Although this video is mostly about the concept of antimatter, the experiments that investigate antimatter particles are incredibly interesting in their own right! CERN has a list with all their antimatter experiments, which can be found at home.cern/science/physics/antimatter. Among these are the ALPHA experiment (the experiment that looked at the colour of anti-hydrogen) and the GBAR experiment (one of the experiments that is testing in which direction antimatter falls)!
@canthisbeathing7586
2 жыл бұрын
Next time I suggest you to make video on What Time actually is? And how does it behave at particle (Quantum) level!
@devlust
2 жыл бұрын
I can see this channel blowing up easily if you keep the consistency man, it's truly amazing how you can explain these complex topics with such simplicity and perfect level of humor, not to mention the awesome animations. Keep it up and thanks for the awesome content!
@lythd
2 жыл бұрын
this channel is so underrated im glad youtube recommended to me, the animations are so pleasing, im binging all your videos rn keep up the good work!
@MartinLeggewie
2 жыл бұрын
I definitely like the humour you put in this videos here and there. Of course, the actual topic is also well explained. I thumbs upped and subscribed. Keep up this good work (and I can imagine that it takes quite a while to produce such content). Greetings from Germany.
@seraphik
2 жыл бұрын
glad to see you're back! keep it up, your channel is definitely gonna blow up!
@FundamentallyExplained
2 жыл бұрын
Thanks for the kind words ^^ I'm also really happy to be able to work on videos again. Already working on the next few, so hope to see you back in the not too distant future :D
@Grandunifiedcelery
2 жыл бұрын
I'm from reddit. Nice video😊 Subscribed👍
@Venom2003GR
Жыл бұрын
KEEP IT UP THIS CHANNEL IS AWSOME
@GottgleicherMaster
2 жыл бұрын
Discovered yesterday and already addicted!
@FundamentallyExplained
2 жыл бұрын
Consume particle physics responsibly ;-)
@bloodyorphan
Жыл бұрын
Anti particles are not anti-matter, they are Neutrino kinetic opposing spin particles. Anti matter is a fragment of a deeper weight particle that has a time dilation high enough to have a destructive interaction with particles that are not time-dilated in their weight space. (i.e. a neutron splits into two particles and moves up the constrained Y weight space and interacts with protons "exploding" them into their constituent photons and releasing 10c^3 energy per proton in the form of photons, the explosion is so intense it can create anything from Gamma particles up to Electron weight particles. Because of DrDons amazing work in Neutrino observations most people in the QM field have adopted this anti-particle naming convention and because of our Great God Of Plus approach to most power equations in physics it has gained a lot of support and notoriety , but is only one symmetry we know of and will never describe the stable symmetries of our observed Universe. In other words a Neutrino Universe would annihilate two seconds after the Big Bang, and we all know it lasted for a lot longer than that, it in fact is still "exploding" in a time-dilated rate today. M.B.Eringa
@WooliteMammoth
2 жыл бұрын
Keep making videos! You are a great explainer and I like the creativity and simplicity of your animations.
@TheMaxi98King
2 жыл бұрын
I laughed so hard because of the outro… Thank you for the great content, very interesting topics to say the least!
