бұрын

@@djuk6573 How delightfully ironic it is when that comment comes from someone whose only video on their channel is a link to a very old climate change denier “documentary”. 😂

@djuk6573

Жыл бұрын

@@WreckedRectum tell me one thing that's wrong in that documentary.

I've been waiting for a more comprehensive coverage of this topic -- and you delivered as usual.

You didn't mention Arthur Eddington who came up with a theory why the denominator of the fine structure constant must be 136. When better experiments showed it to be 137, he came up with another theory. This earned him the nickname of Arthur Adding-one. Recently, Sir Michael Atiyah revived Eddington's work from its well-deserved oblivion, embellished by yet another theory to explain the decimal places. I tried to read Sir Michael's paper: it's very well written, but I'm afraid it doesn't make much sense. He was nearly 90 and would die a few months later.

@ArvinAsh

2 жыл бұрын

Yes, it's an amusing story. I didn't think it was relevant to the main understanding of the constant.

Of all my years of watching physics lectures and books, this is the first i heard of this. Alvin keep up the good work on illuminating these missing subjects. Thanks

@Starcraft2Sonic

2 жыл бұрын

Yes :) His name is Arvin btw - not Alvin.

@fdsfds7339

2 жыл бұрын

Same, this was big.

@fdsfds7339

2 жыл бұрын

@@Starcraft2Sonic I think it autocorrected to Alvin from Arvin

@princeofcupspoc9073

2 жыл бұрын

That goes to show that the resources you are used to are not teaching you anything. I keep saying it. If you CANNOT DO THE MATH, you CANNOT UNDERSTAND even the basic concepts of physics.

@ivornworrell

2 жыл бұрын

God invented Mathematics, man merely discovered that which God ALREADY invented, so @0:14 why was Pauli going to seek answers from the devil when both he AND the devil are just created beings? Shouldn't Pauli be seeking wisdom from God instead, Who is All Wise? Salaam.

The graphics and especially the meticulous accuracy in key details is astonishing. I can’t imagine the amount of time and effort invested in these masterpieces.

Very cool video. I'm learning more and more! Thank you for taking the time to share!

The highlight of my Sunday! Thanks for being good at what you do, Arvin Ash team! 👍🏼

@jtaustinmusic

2 жыл бұрын

You must be a Chiefs fan...

I watch a number of physics and astrophysics channels, and I have to say, you really do what you claim. Your explanation of concepts is always a perfect balance between full proper explanation and a little random fun... and your videos have that same vibe, like you clearly know what you're talking about, but I don't feel like there's a test coming up, which is the vibe of some other popular physics channels. This is really good stuff, glad I found you.

@ArvinAsh

2 жыл бұрын

Thanks! That's exactly what I'm trying to do - explain the understandable details, but also indulge myself and the audience in the mysticism of science, while trying to point out how it is usually not so mystical.

this is an amazing video. I have watched 5 times and will look for the QED video next. I cant believe such high quality, insightful videos are found here

as usual , a great video, Arvin....clear, concise explanation, thank you

For real, i want this channel to be more popular! It is incredible how you explain everything about physics!!! Thank you very much!!

I had never heard or read about the fine structure constant. Many thanks for the illuminating talk. Learnt something new today.

My new favorite physics KZread channel. No one else is talking about any of these obscure yet super interesting topics. Thank you sir!

Love all your videos ! I would love to hear more about Casimir effect and one on basis of quantum computers Love your delivery style Thank you

Excellent video production and information. Presentation is outstanding. Thank you!

Still one of the best! Another great video! The Feynman aspect of his fascination of 1/137 has intrigued me a while now.

Learnt something new for today. Now I will never forget 1/137 as magical number.

Never to miss Arvin's explanation. Always a lot to learn! Keep going Arvin - you're helping the humanity! Besti wishes!

@seanriopel3132

Жыл бұрын

Whenever I want to fully comprehend a scientific concept, this is one of my go-to resources. Certain people have a natural ability to breakdown a complex subject into easy to comprehend segments allowing the most people to understand. Sciclicenglish, veritasium, fermilab, are done of the others.

