30 Subatomic Stories: Can we find a theory of everything?

@HUEnshiro_do_Norte 3 жыл бұрын

Don, I'm not from a country that speaks English, but you sound so clean that I can fully understand you. It's a joy to listen you talking.

@davidjenn5871 3 жыл бұрын

Hi

@vikramgupta2326 3 жыл бұрын

That comparison really put it in context on how hard it is to find a TOE.

@markross699 3 жыл бұрын

Dr. Lincoln - you're a terrific communicator. Wonderful videos and approach. I love your analogies .

@thedecktothe16thpower56 3 жыл бұрын

As a conceptual orientated thinking person its kind of easy to picture in my mind what physics is really explaining through differential equations. We are talking about one object, interacting with itself, through many phases. Essentially what we think of as space is actually an object. It is difficult to understand this because we came in trying to calculate this in the midst of a phasing interaction. In essence we did not come from a big bang we are IN a big bang.

@DavidMaurand 3 жыл бұрын

This is a fantastic series and I hope it lives beyond the pandemic.

@seionne85 3 жыл бұрын

Thank you for the series Dr. Lincoln! It's been so much fun! Specifically, thank you for re-igniting my interest in physics!!!!

@thingsiplay 3 жыл бұрын

You talk like a good friend in a bar, but with the intellectual property of a professor. Can't stop listening. I am addicted.

@shadowjack22 3 жыл бұрын

Absolutely love your videos. Slightly weird suggestion. Sometime could you give us a brief tour of the library behind you? Looks like you have a wide range of interests 😎

@glossblack2045 3 жыл бұрын

I love thumbing through his books behind him while we get a debrief of the biggest questions of our time. And that he takes time to make these vids in the first place. Great work you guys are doing here

@glennstasse5698 3 жыл бұрын

Doesn’t the Cleopatra book seem incongruous?

@ramiengrey1177 3 жыл бұрын

@@glennstasse5698 Nah, it's right next to a book on the Roman Legions, and several other books on that shelf are history-oriented as well. He has his books well organized!

@glennstasse5698 3 жыл бұрын

@@ramiengrey1177 Oh! I assumed it was a book about Elizabeth Taylor! :-). [better be careful here, Son. You’re perilously close to being banned for life.]

@ramiengrey1177 3 жыл бұрын

@k1w1 Well, the shelf on the right is for physics too, including a few books by Don himself, if I'm seeing things properly.

@natecurley3090 3 жыл бұрын

Just wanted to say thank you for keeping me on track whenever I struggle❤

@onehitpick9758 3 жыл бұрын

I like your analogy of how little we may know compared to the limited of high energy and the Planck scale. One thing that may make it less confounding is if there is a set of rules we can find that apply, perhaps recursively, at different scales. I also think we have the same analogy in the other direction, perhaps to an even greater degree. Some may "think" we have entered the precision age of cosmology, when we have only just begun to look into the universe from a relatively narrow aperture in both local space and time and the notions of what we're seeing are still changing rather rapidly and drastically.

@robertprz4959 3 жыл бұрын

2:35 I'm totally shocked by the fact that James Maxwell knew a refrigerator! Maybe he even invented it? I never knew that, but he was a true genius, I guess ;)

@user-wu8yq1rb9t 3 жыл бұрын

It's just a great subject, I'm so excited. Thank you Dr Lincoln.

@morkovija 3 жыл бұрын

Сant believe its been 30 episodes already, what a ride! Thank you Don!

@UpcycleElectronics 3 жыл бұрын

Dr. Lincoln You've come a long way with this channel since the last time I watched. You've obviously applied several elements you've picked up from Professor O'Dowd. I also appreciate the background bookshelf with books scared with the marks of reading. There were a few really interesting points in this upload, like the way you explained the standard model with the graphic around 4:00, and tied it to Super String theory in context. If you broke the habit of reading a teleprompt and adopted a summary outline instead, I think you would see a massive growth on this channel. You have good writting skills, and are pleasant to listen to, but it takes a bit more effort for me to dwell on your key points and the elements I find fascinating. I'm no expert, just a casual layperson viewer of edutainment content like this. I know how much effort is involved with content in general. So from that perspective, I'm not trying to discourage or be negative. I could make an enormous list of things I would need to do if I wanted to make content anywhere near your current capabilities. I'm only saying, I found myself somewhat distracted by how your reading pace is not always aligned with emphatic flow of the content. Some of the high points of your otherwise great writing, slightly miss their mark as a result. I found myself hitting the back 10 sec button a few times just to be sure I caught the point, ...,but I was watching this in the pre-coffee morning...and writting this after...(probably too much coffee...) Anyways, stay well, and thanks for the upload. -Jake

@colbynye5995 3 жыл бұрын

Another fantastic video! Thank you, and looking forward to the next series!