@bloodyorphan
Жыл бұрын
Time-Dilation is why there is something instead of nothing, it is the only observed paradigm that can explain why compressed space can act like a particle. Without time-dilation a photon would cease to exist (i.e. unravel back to a flat space) in 1/25 of a second. For particles to exist for the length of time we observe, we need much higher theoretical particles we call "Photonium". If you use inverse square law to walk any energy back to a 6 Planck radius you get a temperature of 10^36 degrees Celsius. This is the core temperature of a proton and means a proton can persists for at least (10^36/5)^2 seconds observed for it's one second experienced. Square root that because we are talking about a temperature and we get 10^18 for electron weight so (10^18/5)^2 seconds observed for the electron to experience one second. Photons have a core energy of 10^4.5 using the same square root scale. The first proof of this was the half life calculation for Plutonium (20000/5)^2 seconds for Plutonium to drop to 10,000 degrees Celsius, we measured that to within 15 minutes and called it proven, the next proof was the LIGO interference prototype, which proved that with an appropriate temperature (50 watts) we can create electron weights detectable with a standard electron detector. Plurtonium stays at 20,000 degrees Celsius for 185.185' days, and after that length of time the temperature drops in a matter of seconds to 10,000 degrees Celsius. This is the radioactive half life calculation! M.B.Eringa
@fullfungo
2 жыл бұрын
Actually, 13:55 remark about negative mass is a bit incorrect. (Assuming Newton’s theory of gravity and motion) we know that the the force of gravity acting on an anti-mass object of mass M at a distance D would be described by a vector F ⃗ that is a multiple of n ⃗ (vector pointing from the object to the center of the Earth). More specifically, the constant would be G*M*m_earth / D². Thus, F ⃗ = n ⃗ * (G* M*m_earth / D²). As pointed out in the video, this force vector would be pointing away from the center of the Earth. However, it is not a good idea to conclude that the object will move in the direction of the force, especially since we are talking about unusual hypothetical objects with negative mass. Using the Newton’s second law of motion, gives us the formula F ⃗ = m*a ⃗. Therefore, a ⃗ = F ⃗/m. Since F ⃗ points away from the Earth and *m* is negative, the resulting acceleration a ⃗ still points “down” or towards the Earth. This result is similar to “every object falls at the same rate regardless of its mass”, since mass cancels out in the calculation of a ⃗. Thus in Newtonian model, an object with negative mass would still fall towards the center of the Earth. This, actually, plays well with Einstein’s model of gravity, where the forces don’t exist, and gravitational attraction is an effect of moving along geodesics. In that case, the mass doesn’t play any role at all (if it’s small enough), since the object would accelerate “down” solely because of the properties of the Earth and not of the falling object.
@jollyindividual3042
2 жыл бұрын
What do you want to say, can u make it simple buddy
@fullfungo
2 жыл бұрын
@@jollyindividual3042 sure. In the video (13:55), it says that the force of gravity would be negative for negative-mass particles. (let’s say this is true) Then they say, that this implies the force points up. (sounds reasonable) But at 14:06 they say that a negative-mass particle would “fall up”. This is the part I disagree with. By F ⃗=ma ⃗, we should conclude that F ⃗ and a ⃗ (acceleration) point in opposite directions, since m
@Xehlwan
2 жыл бұрын
This is a great addendum to the video! While the video maintains a very simple tone for a reason, your explanation is very well written.
@jdtma6674
Жыл бұрын
I always loved your videos, thank you for making them and I hope you are doing well and are happy 😊
@benmcreynolds8581
Жыл бұрын
🧲🌡️📡🔆☢️🔌🔊🔋♻️🌐☯️⚛️ I feel magnetism and electromagnetism play such a crucial aspect of the cosmos. It's really facinating how so many properties with-in Nature use; {"Differences"} that seem to be a key factor in keeping dynamic systems functioning. High pressure/low pressure, hot/cold temp, different densities, static electric charges/discharges, electromagnetism north/south poles, different velocity/angular momentum, layers between different regions such as, land, water, air, edge of atmosphere, space, the different regions in space with different particle density, creating bubbles/membrane layers, cloud regions, nebula's/ Galaxy's, Galaxy clusters, less dense voids regions of space. All of these things are basic differences but create a way for the dynamic engine with-in Nature to continue flowing and operating to create and convert energy. How a battery 🔋 transfers + charges through a membrane layer to a - charged side. Like how regions of high/low pressure and temperature 🌡️differences create winds. Transfer that into water or planets core and add density. It creates either ocean currents and flow or planetary convection geothermal activity. 🧲🌡️📡🔆☢️🔌🔊🔋♻️🌐☯️⚛️ What if our universe is 1 half of a sorta ying yang ☯️ universe where there's a membrane layer in-between the 2 layers , maybe our black holes and quantum fields are an entangled membrane layer that allows for quantum particles to pop in and out of existence of that membrane with the other half. The 2nd half of our universe would maybe be an anti-universe, like a mirror image of ours where the anti-matter is to create this balancing act with-in the system. (It doesn't mean there is multiple versions of ourselves and all that stuff when people talk about a multiverse, no not that.) It just seems like a natural way to balance things out, yet also describe the fluctuations. I just had a random daydream thought and obviously I hope more professional people's minds end up diving into this sorta possible theoretical physics ⚖️ 🌐🧲🌡️🔆☢️⚛️♻️🌐☯️
@jdtma6674
Жыл бұрын
Your videos are wonderful :)
@yunusozd
Жыл бұрын
amazing video amazing the office reference.