For those interested, there is a very well done, and also not well known movie that involves the FSC, available on KZread Movies. It's entitled "UFO", starring Alex Sharp, David Strathairn, and Gillian Anderson. Now before you roll your eyes and giggle, the film takes a very plausible look at the possibility of the FSC being employed as a measure for intelligence, and the basis of a universally common mathmatical tool for communication. It's a good watch and it's well written and produced.

Wonderful video!! Hard to image it being done better!!

Incredibly put together and explained

Your videos are always so interesting!

That was so easy to understand the way you explained it, Arvin.

There is always something new to learn from this channel ❤️

Awesome explanation as usual. I have theory that in order for Arvin to produce such CONSTANTLY BRILLIANT videos he requires his brain to be at a constant temperature and that's why he wears that great looking hat! Always learning from you Arvin.

Best physics discussions online! Thank you for putting these videos out.

Love your stuff Arvin, thanks again :)

@ArvinAsh

Жыл бұрын

Glad you like them!

Arvin your brilliant ad in reference to sommerfeld was smooth.

Thanks Arvin!! I ALWAYS get super excited when you tease another new video....& Christmas comes early when you put up on KZread!!! Thanks so much, Sir!! After thinking about it, I ask "What is the total pie" If Alpha is just 1 out of 137 slices of this "pie" ....Then what IS the pie?? What is the 137 ?? Is the 137 the "super force" that was briefly before it split into the 4 fundamental forces in nature??? I think if we can know what the 137 represents, then we can maybe put The Alpha Constant into some sort of useful context.

@ArvinAsh

2 жыл бұрын

Thanks so much! Glad you enjoy them.

Awesome, video yet again. I've seen that number pop up in some fun circle geometry stuff I've played around with. Not surprised tho as PI seems to relate to it as per those equations you showed.

@DKFX1

2 жыл бұрын

I very much doubt you've seen this exact value show up in circle geometry. If you are sure then I'd love to see proof:) As far as I know there's no known connection to any purely geometric ratios.

@engizmo

2 жыл бұрын

@@DKFX1 yeah, would love someone to look over it. Please share your email and I'll reach out.

@DKFX1

2 жыл бұрын

@@engizmo tried sending my mail, but YT auto-deleted. :/

@engizmo

2 жыл бұрын

@@DKFX1 😢

Beautiful video 🙌🏿 Thank you Arvin 🙏🏿

Thank you. I popped over from Answers with Joe and have found another cool channel to peruse.

Thanks for the explanation. I applaud the fact that you I said “I don’t know.” One of the problems in physics today is that not enough scientists say that phrase. I think it opens the path for others to look in that direction.

@abelis644

2 жыл бұрын

True, Scientists, those of integrity, ALWAYS say I don't know.

@BritishBeachcomber

2 жыл бұрын

Research scientists say "I don't know" every day. That's where great ideas come from.

@travisprugh6347

2 жыл бұрын

I am none of those and i know that i dont know.

@timterrell8678

Жыл бұрын

That’s not how science works. In physics, scientists don’t just say they know and block others paths from researching it. The scientific method is followed. Papers are published and peer reviewed. The results are duplicated and verified.

@johndef5075

Жыл бұрын

Smart people aren't afraid to say they dont know.

Excellent video, as always. Very interesting, informative and worthwhile video. Many thanks for the links to the articles, including Arnold Sommerfeld's original article.

Explicação clara, didática e muito bem ilustrada. Genial, muito favorável à compreensão. Vídeo indispensável...

Top tier content, thanks Arvin.

I like watching videos like this as they remind me that basically I know pretty much nothing but at the same time show me that I'm not alone in that. This one has sent my limited grey matter spiralling off in all sorts of directions wondering about what other constants are out there and what sort of things are they used in. I think I'm going to have some fun with this whole concept 😊

@vhawk1951kl

Жыл бұрын

How do you define "know"? *Can*you define or set out what you seek to convey when you use the word" know"? What would be a clear example of " know" or knowing? Is there any material difference between" know" or " knowing" and believe/believing or assume/ assuming or infer/inferring and wherein lies that difference? For example do you "know"that the thing on the end of your left leg is your left foot, and if so *How* do you know that *If*you do?