@sthelenskungfu 3 жыл бұрын

You featured one of Jimmy Akin's questions! That's awesome! I have listened to him for a couple years.

@peterb9481 3 жыл бұрын

Love Fermilab and Penrose and Einstein and Newton... Possible the Universe could be likened to a black hole in at least some ways - space expanding faster than the speed of light. However matter still prevails whereas in a black hole: only gravitational waves. But the concept may remain that if there is an outside to the universe (suck as “the bulk”) looking in - the universe may be seen as contracting.

@Dra741 3 жыл бұрын

Mysunbelt mental understanding of our environment is that every particle and every leaf is , fits and the formula

@tresajessygeorge210 2 жыл бұрын

THANKS AGAIN PROFESSOR LINCOLN...!!! Looking forward to the recent topics after the general relativity theory. May be about findings of black holes and PARKER PROBE. THANK YOU...!!!

@jonc6157 Жыл бұрын

Awesome clarification !

@vishalmishra3046 3 жыл бұрын

The most practical theories to unify would be QED and GR using well crafted experiments between particle accelerators (e.g. LHC) and satellites (e.g. ISS). Strong and weak force integration can be ignored for simplicity since they are strictly confined to short distances and have nearly no influence at long range. QED includes SR (Special Relativity) and needs to be expanded to curved space-time with terrestrial and near-space experiments. If QED and GR are found to be special cases of this experimentally provable general theory, it's a great stepping stone to a more general TOE.

@anaxim1 3 жыл бұрын

Really enjoying Heavy Duty Mysteries Time with Dr. Lincoln. Keep up the good work, please.

@nicholasperry2380 3 жыл бұрын

What a superb series! Thank You. I'm very impressed that you can give people like me a hint of the wonder in science that we can understand. You must be a superb educator and scientist. Interesting bookshelf too. Sort of a question is - How are some of these subjects related to stuff that we might be able to make later such as super-strong cables, rapid recharging power cells and the like.

@Petrov3434 3 жыл бұрын

Thank you for all your efforts !!

@gregorykeating4195 2 жыл бұрын

Just stumbled upon this series - awesome! 95% goes over my head - but the other 5% really causes me to pause and consider the implications! Thanks for expanding my universe Don!

@grolmidri7759 3 жыл бұрын

Thank you for making these videos.

@joseraulcapablanca8564 3 жыл бұрын

Thanks Doctor Lincoln. You are a great communicator. Great to hear Scwarzchild and Le Maitre, getting credit for their parts in the expansion picture. Keep up the good work.

@wayneyadams 3 жыл бұрын

00:59 Dr. Don, in the nine years I worked as a chemist, and the four years in University, I never once looked through a microscope. LOL

@barryomahony4983 3 жыл бұрын

love this series

@wizardofki 3 жыл бұрын

I think that it's the tough questions that will lead us closer to TOE if anything will and exploring around the "edges" of what we already understand. The thought that we could build a particle accelerator with a diameter of four light-years or more is just silly.

@JohnJohansen2 3 жыл бұрын

Can't wait to the next episodes! Although it's a hard one. I believe you're my biggest idol on KZfaq, that doesn't has food as the subject.😉

@althomas6045 3 жыл бұрын

you never stop teaching us, helping us see, enlightening us: " a quadrillion is a lot ". thank you for all you've done and all you've done for us.

@montenegroalvaro 3 жыл бұрын

Hi Don, great videos as always. Question for the Q&A section: if a particle (or anything) cannot be accelerated to the speed of light, how can we decelerate photons (Glasgow experiment) in a vacuum? Aren’t we breaking some kind of logical symmetry?

@martijnvangorp 3 жыл бұрын

Great video again!

@folkertjanhoogstra820 3 жыл бұрын

Hi Don, Can u maybe also do a video on the electro-weak model? Great series!

@KonekoEalain 3 жыл бұрын

Hey Don! Any thoughts on the black holes discovered that are thought to be too big for how ancient they are? Love the series!

@MrWildbill 3 жыл бұрын

Thanks for a great series but I have one question or really one question that stands out more than the million other questions watching your series raised in my mind. Does the Weak Force exist in stable atoms, like in Iron or Silicon or for that matter Hydrogen. If it does exist in stable atoms what does it do?

@jcf20010 3 жыл бұрын

This is a super condensed version of "The Theory of Everything, The Quest to Explain All Reality" which I have watched several times.

