This discussion of quantum dynamics is equal to any of those given at Princeton, Stanford, or Waterloo, and deserves many more views.

@didierfavre2356

Жыл бұрын

I totally agree.

Will- thanks for a clear explanation of a complex topic. Even us laymen could follow you.

An engrossing presentation. Realizing today that it is seven years old is sobering. Sitting in the back rows of the KZread seats, one can only wonder how much further the landscape of conclusions has been resolved.

I love this presentation, I don't study physics per se, and still got amazed by it.

One of the best presentations on QCD I've seen. Thank you.

Lecture is great. I've learned a lot. The choice of slides bachground is questional. White (or black) background would be better. Btw, the language of the lecture is simple enough for a non-physics student to understand.

5:45. (3/17/2023) I appreciate your perspective.

7:48. Fun times!

Trivia du jour: when Professor Murray Gell-Mann taught at Columbia University, he lived on Manhattan's West End Avenue within a block of where the Oppenheimers had lived twenty years earlier. But he'd moved to Cal Tech by the time he came up with the name "quark," from James Joyce's "Finnegan's Wake."

Has particle accelerators been able to replicate experiments and use particle collisions as a constant?

question period answered: for every bald head the Universe creates, there is an anti - bald head.. and could Krazy Glue replace cyanoacrylate adhesive, with the Strong Force and Re - brand as Krazy Gluon?

12:39. “Getting rent Money unexpectedly!” That’s some gluon shit to do!

48:03 third bullet point I thought this was the drag on the system of orbital combinations. Orbitals being the 4-d manifold of an energetic momentum often called a particle. Energy being weightless has no limits on speed. Can it not be concluded that the orbital of a particle be looked at as having a single high point of energy yet appear to cover all points of orbital or that drag is created when orbitals combine through fundamental force interactions? Where opposing spins combine by inverting one past a tangent orientation(angles greater than 90). The difference in momentums results in an exit angle with velocity decay towards offset of difference of momentum. Then does the implied negitive acceration act as the mass of the system?

Very interesting talk. Thanks for sharing.

Can we look at the data in these experiments going on at the LHC?

The constants will be calculable when we can find the extra dimensions.

Quantum Entangled Twisted Tubules: When we draw a sine wave on a blackboard, we are representing spatial curvature. Does a photon transfer spatial curvature from one location to another? Wrap a piece of wire around a pencil and it can produce a 3D coil of wire, much like a spring. When viewed from the side it can look like a two-dimensional sine wave. You could coil the wire with either a right-hand twist, or with a left-hand twist. Could Planck's Constant be proportional to the twist cycles. A photon with a higher frequency has more energy. (More spatial curvature). What if gluons are actually made up of these twisted tubes which become entangled with other tubes to produce quarks. (In the same way twisted electrical extension cords can become entangled.) Therefore, the gluons are actually a part of the quarks. Mesons are made up of two entangled tubes (Quarks/Gluons), while protons and neutrons would be made up of three entangled tubes. (Quarks/Gluons) The "Color Force" would be related to the XYZ coordinates (orientation) of entanglement. "Asymptotic Freedom", and "flux tubes" make sense based on this concept. Neutrinos would be made up of a twisted torus (like a twisted donut) within this model. Gravity is a result of a very small curvature imbalance within atoms. (This is why the force of gravity is so small.) Instead of attempting to explain matter as "particles", this concept attempts to explain matter more in the manner of our current understanding of the space-time curvature of gravity. If an electron has qualities of both a particle and a wave, it cannot be either one. It must be something else. Therefore, a "particle" is actually a structure which stores spatial curvature. Can an electron-positron pair (which are made up of opposite directions of twist) annihilate each other by unwinding into each other producing Gamma Ray photons. Alpha decay occurs when the two protons and two neutrons (which are bound together by entangled tubes), become un-entangled from the rest of the nucleons. Beta decay occurs when the tube of a down quark/gluon in a neutron becomes overtwisted and breaks producing a twisted torus (neutrino) and an up quark, and the ejected electron. The phenomenon of Supercoiling involving twist and writhe cycles may reveal how overtwisted quarks can produce these new particles. Gamma photons are produced when a tube unwinds producing electromagnetic waves.