@phaedrussmith1949

Жыл бұрын

If potential knowledge is infinite, then simple math proves that at any given moment, no matter how much we know, we really know nothing.

Well I didn't know it varied with temperature. Also, my cat Bullet intently watched this whole video as I watched it. I don't think he understood your words, but your animations were varied and dynamic enough to keep him interested the whole time.

Great job 👏🏻, please make videos on Anthropic principle to understand better on this topic thanks

what a well done work. what a great guy you are. so much thank you. really thank you. keep it up!!!

Great presentation as always Arvin. The graphics and the narration is superb. If entropy in the universe is increasing, then the universe is cooling down, do we know the rate of cooling ? What equation is employed to calculate this ? Are all the events that are happening in the macro state in the universe probabilistic or deterministic ? Any method to ascertain this ? You say alpha is changing over time, do we know the rate of change ? At what stage of alpha will the Big Crunch happen ?

@vhawk1951kl

Жыл бұрын

Apart from imaginary, what is "the universe"? Since you have no idea what "the universe" is or might be, how could you possibly discover whether or not it is what you call "cooling down"? Can that which is imaginary "cool down"?

When the coder was scripting their simulation engine, they chose 137 'cause it gave smooth results with the GPU when simulating our universe.

@thedeemon

2 жыл бұрын

127 is so much nicer though (it's 1111111 in binary)

@javiej

2 жыл бұрын

that's why it changed to 127 at the big bang, it was too hot and the coder did some undervolting to reduce temperature

@dananorth895

Жыл бұрын

Maybe the stepper motors had fractal gearing?

Great job explaining such an esoteric idea.

Wonderful explanation of a mind-boggling number, thank you Sir.

This man should get an award for being the best teacher

Thanks for mentioning Arnold Sommerfeld, an obvious hole in my education!

@l.h.308

Жыл бұрын

If I remember correctly the very young Werner Heisenberg was a student of Sommerfeld or at least had some contact with him.

Just wow. What a great job of bringing such an elusive thing into the almost graspable.

Cómo siempre Arvin, felicitaciones por tu simpleza y calidad, que tengas un buen domingo y gracias por el aporte. Saludos

@joesteadman343

2 жыл бұрын

Igualmente, water brother.

@ArvinAsh

2 жыл бұрын

Obrigado meu amigo

Hi Arvin! Please make a video about theories that say what can be on scales smaller than the Planck length

@shadowoffire4307

2 жыл бұрын

You support Russia OE ukrain?

@user-Tenebrea

2 жыл бұрын

@@shadowoffire4307 I live in Russia

Imagine what Arnold Sommerfeld could have accomplished with Brilliant 😂

@hexagonist23

2 жыл бұрын

Pay lots of money to learn some information that is easily available free everywhere?

I've not learn so much in one shot for a long time, thx!

Very good video Arvin

Hi Arvin, can you please do a video on how magically einstien cameup or derived formula E=MC2 and why variables in most of the formulas are squared ? And how scientists comes up with constants like planks constant or speed of light it self?

@SACHIN-yw4hd

2 жыл бұрын

I was thinking about this.😯

@kshitijkumar5629

2 жыл бұрын

It is not that every variables or most variables are squared. For this we need to understand maths especially calculus, trigonometry, algebra. If you are comfortable, you can start with reading simple special relativity concepts like time dilation, length contraction, equivalence principle. Lots of good books exist on modern physics, from which you can take reference. Deriving E=mc² could be hard comparatively to other concepts like time dilation or length contraction , as it's calculus heavy, so you might need to be very comfortable with calculus. Now it can be considered as coincidence or something with no inherent explanation as to why many variables are squared. In 2d coordinate geometry, its very evident due to the formula we write for distances. Regards.

@onebronx

Жыл бұрын

Most squared variables come either from integration of a linear relation (mv --> mv²/2), or just from spreading some constant value over a surface area (most inverse square laws, like a force of gravity or EM force).

This and "the golden ratio" are the signatures of god

It was the best explanation on this excellent subject.