@Harazmatik 3 жыл бұрын

Nice video as always!

@Simonov85 3 жыл бұрын

Dr. Lincoln, could you perhaps address the question in one of your future videos whether all atoms will eventually decay into elementary particles? There are so many different factors to take into account from entropy to possible recombination (not the epoch) to the expansion of the universe to the unimaginably long time that it would take 'stable' elements to decay that I am not able to come up with a definite answer myself. Much appreciated!

@kalokajoe357 3 жыл бұрын

Just a big thank you.

@patrickaycock3655 3 жыл бұрын

Please dont stop making vids like these! I be sad.

@benediktwalch1605 3 жыл бұрын

I am definitely looking forward to those upcoming episodes?

@GlennHamblin 3 жыл бұрын

Physics is everything!!

@codyramseur 3 жыл бұрын

I’m glad to hear your take on CCC. I had the same skepticism regarding the prediction of Hawking Points, given that we have observed the sky in the microwave wavelength. wouldn’t it be useful to consider a redshift in this circumstance. Also I’d think it would be useful to address the idea that a singularity in reality is not actually pointlike and as such might contain topological information that would influence the early structures in the Universe. Like it seems difficult to logically go from a 2D object to a 0D object, then back to a 2D again. It would seem more likely that the singularity is 2D but just many orders of magnitude smaller. Idk

@mikeclarke952 3 жыл бұрын

I like the football field analogy and helps explain why Sabine gets so mad at particle physicists begging the world to give them billions of dollars so they can build a bigger particle accelerator. Subscribed.

@drdon5205 3 жыл бұрын

Yeah...Sabine is smart, but I don't agree with her. She cartoon-ifies the conversation. Nobody thinks we will get a TOE from another accelerator. Nor do we know that it will answer a big question. It's exploratory science. We don't know the answer until we do it. It's totally valid to ask if it's worth the money. And I have asked her personally what experiments should be done instead. Sadly, her answers are pretty vague and, as you say, a big angry. She does grumpy old guy better than I do and I >>AM

@mikeclarke952 3 жыл бұрын

@@drdon5205 Thank you for the informative reply.

@smlanka4u 3 жыл бұрын

Very interesting. Thank you so much for sharing your great knowledge.

@smlanka4u 3 жыл бұрын

There are mathematical structures and mathematical ratios between elementary particles: Finding a mathematical beauty between the elementary particles in the standard model of particle physics: The Mass of a Up Quark = 2.2 MeV/c^2 The Mass of a Charm Quark = 1280 MeV/c^2 The Mass of a Top Quark = 173100 MeV/c^2 The Mass of a Electron = 0.511 MeV/c^2 The Mass of a Muon = 105.66 MeV/c^2 The Mass of a Tau = 1776.8 MeV/c^2 2.2 / 0.511 = 4.305283757338552 ---- (A) 1280 / 105.66 = 12.11432897974636 ---- (B) 173100 / 1776.8 = 97.42233228275552 ---- (C) From (B) and (C); 97.42233228275552 / 12.11432897974636 = 8.041909085153082 or around 8 ---- (D) Bottom Quark 4180 MeV/C^2 / Strange Quark 96 MeV/C^2 = 43.5 or around 40 ---- (E) Strange Quark 96 MeV/C^2 / Down Quark 4.7 MeV/C^2 = 20.4 or around 20 ---- (F) From (E) and (F); Main Pattern Factor = 40/20 = 2 ---- (G) From (D) and (G); 8/2 = 4 ---- (H) From (B) and (H); 12.11432897974636 / 4 = 3.02858224493659 (But (A) = 4.305283757338552) Finding a mathematical beauty: From (A); (2.2 - 0.511) / 0.511 = 3.305283757338552 ---- (I) 11.11432897974636 / 4 = 2.77858224493659 96.42233228275552 173100 / 4180 = 41.41148325358852 1280 / 96 = 13.33333333333333 2.2 / 4.7 = 0.4680851063829787 41.41148325358852 / 13.33333333333333 = 3.105861244019139 13.33333333333333 / 0.4680851063829787 = 28.48484848484848 28.48484848484848 / 3.105861244019139 = 9.171320367160919 ------------------------------------------------------- Finding a mathematical beauty: 173100 / 1280 = 135.234375 Pattern Factor = 2 135.234375 / 2 = 67.6171875 1280 / 67.6171875 = 18.93009820912767 18.93009820912767 / 4.7 = 4.027680470027164 18.93009820912767 / 0.511 = 37.04520197480953 37.04520197480953 / 4.027680470027164 = 9.197651663405088 1280 / 105.66 = 12.11432897974636 12.11432897974636 / 13.33333333333333 = 0.908574673480977 ------------------------------------------------------- Finding a mathematical beauty: 173100 / 1776.8 = 97.42233228275552 97.42233228275552 / 41.41148325358852 = 2.352543899144529 or around 2.35 or 4.7/2 A mathematical beauty: 2.352543899144529 x 2 = 4.705087798289058 (around the mass of a down quark) According to the Pattern of the Down, Strange and Bottom Quarks: 4.7/10 = 0.47 0.47/5 = 0.094 If the Down Quark is at the center; The Mass of a quark in the smaller 3rd quarks group = 4.7 / 50 = 0.094 4.705087798289058 / 50 = 0.0941017559657812 or around 0.093463217 MeV/c^2 The number of standard elementary particles groups (columns) = 3 The most obvious impact between the last particles group with the first particles group of the standard model: The impact = (The Up quark position / 8) for (The Tau position / 2) OR The impact = (The Tau position / 2) for (The Up quark position / 8) Start of the Pattern Factor = 2 Growth of the Pattern Factor = 2 x 2 x 2 = 8 18.93009820912767 / 8 = 2.366262276140959 (2 + 2.366262276140959)/2 = 2.18313113807048 (around the mass of a up quark) My calculations show a mathematical beauty between some elementary particles in the Standard Model which can help to find the missing links of the other particles. - W. Suresh Madusanka

