I like the way D. Lincoln wears a suggestive shirt in each video...

@yashas9974

3 жыл бұрын

Does this have anything to do with Sheldon?

@stetsonaidan3404

3 жыл бұрын

I realize I'm kinda randomly asking but does anybody know a good website to watch newly released tv shows online ?

@justinaugust6611

3 жыл бұрын

@Stetson Aidan Try FlixZone. Just search on google for it =)

@zechariahian7287

3 жыл бұрын

@Justin August Yea, I have been using FlixZone for years myself :D

@stetsonaidan3404

3 жыл бұрын

@Justin August Thank you, I signed up and it seems like they got a lot of movies there :) I really appreciate it !

Simultaneously very lucid and information dense. Thank you!

Thank you so much for posting these talks.

I asked a question in the video before this, then clicked this video which answered my question from the previous video. Y'all are awesome!

Another awesome video. You're spoiling us fermilab :D

Thanks for giving this knowledge in such a easy way

Hi Dr. Lincoln, thanks for these videos! Can you do a video on Ads/CFT correspondence?? Also a video on the physics on the blackboard please!

THANK YOU PROFESSOR LINCOLN...!!!

Clark Kent has had a tough paper round.

Very good explanation

Very interesting, Keep going Dr. LINCOLN = )

This video should have more views and likes.People need to get their heads out of the Kardashian's back sides.

@bobroberts7305

6 жыл бұрын

Best way to encourage that is never use the K word and never link anything related to the K word.

Thank you!

Fantastic!

I looooooove these videos!

Very interesting!

Very good video! Maybe a little maths and eventually some equations would be nice in the next video! :)

Very cool video. It really is interesting to know and learn what we don't know, and what physicists are trying to understand. Something that really could be taught in schools a bit more.

Thanks man

I wonder how many "first!"s weren't approved. However, nice vid, I exspecially liked the second point, it seems just a matter of beauty.

Very well done. Rarely does one encounter such honesty about a strongly advocated (yet undemonstrated) idea. " Science: requiring intellectual honesty since 1514."

What does it have to say about gravity?

Well, I know my future research path now.

the audio on this vid is just way too cool

I'm all for the elegance of eleemosynary supersymmetry.

Sorry... accountant/auditor asking a physics question.. Please pardon my ignorance.. With the particle accelerators, I understand that there are various sensors in place to capture the effects of collisions. How do scientists get comfort over the fact that all sensors that need to be used, are being used? That is, what if there are particles that don't interact with the sensors but result out of the collisions and are not being observed / sensed because we haven't thought of putting in a sensor for that specific particle?

@ShapeDoppelganger

8 жыл бұрын

UltimateHandler They usually don't try to detect the particle directly, but rather detect what those particles will decay into in it's very brief existence. For doing so they first need a theory that will tell them how the particle they are looking for will decay, remember that this is necessary as those exotic particles, like the Higgs Boson and mesons and stuff like that, have a very short life time because of the energy levels that are required for their existence, so they readily decay after the collision of the atoms. With the theories we can test them to see which theory correctly foretells what the measurements are. Even if no theory can account for the observed results that is a very good thing, that tells that we may have physics beyond what we know yet. As for the Higgs Boson confirmation it was a really good confirmation of our theories but also a bucket of cold water as it was so precisely predicted and measured that we are like 95% sure that even with that discovery we won't be able to push our current theories further, to any branch, like the one in this video, Super Symmetry. Just to clarify, we hand't detected the Higgs Boson itself, but rather the particles that it would decay into when the energy levels for its creation had been reached, and as our theories had predicted that it would decay in the exact way we've seen after some millions repetitions of the experiment we were sure of the result and confirmed that it was really a Boson Higgs decaying.

@frankschneider6156

8 жыл бұрын

+UltimateHandler Actually this happens a lot. The collisions are usually scheduled to happen in one of certain places of the accelerator, where detectors are placed. These detectors are huge machines and contain a whole battery of measurement devices. There are in principle only 4 (3) ways a particle can interact with it's environment: weak and strong force, electromagnetic force and gravity, although the later doesn't really count due to it's low strength. So you construct your detectors to detect special kinds of interactions (depending on which kind of particle you expect to be engaging with). Nonetheless are some particles more difficult to detect than others, like the neutrino(s). But you don't always need to directly measure these particles. As Doppelganger explained, such particles might decay or interact with other particles, which may be detected. Actually that's what interpreting the data from detectors is mostly about: identifying: what the heck is going on there ? But you'll surely still miss some particles. But then you still have other ways to indirectly identify those particles: if things don't add up. E.g. if there is energy missing / getting lost, you KNOW there needs to be particle (as otherwise the law of energy conservation would be violated), or if the angles of a reaction are are not right (as otherwise the law of conservation of momentum would be violated). Actually the last one was how the neutrino was identified (a notoriously difficult to identify particle as it only interacts through the weak force (well and gravity),.