@hai.1820
2 жыл бұрын
After watching many Arvin Ash and Sabine videos, I finally got to understand these science topics. Thank you so much! And the family guy and the office references were just a killer! ^^
@jack.p
2 жыл бұрын
I just discovered this channel and I'm really loving every video. This in particular was so interesting. The only problem is it leads my mind down and endless spiral of asking WHY should the universe have a nice neat system of symmetrical charges? Or maybe it just "looks" that way as a result of being a system of conscious matter particles looking at itself. Anyway looking forward to more videos!
@jacksalamison1849
2 жыл бұрын
Such a well-made video, Bob!
@ycajal
Жыл бұрын
Love your channel💕
@SK-rs5wn
2 жыл бұрын
Love it! Great video!
@akshitasrivastava2408
2 жыл бұрын
the explanations are so good, keep going!
@jollyindividual3042
2 жыл бұрын
Hey bro when u gonna upload ur next video u got my interest in Particle Physics ✌🏻✌🏻❤️❤️❤️
@caiolopezcomz
2 жыл бұрын
Thats the best explanation I've ever had.
@Nagria2112
2 жыл бұрын
cool video BUT actually most feynman giagrams are read from bottom to top. i guess it make it more confusing but i learned them 90° from your pov. if you look the the same shape it will represent electron-electron scattering be exchange of a vitral photon ;D
@FundamentallyExplained
2 жыл бұрын
It is true that if you read the diagram from bottom to top, the proces it describes is different, you are absolutely right 🙂. The reading direction is, however, a matter of convention (or maybe just personal preference). I do prefer them this way, but an additional reason I drew them like this is that this reading direction matches the direction you would ready anything else in (e.g. this text you are reading now). That is also the reason I find the bottom-to-top convention a bit uncomfortable myself. But as I said: its a matter of personal preference 😉
@Nagria2112
2 жыл бұрын
@@FundamentallyExplained thanks for your reply. it makes total sence, i just wanted to mention it.
@tom8645
2 жыл бұрын
Saw your video on reddit, it is very clear and you have a nice voice for explaining videos! Keep it up and love to see where it brings you!
@k7iq
2 жыл бұрын
I think that I was told that the horizontal photon (in the Feynman diagram) is a "virtual" photon. So, what is a virtual photon if it does not have a frequency ? Is it not an electromagnetic phenomenon in this case like a real photon ? Having trouble here with the word "photon" (I had asked what the frequency might be of this photon in another video and was told it was virtual and did not have a frequency and nothing was said beyond that...)
@fuzzblightyear145
2 жыл бұрын
Great video. love the "...i'll see myself out" 😂😂
@armantas8846
10 ай бұрын
fun fact, antimatter is the most expensive thing in the world.
@dleivam
2 жыл бұрын
Brilliant... you have a new subscriber..
@jollyindividual3042
2 жыл бұрын
Well done buddy hats off u earn my respect 👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻❤️
@yerp9130
2 жыл бұрын
i thought the arrows on feynmann diagrams represented time
@Lojdika
2 жыл бұрын
Shouldn't particles be visually represented as a highly localized wave instead of a ball?😄
@paulfrancis8836
2 жыл бұрын
So, does Light, or a packet of Light take up any Space ? seeing as it's said that light has no mass. If an electron is a wave, does it take up space ? ... any space ? if they don't have mass, and take up no space, then Two should be able to occupy the same time and space. No ?