@smlanka4u 3 жыл бұрын

Finding a mathematical beauty to calculate the Masses of nearest main small elementary particles: According to the ratios of the Masses there are many Pattern Factors. Eg: The Pattern Factors of Electron, Muon and Tau should be equal to 3. And there are Pattern Factors for Up, Charm and Top quarks around 4 : 8 or 2 : 4 : 8, and it shows an impact to the Electron too. If we remove the impact to the Tau then the virtual mass of the Tau = 1776.8 x 2 = 3553.6 MeV/c^2 The virtual mass of the Tau 3553.6 MeV/c^2 / The mass of the Muon 105.66 MeV/c^2 = 33.63240583002082 The Pattern Factor of Leptons = 3 The mass of the Muon 105.66 MeV/c^2 / The virtual mass of the Electron = 33.63240583002082 x 3 The virtual mass of the Electron = 105.66 / 100.8972174900625 = 1.047204299864926 MeV/c^2 The virtual mass of the Electron 1.047204299864926 MeV/c^2 / 2 = 0.5236021499324629is or around the standard mass of the Electron = 0.511 MeV/c^2 So the most possible impacts (ratio); (The Up quark position / 8) : (The Electron position / 2) : (The Tau position / 2) Prediction 1: The virtual mass of the Electron 1.047204299864926 MeV/c^2 / A small Electron = 100.8972174900625 x 3 A small Electron = 1.047204299864926 / 302.6916524701875 = 0.0034596404998914 MeV/c^2 OR A small Electron = 0.511 x 2 / 302.6916524701875 = 0.0033763732552904 MeV/c^2 The most possible Mass of a small Electron = 0.0034 MeV/c^2 Prediction 2: -------------------- The 1st possibility: Main Pattern Factor = 2 135.234375 / 2 = 67.6171875 67.6171875 / 2 = 33.80859375 A small Up Quark = 2.2 / 33.80859375 = 0.0650722125938764 MeV/c^2 But, A small Up Quark / A small Electron = 0.0650722125938764 / 0.0034 = 19.13888605702246 And, A small Up Quark / A small Electron should be equal to around 3.02858224493659 / 4 = 0.7571455612341475 -------------------- The 2nd possibility: 2.2 / 135.234375 = 0.0162680531484691 MeV/c^2 But, A small Up Quark / A small Electron = 0.0162680531484691 / 0.0034 = 4.784721514255616 And, A small Up Quark / A small Electron should be equal to around 0.7571455612341475 -------------------- The 3rd possibility: 1280 / 2.2 = 581.8181818181818 581.8181818181818 / 135.234375 = 4.302295047529016 or around 4 A possible Pattern Factor = 4 A possible Pattern = 4 x 135.234375 x 4 (OR 581.8181818181818 x 4) The virtual mass of the Up Quark = 18.93009820912767 MeV/c^2 A small Up Quark = 18.93009820912767 / (4 x 135.234375 x 4) = 0.0087487455616997 MeV/c^2 OR A small Up Quark = 2.2 x 8 / 2163.75 = 0.0081340265742345 MeV/c^2 (0.0087487455616997 + 0.0081340265742345) / 2 = 0.0084413860679671 A possible mass of a small Up Quark = 0.008441 MeV/c^2 (OR 0.00874 OR 0.00813 MeV/c^2) But, A small Up Quark / A small Electron = 0.00844 / 0.0034 = 2.482352941176471 And, A small Up Quark / A small Electron should be equal to around 0.7571455612341475 -------------------- The 4th possibility: 2.2 / 581.8181818181818 = 0.00378125 MeV/c^2 But, A small Up Quark / A small Electron = 0.00378125 / 0.0034 = 1.112132352941177 And, A small Up Quark / A small Electron should be equal to around 0.7571455612341475 -------------------- The 5th possibility: 2.2 / ((135.234375 x 4) x 3 / 2) = 2.2 / 811.40625 = 0.0027113421914115 