Why wouldn't the proton be more like a magnetic field with the electric source for the field being a set infinite, of 'electron-antielectron' pairs interacting at infinite speeds of entanglements. Like Dirac electrons in a magnetic field kline-bottle. If one took a quark apart thats what I imagined you will get just a kind of dark energy object of magnetic origins twisted up.

Fascinating talk. Now I'm curious about the Russian doll of quarks. How far can you go?

@vadimlinev2261

3 жыл бұрын

apparently we do not have any reasons to believe that there is another set of particles hiding inside quarks. Though string theory says that all these quarks are only different modes of vibrations of incredibly thin strings. String theory provides calculations nicely fitting observable phenomenons, but in order to detect strings themselves we need a particle accelerator the size of the Solar system, i.e. not doable in our life time.

@vadimlinev2261

3 жыл бұрын

apparently we do not have any reasons to believe that there is another set of particles hiding inside quarks. Though string theory says that all these quarks are only different modes of vibrations of incredibly thin strings. String theory provides calculations nicely fitting observable phenomenons, but in order to detect strings themselves we need a particle accelerator the size of the Solar system, i.e. not doable in our life time.

44:50 This QCD calculation should be somehow incorporated into bitcoin difficulty calculations.

3:10. The “Mother in Law” of physics.

I have a theory that quarks created everything and that the universe will expand until it runs into other universes, and will continue to expand while there would be a gateway to the other univers by what I call a radient prism field where the two bubble universes are touching, eventually many universes will grow and bump into each other - casusing a massive event that would combine the universes into a singular universe, introducing new laws of physics into the old ones that are now in one - things that existed in that universe might be torn apart or materialize - dark energy might be a dominating force in one and interact with another and simply cancel each other out (or in some cases create the oposite effect -- big bang with so much energy that energy is ejected from the larger universe and comes into existance as a tiny universe like our own at its present state). The large universe will cancel and multiply different laws of physics - ultimately the most plentiful survive - however only roughly 20% is poofed- roughly 25% of matter is ejected from the larger universe and becomes smaller universes (like our own). Eventually the big bubble universes will bump into each other and the little universes will form other big bubbles and go through the same process - once a big bubble universe ejects (or rather creates through bang dynamic state) a smaller universe- that universe cannot rejoin the origional host. This continues to some extent but I need more time to make an ultimate conclusion on an infinate state. Over the next two years I will be exploring what is beyond the larger bubble universe to the 4th power - The area of my proposed research will be centered around the edge - the expanding nature of everything (the multiverse constant). This is a lot to wrap my mind around, but exploring what lies at the edge of the multiverse and megaverses is where a lot of answers exist.

@pureenergy4578

2 жыл бұрын

I have read many books that say there are unlimited dimensions, each one overlapping, all existing within the same space. The ways between them are called tunnels, black holes being the entrances and exits. The way you can tell these dimensions overlap are the people that say they have had NDEs or near-death experiences and of course what are called ghosts and other images. NDEs can't be written off as not existing because millions of people are experiencing them. The physicist Barbara Brennan that wrote the book HANDS OF LIGHT says that we are multidimensional. We consist of many dimensions at once.

@simonzinc-trumpetharris852

11 ай бұрын

You lack the education to make hypotheses. Go away and take your stupid ideas with you.

No cats. Just the question.

4:36. Easy to poorly represent.