Terrific style plus depth of knowledge gives us the unique Arvin Ashe! Just wow and thanks Arvin! We’ll done son!

@ArvinAsh

2 жыл бұрын

Awesome, thank you!

Please don't stop making videos on this KZread channel. Nice 👍👍

@ArvinAsh

2 жыл бұрын

Thank you. But all good things come to an end. I probably will not be making these videos too much longer. I'm spent. But people like you who appreciate these videos keep me going.

@prajwalkowndinya6601

2 жыл бұрын

@@ArvinAsh wow you're a great person. I can totally understand what you're trying to say, so it's ok. Just wanted to say big fan. Love from India 🇮🇳

does that mean, that the fine structure constant can have different values depending on the temperature/energy of the locality (like the core of stars; at collision points etc)? And "if" so, how does it affect the particles/fusion reactions? Or would it be irrelevant when only plasma is involved? Arvin and Matt are the only two ppl that always leave me with more questions after gettimg an answer - LOVE it!

@ArvinAsh

2 жыл бұрын

The different values only apply at the temperatures which were present at close to the big bang. The core of stars is much cooler than that. At these temperatures, the constant does not vary enough to make a big difference.

@medexamtoolsdotcom

2 жыл бұрын

He said it only went from 1/137 to 1/127 when the temperature got up to a quadrillion degrees. At even a billion degrees, and that's about as hot as any star can be, it would be a million times closer to 1/137 than 1/127 is, in other words still very close to 1/137.

@marcellorenzz9525

2 жыл бұрын

@@medexamtoolsdotcom sure, close to "normal", but since it´s so inportant that it has exactly the value it has - who knows what even the slightest difference would have on fundamentally weird things like quantum objects^^

Excellent video sir, i could understand this as small level.

Very nicely done video!

Glad to see so many people liking this wonderful subject. Thanks to Arvin Sir.

i watched your video on fields and that was the day it became clear to me what fields actually are. but after watching your video, i found myself in a new problem. before that i believed that the universe is discrete and after knowing about fields i now think that universe is continouse, please help me sort this out in some future video. thank you. you are the best in my list.

@generaltheory

2 жыл бұрын

The universe is pretty big and cardinalities are also. Y'know, N, Q, R, R2...

@BlackHole-qw9qg

2 жыл бұрын

Universe can be discontinuous or continuous depending on the true nature of space time (see Loop Quantum Gravity for example). But it has nothing to do with the other quantum fields because they all are embedded in our (supposedly continuous) spacetime.

@DFPercush

2 жыл бұрын

Wave functions are continuous. Interactions are discrete. The continuous wave function tells you the probability that a certain discrete event will happen. Often times, in the macro world, there are so many interactions that we can practically think of things as continuous, like radio waves. They're still just a bunch of photons, but they involve billions of times more photons than visible light. We just can't practically isolate a single radio photon. So it makes sense to use a continuous field model when designing antennas. All models are approximations. You use the one that answers the question you need to ask. Newton's laws will get you to Mars, even though they are not the complete reality.

Thanks a lot for this great video

Thank you for great great great great explanation!

Marvellous stuff and way beyond my IQ level but I still find your channel exhilarating.

You mentioned alpha's relationship to the speed of the electron being 1/137 of c. Does this indicate that alpha determines the electron's speed or is it merely a coincidence that the electron's speed divided by c is a value that is close to that of alpha? Do other particles with mass have a similar speed or is it just the electron?

@ArvinAsh

2 жыл бұрын

Ratio of electron speed and speed of light is a way to think of the meaning of alpha. It is not a coincidence, it is how it was derived.

@BloobleBonker

2 жыл бұрын

Would it also apply to a muon orbiting a proton?

@Lukionest

2 жыл бұрын

@@ArvinAshThank you for the response. Since electrons have mass and light does not, does that indicate a relationship between alpha and the Higg's field, in terms of the Higg's strength or some other aspect of Higgs?