@akarshchaturvedi2803

7 жыл бұрын

ShapeDoppelganger dude, you left me nothing to answer.

@bobroberts7305

6 жыл бұрын

Some particles may not be able to be sensed, but break down into particles that can, so their existence is derived from those that can.

God (for lack of a better word), Dr. Don Lincoln is GREAT!

What kind of energies are needed to test some of the SUSY theories? Will an accelerator more powerful than the LHC be needed?

@nose766

5 жыл бұрын

From what I've read, it is expected that some superpartners have masses in the levels of GeV. So that should be the necessary energy. It is entirely possible for it to be greater, in the TeV levels, but the Higgs Boson mass would have to be explained with new physics.

Cool shirt.

A refresh after LHC results is needed, what the variations that are alive

How much bigger does SM predicts over the measured 125 GeV for Higgs boson? Can someone give a value?

what is meant by force particle. is it the same as force carriers like photons or gluons ?

@ronaldderooij1774

6 жыл бұрын

Yes.

I did not know that supersymmetry would imply that the 3 forces are grouped together in one. Does it mean that electroweak interaction could be called then electroweakstrong interaction?

@notchmath9642

5 жыл бұрын

roglo Electronuclear

Their is one particle which can change from one space to the others with just properties changed. The different space of existence depends on the properties of how this particle change and how they behave in higher dimensions.

@venkateshbabu5623

6 жыл бұрын

They have to explain every property in each dimension up to 12. That gives a better understanding of what to look for in each dimension.

@venkateshbabu5623

6 жыл бұрын

Excellent vedio thanks.

@venkateshbabu5623

6 жыл бұрын

They also create fields.

Whicm field of physics deals with antimatter???

Love

Gem.

OK, but how many adjustable parameters do you have to play with in order to get these "interesting" results?

Could supersymmetry be used to relate weak gravity (force) to dark matter?

@javiercabrero5573

Жыл бұрын

honestly i have no clue but i think it could

did you know if the fermilab building would look like the Atari logo if it was supersymmetrical :)

Wait... If every force has at least one particle, and the electroweak force may be real, so does that mean we can have a new particle? Or can the know ones fuse into a heavier one?

@MaestroRigale

7 жыл бұрын

Felipe Lorenzzon My understanding is that the Electroweak force is only observed at high energies, in which the spontaneous breaking of the EW symmetry disappears, the Higgs field no longer causes the Z and W bosons to have mass, and they become massless bosons indistinguishable from the photon. These massless bosons (that include what would be photons, z bosons, or the two w bosons at lower energies) are what mediate the Electroweak force.

@srpenguinbr

7 жыл бұрын

thank you, you helped me a lot :) that makes a lot of sense

Isn’t the Higgs boson and its field a good candidate to test supersymmetry? The Higgs boson gives other objects mass. Gravity is proportional to the mass of two interacting objects following Newton. Gravity is maybe a force so this could be example of {force equation (gravity)} = {particle equation (Higgs boson)} given by the definition of supersymmetry. At least according to Newton’s formulation gravity is force. This is in contrast to the curved spacetime of Einstein’s general relativity. Understanding quantum gravity better could resolve whether gravity is force and would decide whether this works.

2:30 Why is Water wet? Same reason why magnets attract

Him: ...aspects of a single Unifying Force. Me: ...Master Yoda?

Is supersymmetry the same as anti-matter or is it a separate theory ?

@michaelsommers2356

8 жыл бұрын

+FlyingTreeBadger They're different.

@TheGuaver

8 жыл бұрын

+FlyingTreeBadger anti-matter is not a theory, it is a well understood and constantly observed set of particles whose only difference from regular matter is its opposite charge.

@FlyingTreeBadger

8 жыл бұрын

Thank you tho I understood that, I just didn't put 2 and 2 together at the time lol Thanks for taking the time too explain.

@spaaaaace8952

7 жыл бұрын

Supersymmetry isn't a theory, it's a concept, or a life style that fits with a lot of questions.

@merlinthegreat100

7 жыл бұрын

FlyingTreeBadger It's different, antimatter arises from the Dirac equation which deals with relativistic quantum mechanics

Explanation

Super shirt for super symmetry

what happened to string theory. is it still around?