Assalamu alaykum

QUARKS DO NOT MAKE SENSE - or the 3rd quark is REALLY weird. Proton = 2 up , 1 down quarks. Neutron = 2 down, 1 up quarks. So the difference between the two is the 3rd quark. Both the proton and neutron, have one up and one down quark. That leaves the difference between the proton and neutron as the 3rd quark. So difference between a proton and neutron is due to whether the 3rd quark is up as in a proton, or down as in a neutron. So, if that's true then: The third quark determines these things: If it has an up quark - proton, then the particle is immortal. If it has a down quark - neutron, then the particle decays in 10 minutes. EXPLAIN If it has an up quark - a proton, then the particle has less mass then the neutron. If it has a down quark - a neutron, then the particle has .1% more mass than the proton. So the down quark weighs .1% more than the up quark. EXPLAIN Quarks have no measurable physical extension, and seem to exist at points. Yet that single point does all this and more. EXPLAIN The proton has an up quark, and that magic third quark also determines half of the electromagnetic force in the universe. And it in no way is like the electron, the other half, except in being an opposite charge. EXPLAIN The electron is one full charge, the magic third quark is 2/3+ charge, but somehow it determines all positive charge (and the 1/3- charge of the neutron's third quark determines all zero charge particles.) EXPLAIN. When three quarks team up only a small part of the proton's mass comes from the masses of the quarks. Most is binding energy. So that third quark has virtually no mass but can do all these magic things. EXPLAIN. Quarks interact strongly and link in twos or threes to make particles such as pions, protons, and neutrons. Yet the other half of the charge world, electrons, does none of these things. EXPLAIN Physics is a science of pairs. For every particle there is an anti-particle. Virtual particles come in pairs. Spin, waves - destructive and constructive interference, etc. In these cases the pairs are virtually identical and or mirror images of each other. So why would electromagnetic charge have electrons and protons so different from each other, and in no way seem built on exact opposites, or mirror image opposites. EXPLAIN! Particle wave duality includes atoms, electrons, protons, neutrons, quarks and gluons. Now imagine a nucleus of deuterium, that has no particles only waves that include in the nucleus of the atom, a proton wave, neutron wave, 6 quark waves, plus gluon waves. EXPLAIN. Proton spin crisis. EXPLAIN.

@JohnDlugosz

3 жыл бұрын

"If it has a down quark - neutron, then the particle decays in 10 minutes. EXPLAIN" The up and down are related via the "weak" interaction. One can turn into the other, emitting or absorbing a W boson which holds the difference in charge. The heavier one will decay into the lighter one via this mechanism. "Quarks have no measurable physical extension, and seem to exist at points. Yet that single point does all this and more. EXPLAIN" Particles are not really "things". The _field_ is fundamental, and an excitation in the field makes what we see as a particle. They extend over all space! They seem to be "points" because quantum interactions are all-or-nothing and appear to happen at one point. This means that there is no substructure. "So the down quark weighs .1% more than the up quark. EXPLAIN" No, the mass of the proton is due to the energy in the system, not simply the sum of the quarks. The mass of the valence quarks is a small part of it. Why the fundamental particles, including u and d, have the masses they do is not known. You keep saying "that third quark" -- the charge of the proton or neutron is the sum of all three. Particles vs waves: I think you are confused. Everything is fields, all particles are quantized excitations of the field. The mirror opposite of the electron is the positron, not the proton.

@TomHendricksMusea

3 жыл бұрын

This reminds me of epicycles rationalization. The only thing missing was saying some magic word was involved. Yes physics is bizarre, but not made up. Count me as skeptical - and still waiting for someone to answer all the questions I have on quarks existence.