@thedeemon

2 жыл бұрын

@@BloobleBonker Muon is much heavier, it should orbit at a different speed. (of course this whole talk of electron's and muon's speed in an atom isn't very meaningful in quantum mechanics, at least this shouldn't be taken too literally)

@thedeemon

2 жыл бұрын

@@Lukionest Alpha is all about coupling constant between the photon field and electrically charged particles. It's not related to Higgs in any way. With Higgs field there is a similar coupling constant, it gives us particles' mass.

Great video, thanks a lot!!!! greeteings from Mexico

Fantastic video Sir.

Another great video. One day we may have a great answer as to why the constants are the way they are, and these inquisitions and summaries help get us there :) Question: I'd love to know why we don't think the center of a black hole is just a quark gluon plasma, where quarks can't overlap and some can or something, how do we now it is a point singularity? Question2: Why would someone think there is a black hole emptying out into a white hole, when the mass of the black hole is not being drained? I would think we'd have to see black holes very quickly evaporate if there was an empty'ing out in its white hole counterpart.

@rael_gc

2 жыл бұрын

In science, usually with great answers, we got more great questions. This is why science is so fascinating!

@PETERJOHN101

2 жыл бұрын

The truth is that science only answers how, not why. The pursuit of science is in reality part of a religious paradigm, one whose pursuit of physical effects can never reveal _why._ How and why are very different things.

@rael_gc

2 жыл бұрын

@@PETERJOHN101 Sorry, science answers a lot of whys. I think you're messing the subjects here, coming to a science channel to try to discuss religion. If you have a religion (or not), and which one, is totally a different subject.

@ivornworrell

2 жыл бұрын

God invented Mathematics, man merely discovered that which God ALREADY invented, so @0:14 why was Pauli going to seek answers from the devil when both he AND the devil are just created beings? Shouldn't Pauli be seeking wisdom from God instead, Who is All Wise? Salaam.

@Andromedon777

2 жыл бұрын

@@ivornworrell Don't read too deep into Paul's quote. He was being sarcastic

Thanks for another great video Wish you happy new year 🎊🎁 Is there possibility that other universe exist with diff value of Alpha and other constants with generate whole different physics law and property ? According to my knowledge of they existed we cannot communicate with them is there any way to create them in lab or contact them

@pansan4967

2 жыл бұрын

It could be, but as you said, we could not communicate with these other universes. So it doesen't really matter. You can kinda make up your own universe with its own laws of physics in your head. But your mind is limited with the boudaries of our universe, so have fun.

@ivornworrell

2 жыл бұрын

God invented Mathematics, man merely discovered that which God ALREADY invented, so @0:14 why was Pauli going to seek answers from the devil when both he AND the devil are just created beings? Shouldn't Pauli be seeking wisdom from God instead, Who is All Wise? Salaam.

@pansan4967

2 жыл бұрын

@@ivornworrell This does not explain anything. Humans always put god into the place where we can't explain a phenomena, but we always push forward and find ways to explain even the complexed things. First it was God who created humans, now we know better, first it was God that makes the sun hot and glow, now we know better. We put god as an explanation to why the moon orbits the earth, now we know better. Putting god as a solution to a problem makes yourself ignorant to the problem itself. Do not underestimate research done by humans. Sure, god could have done the big bang. What gives, because it is a time where we can't find any answers yet. Maybe in a few hundred years we have a solution to that problem and the existince of god shifted again as history and science pushes forward. God is just a placeholder for things we don't understand yet.

THANK YOU DR. ARVIN ASH...!!!

I don't think I've ever been this freakishly curious about one of Arvin's explanations before the intro even started

Arvin, I think the real magic number is actually "13", which represents the number of spheres of the same size that can occupy any given volume perfectly with all of them touching the center sphere packed as tightly as possible - this is illustrated in the ancient drawings of the "Flower of Life".

@henrytjernlund

2 жыл бұрын

I think that sphere packing depends on the number of dimensions you are working in. There are videos that are based on abstract algebra on hyper complex numbers. In these you it seems that divisional algebras (plus, minus, multiply, and divide) work only in 1, 2, 4, and 8 dimensions. Look up Divisional Algebras and the Standard Model.

@michaelbartlett6864

2 жыл бұрын

@@henrytjernlund I'm talking about the three spatial dimensions that make up our perceived reality at any given point in time.