@ronaldderooij1774

6 жыл бұрын

It is still around, but no proof at all.

The electronuclear force, it's called. At high enough energies, it'll merge with gravity to form the superforce.

Supersymmetry is a fantasy!

2:30 Why gravity can't just be a result of electromagnetism too?

@MultiWeb23

4 жыл бұрын

Because magnectic objects don't seem to be more gravitationaly attractive. Also, we don't know if there is such a thing as "antigravity" to pair the positive and negative charges of electromagnetism

standard model in a positive curved spacetime supersimetry in a flat spacetime

May be the particles in the Standard model are already super-symmetric to each other? May be the black holes in the center of galaxies are way bigger that we think and allow galaxies to rotate quicker than expected? One (unified) force and one (string) particle sounds good. Better, one entity manifesting itself as force or matter. But even then, we'll keep asking ourselves why one!!!

Lightest Supersymmetric Particle = LSP = lumpy space princess, so that means lumpy space princess is made of dark matter

Copied from the Wikipedia String Theory Page: 'The earliest string model, the bosonic string, incorporated only the class of particles known as bosons. ... Roughly speaking, bosons are the constituents of radiation, but not of matter, which is made of fermions. Investigating how a string theory may include fermions led to the invention of supersymmetry, a mathematical relation between bosons and fermions.'

Galaxies spin faster that they should under G alone because of EM. They are like dust bunnies. But Relativity doesn't recognize it !

It's like the Biblical model for physical + spiritual: Physical: 12 tribes of Israel, plus four living creatures with four wings. Spiritual: 12 apostles, plus four living creatures with six wings. Is interesting it's like that.

one of those papers was written by a ninja. please someone get it.

0. Kidding. How is there an answer for that question without a unifying field? That's why my joke is "0".

who up playing wit they worm

so physicists like supersymmetry because it's pretty

Dr Dan is wrong. Earth does not spin because of gravity. Rotation requires no gravity.

Supersymmetry, multiverse, splitting universes, horizon problem….. We need experimental proof or observational proof. It seems physics is derailing. Could you give some clues on how to search for proof?

@aleksandersuur9475

5 жыл бұрын

Science works at the very edge of the unknown, there have always been bunch of hypothesizes Many that seem ridiculous some that are true even though they seemed ridiculous in the beginning. Science does what it has always done, figure out what are the testable consequences of a hypothesis and go test it. If enough tests support your hypothesis and none invalidate it, you can start taking it seriously, until then all you have is an idea.

Goddamn incomplete models that require costly time consuming DLC patches.....

S for SUPERsymmetry haha

The Reason it is not interesting is no evidence. No evidence means no evidence.

4. Grant Money

If you realize that the prevasive electric currents in space are the major constructing factor of observable universe, you need not to conjure any dark matter etc. It's just the gravitational model of the universe that's erroneous, as it puts the role of electric currents in plasma aside. Double radio galaxies, pulsars, quasars, all have a testable explanation, with no need for black holes, expanding universe (redshift based acceleration was proven false by Harlton Arp). The Electric Universe.

US department of energy = US department of mass = church = religion Aaaaaah! XD

@DanDart

8 жыл бұрын

Yes I was incredibly high

@josephhardin8391

6 жыл бұрын

I see what you did there. It's a shame science isn't a recognized faith.

Please, please, please, switch off that horrid music

Supersymmetry is a joke. If you follow the analogy he gives all the way through... it would be Equation + Equation = ..... If our universe/existence is one Equation... than the other is forever outside our grasp. The very fact we can consider these philosophical ramifications through scientific pursuits is mind blowing though.

@lucasdarianschwendlervieir3714

7 жыл бұрын

Don`t judge on a principle that you don`t really understand.

@lucasdarianschwendlervieir3714

7 жыл бұрын

Ryan Smith Equation is not a variable. It should be thought as the Lagrangian. What he is saying is that if the Lagrangian is not supersymmetric, terms must be added to it, in order to make it supersymmetric. If you've seen enough Lagrangians you will know that terms are often added to improve the theory.

Symmetry in life body and spirit. Symmetry in the world and the all other life we know of. God is symmetry. A fundamental property of His above (foresight) to create.

There is NOT ONE testable idea or proposition yet from 30 years of work on super symmetry. The theory is a complete FAIL.

@MikeRosoftJH

3 жыл бұрын

That's not entirely true. Supersymmetric theories predict certain properties of particles (e.g. electric dipole moment of the electron, or proton decay), and some versions of supersymmetry are ruled out by experiment. (We don't have positive evidence of either the electric dipole moment or proton decay; we only have experimental limits.)