@PrivateSi

3 жыл бұрын

This does, because it was designed to. This doesn't make it right though. -- Bottom-up Thought Experiment... Constraints: As few base forces and particles as possible to form a coherent, integrated 3D multi/universe model -- Subspace Charge Field: +ve charge cells (quanta, +1) held together by free-flowing -ve charge. Matter-energy field conserves momentum -- Matter-Energy: Matter is focused energy.. Energy is mobile matter.. Velocity is position change in time.. Force changes velocity and/or direction -- Positron/Up Quark/Graviton (p+): Out of place, free cell warps the field and sends out field cell vibration 'blip' spheres at C + 6 spin loops -- Electron/Down Quark (e-): Hole left behind warps the field and sends out field cell vibration 'blip' spheres at C + 6 spin loops -- Bion/Electron Neutrino/Dark Matter (n+-): Only exactly opposite phase p+ and e- annihilate (ie. pairs created together), else a Bion is formed -- Nucleons: Proton (P) = pep, Neutron (N) = Pe, Beta- = e, Beta+ (B) = p(n) = p(pe), Alpha (A) = PNPN = (PeP)(PeP) = (pep)(e)(pep)(pep)(e)(pep) -- Heavier Fermions: Larger holes and chunks of subspace field rapidly disintegrate to p+s, e-s, n+-s and/or annihilate to regular = empty field -- Electrostatic Force: Recoiling repulsive blip spheres propagate. Same phase blips repel, opposite form an attracting AC wave guide, recoil adds push -- Spin: e-s and p+s pull in the 12 surrounding cells, or -ve charge that pulls the cells, that then bounce out, forming 6 loops as a torus. Spins up/down -- Strong Force: Spin loops merge and form DC (flowing) circuits between e-s and p+s -- Mass: Length x number of strong force bonds + near electric field. Neutral bion has compact strong force circuits , Protons' are long as 2 p+s repel -- Magnetism: Some spin-aligned atoms' p+s and e-s' strong bonds join in a shorter straight path. Energy conservation results in external force circuits -- Long Instant Off Force: AC (longitudinally blipping) subspace 'flux tube' as thin as 1 cell wide. Each cell and its -ve charge move in contrary motion -- Photon/Light: e- (or p+) moving alternately up and down (ie. transmitter or e- moving from a neutral ground state to charged higher level and back) -- Double Slit: Laser light / particle centre's preceding, extended subspace distortion diffracts, interferes, forming wave guides observation destroys -- Dark Gravity: p+ traps 1 quantum of -ve charge so void cell size/gap grows (and matter's shrinks?) forming a macro -ve charge gradient -- Bang Expansion: Loss of -ve charge to the multiverse?.. Bang ejector velocity petered out, magnified in time by outward momentum conservation -- Gravity Wave: Longitudinal wave where the entire field in a large region is effected in unison for a duration -- Big Ping: A dark crystal universe collisions's intense gravity wave forms e- & p+ pairs from outside in at C. Many annihilate or form bions -- Big Bang: Ping wave collides centrally / -ve charge lost to the multiverse / blasted cells and -ve charge form much matter and leave a truly empty hole? -- Black Hole: Absorbs matter and energy. Bion crystal? Truly empty hole in the field that rips matter to pieces, turning it into subspace field until full? -- Frame Dragging: Entire sphere of subspace cells rotating around a point in unison -- Time: Cell to cell blips take a constant time so light slows locally with gravity as cells shrink but always measures C locally as subspace circuits slow too -- Makes more sense than making up bosons to carry force and mass, quarks that don't solve the anti-matter and dark matter problem, anti-neutrinos, loads of fundamental fields, extra spatial and temporal dimensions etc, that ultimately don't tie relativity and quantum mechanics together properly or well... They should at least be honest and call their 'spatial dimensions' geometric/field dimensions or something.. Magic Space is not my cup of tea.

@PrivateSi

3 жыл бұрын

@@JohnDlugosz .. The Weak Force is inherit charge and geometric instability.. You do realise much of the standard model of particles is literally useless, short-lived high energy junk... Up Quarks are most likely Positrons and most likely only Positrons and Electrons made at exactly the same time, with exactly opposite phase annihilate, else they form electron neutrinos (standard neutrinos=dark matter)... The Positron is the Graviton, not mass, so a neutrino adds to gravity half as much as a proton even though it is possibly much less massive. The Neutrino could in fact be 2/3 proton mass but simply much, much smaller and neutral.. Experiments point to massive neutrinos, dark matter, up quarks being positrons (and beta+ decay)...

I have a headache

LOST ME WITH THE POOR CATS, weird me.

There's a very good reason why it's a secret! No one has ever looked into an atom and now you names for things even smaller? How about you show me inside an atom and actually confirm that protons, neutrons and electrons actually exist? Because something tells me that Bohr was looking up instead of looking down when he came up with his model of the atom!

@JohnDlugosz

3 жыл бұрын

Look up """Deep Inelastic Scattering", for both electrons and neutrinos. We _have_ looked inside the atom, starting with Rutherford long before you were born.

@PrivateSi

3 жыл бұрын

Atoms and even electrons have been 'photographed' (although not using light, using particles and scattering... You've head of electron microscopes and seen the results. Imaging things inside a nucelus or Proton involves probing the strong force rather than just the electrostatic force so is much harder as the parts are too small so protons have to be smashed together... Personally I think much of the later Standard Model is temporary chunks and holes blown in the underlying, self-balancing base subspace binary charge field that quickly disintegrate and annihilate back to balanced, regular = empty field... Perhaps even creating permanent matter, with some not annihilating.. Multiple holes and chunks can react to form other temporary particles... all of which are useless junk.

_"He has made everything beautiful in its time; also he has put eternity into man's mind , yet so that he cannot find out what God has done from the beginning to the end."_ Eccl 3:11

Worst looking Schrodinger's cat ever.

Oh my God don't you see human spinal is vertical and other are horizontal and never considered the monkey the same cause its an approf of what went wrong and nature fixed.

One of the best presentations on QCD I've seen. Thank you.