This is another great presentation. Gosh, our knowledge of the Universe has changed so much since my High Scool days in 1966. Expanding Universe is Expanding Minds. Thanks Arvin.

@ArvinAsh

2 жыл бұрын

Glad you enjoyed it!

Ur explanation is SUPERB.. a template for others

This is by far one of the best videos I've seen that attempts to teach the fine structure constant.

Great video! So if the value is changing for this constant, would it be possible it will change again in say a million years and we just happen to calculate the value in these conditions of the universe today. ? I m not against the fine tuning theory but i highly doubt its validation.

@ArvinAsh

2 жыл бұрын

Unlikely. We are not likely to approach the temperatures near the big bang in the current trajectory of the universe.

Hi Arvin, can you do a video on the Penrose theory of conformal cyclic cosmology.

@grayaj23

2 жыл бұрын

Seconded

That ad segue was Brilliant

Brilliant, my friend, just plain brilliant! You are indeed a legend.

Wow. Amazing. Isn't the universe and everything that has ever existed just one big piece of art?

I think a possible answer to the question of why it is such a random number might be closely related to the many-worlds theory. If life and the universe did not exist because the value of the fine structure constant was not 1/137, then no life would be around to ask why such a value. Many questions about why the constants of the universe are so precise and unpredictable might actually be answered by the many-worlds theory. We could simply be one of or the only universe hospitable to life. Forgive my english I'm a french 15-year-old :p

@DFPercush

2 жыл бұрын

Your English is perfect! I had no idea until you said you were French. But yeah, many questions can be answered by the anthropic principle and many worlds. "Why is x?" --> "Well somewhere there is not x, but there's nobody around to ask why." :P

@BirdTho

Жыл бұрын

Because it would be horrible if the universe was deliberately created, that someone comes up with a many world theory?

Great video! Thank you.

"I don't know", is a great answer in science. It means there is more work to do.

While it is interesting that things like α and π, are ratios, there are a lot of constants, like c. Couldn't we reverse engineer starting from any of these values, (like i.e we say c = 1), to find the actual mathematical model, that the universe was created? If I had created it, the values would be proportionate of one another, or atleast somehow connected

@harrkev

2 жыл бұрын

This has already been done. Look up "Planck units."

Amazing video (as always) and amazing channel! However, "life" = "life as we know it". Different alpha might just mean different life :)

@ArvinAsh

2 жыл бұрын

Well said!

@DrGalile0

2 жыл бұрын

@@ArvinAsh, you have one of the best channels explaining physics out there! I am a teacher too (biology), and I am just stunned by how well you can explain complex topics - bravo!!

No one comes close to you as a physics educator, that's for sure! And how you illustrate your subject is stunning.

Awesome episode.

I love the fearless reasonable consideration of an intelligent creator on this channel. You are the only scientist making videos of this type on KZread willing and brave enough to discuss it as a point of thought. Keep up the great videos

Nature is not " fine tuned for life ". Life is fine tuned to nature. I find it disturbing when people in self indulgent folly and blind arrogance make such claims as this, especially when their ironic claims in which the opposite can be debated with ease. Almost as if such claims are being plagiarized or hijacked.

@yziib3578

2 жыл бұрын

You clearly do not understand fine tuning but you will state your strong opinion about it. Are you projecting blind arrogance?

Amazing explanation! Subscribed But is there an equation that relates the energy level (temperature?) of the system to the value of alpha?

@ArvinAsh

2 жыл бұрын

Yes, you have to get into the equations of QED to derive that.

Yay for content!

Great explanation

Very interesting topic. Got me thinking whether all the universal constants are somehow related through time and space, and thus lead to one grand unified constant from which all others derive.

Nice work.

If may help to rewrite this as Hooke's law of stretching springs: F = C u. Since alpha describes 1 electron and not 2, e and pi may end up in some kind of squared standard deviation. Or perhaps describe self-interaction. Epsilon is dependent on mu and not the other way around, so use mu preferred, then epsilon and not c. Finally Planck's constant resembles a spring constant.