@canthisbeathing7586
2 жыл бұрын
🔆 As usual, Great Great Video 👏👏👏
@dimaboiko3124
2 жыл бұрын
Wait. If we use negative mass, is it means that energy become negative? But, how? It's like you have -2J and you emitting 1J of light you will end up with -3J. Ok, maybe you can only emit "negative" light, so you will annihilate energy, which is conserved? It's so strange....
@FundamentallyExplained
2 жыл бұрын
It is strange, mostly because it is a highly speculative hypothesis. I do understand your point, though, and I would agree with you if only the formula E=mc^2 would exist. However, that formula comes from a larger one, in which the last step is taking the square root on both sides (see en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass%E2%80%93energy_equivalence#Extension_for_systems_in_motion for more information). Taking the square root of a number (say: x^2) technically yields two numbers: x and -x. For simplicity (and because it is just to wacky an idea) the negative solution is just disregarded. If however mass could be negative, this negative solution would be the solution to the negative energy problem, as for antiparticles the energy associated with their restmass would then not be mc^2, but -mc^2.
@موسى_7
2 жыл бұрын
If antimatter has negative mass, would annihilation create 0 energy because equal positive and negative mass become equal positive and negative energy giving 0 in total?
@FundamentallyExplained
2 жыл бұрын
No, but the reason is a bit technical. You are right that E=mc^2 would give a negative energy if the mass is negative, but this formula is a simplified version that would only hold for normal matter. The full formula is E^2 = m^2 c^4 + p^2 c^2, in which p is the momentum of the particle. If the particle is stationary, this equation reduces to E^2 = m^2 c^4, which you can manipulate by taking the square root on both sides of the =-sign. This would indeed yield E=mc^2, but also the negative version would be a solution: E = -mc^2. This equation would yield a negative energy for positive mass (which would break all kinds of physics), but for negative masses it would be the solution to the question you pose :-)
@evelienrenders2072
2 жыл бұрын
Hahaha 42 puzzle pieces! Love it
@arahman3897
2 жыл бұрын
Electrons are generated from electron field. Then anti electron or positron are generated from where? Antielectron field or it is also e electron field.
@pyre5238
2 жыл бұрын
I dont think I understand why a planet or something, since it is pretty much a closed system, couldnt be an anti-matter planet and we just dont know?
@pyre5238
2 жыл бұрын
Ive been wondering this for years and finally found a place I feel like Id get a good answer and stay. Relatively. Anonymous.
@FundamentallyExplained
2 жыл бұрын
Not sure why you want to stay (relatively) anonymous with this question, it is a good one! The truth is that no planet, star, or anything else in the universe is truly a closed system. Whether it be cosmic rays, interplanetary dust, comets, or anything else just floating around in space: galactic objects like stars and planets scoop them up. We know the composition of the interplanetary stuff (mostly normal matter), so if e.g. an antimatter planet would exist, we would expect to be able to see at least a trace of the photons coming off of the annihilation process originating from the planet.
@k7iq
2 жыл бұрын
Shouldn't your particle and anti-particle faces be mirrored maybe ?
@gilbertsanchez4513
2 жыл бұрын
I guess I didn't understand? I failed to see how the guys explanation showed why is there something, rather then nothing?
@thaavatar743
Жыл бұрын
whats an anti photon.. 🤔
@robertkoekoek9630
2 жыл бұрын
Do there exist anti-questions? In reality, what is solving infinitely many parallel equations?
@AlessioSangalli
2 жыл бұрын
3D holograms... Are there holograms that are not 3D?
@chesswithsomi7314
2 жыл бұрын
May be this universe is made of anti matter and we are looking for normal matter......I mean in reality positron seems more positive than the negative negetron (electron)
@FundamentallyExplained
2 жыл бұрын
Could be 🙂It really is just a matter of definition.
Пікірлер: 61