MeV/c^2 But, A small Up Quark / A small Electron = 0.0027113421914115 / 0.0034 = 0.7974535857092647 And, A small Up Quark / A small Electron should be equal to around 0.7571455612341475 -------------------- The 6th possibility: A small Up Quark / A small Electron should be equal to around 0.7571455612341475 So the required mass of a small Up Quark = 0.00844 x (0.7571455612341475 / 2.482352941176471) = 0.00844 x 0.3050112450469314 MeV/c^2 So the most possible Mass of a small Up Quark = 0.0025742949081961 MeV/c^2 OR around 0.00257 MeV/c^2 A small Up Quark / A small Electron = 0.0025742949081961 / 0.0034 = 0.7571455612341471 -------------------- Conclusion: It seems that there are many types of small Up Quarks (Upper Quarks). The most possible main Mass of a small Up Quark should be around 0.00257 MeV/c^2 OR 0.00271 MeV/c^2 OR 0.00844 MeV/c^2 --------------------------------------------------------- Finding a mathematical beauty: 41.41148325358852 / 13.33333333333333 = 3.105861244019139 (The Pattern Factor = around 3) 13.33333333333333 / 3 = 4.444444444444443 (But; Up Quark 2.2 / Down Quark 4.7 = 0.4680851063829787) -------------------------------------- If a small Up Quark = 0.00257 MeV/c^2; A small Up Quark 0.00257 MeV/c^2 / A small Down Quark 0.467 MeV/c^2 = 0.0055032119914347 ------------------- The 1st Possibility: 0.4680851063829787 / 3 = 0.1560283687943262 0.1560283687943262 / 0.0055032119914347 = 28.35223666418296 A possible mass of a small Down Quark = 0.467 MeV/c^2 / 28.35223666418296 = 0.01647 MeV/c^2 ------------------- The 2nd Possibility: 4.444444444444443 / 3 = 1.481481481481481 1.481481481481481 / 0.0055032119914347 = 269.2030551952725 A possible mass of a small Down Quark = 0.467 MeV/c^2 / 269.2030551952725 = 0.00173 MeV/c^2 ------------------- The 3rd Possibility: The virtual Up Quark 18.93009820912767 / Down Quark 4.7 = 4.027680470027164 4.027680470027164 / 3 = 1.342560156675721 1.342560156675721 / 0.0055032119914347 = 243.9593747733699 A possible mass of a small Down Quark = 0.467 MeV/c^2 / 243.9593747733699 = 0.00191 MeV/c^2 -------------------------------------- If a small Up Quark = 0.00844 MeV/c^2; A small Up Quark 0.00844 MeV/c^2 / A small Down Quark 0.467 MeV/c^2 = 0.0180728051391863 ------------------- The 1st Possibility: 0.4680851063829787 / 3 = 0.1560283687943262 0.1560283687943262 / 0.0180728051391863 = 8.633323249638665 A possible mass of a small Down Quark = 0.467 MeV/c^2 / 8.633323249638665 = 0.05409 MeV/c^2 ------------------- The 2nd Possibility: 4.444444444444443 / 3 = 1.481481481481481 1.481481481481481 / 0.0180728051391863 = 81.97296822889235 A possible mass of a small Down Quark = 0.467 MeV/c^2 / 81.97296822889235 = 0.005697 MeV/c^2 ------------------- The 3rd Possibility: The virtual Up Quark 18.93009820912767 / Down Quark 4.7 = 4.027680470027164 4.027680470027164 / 3 = 1.342560156675721 1.342560156675721 / 0.0180728051391863 = 74.28620772127507 A possible mass of a small Down Quark = 0.467 MeV/c^2 / 74.28620772127507 = 0.006286 MeV/c^2 ----------------------------------------------------------- Finding a mathematical beauty: Down Quark 4.7 / The virtual mass of the Electron 1.047204299864926 = 4.488140471354282 or around 4 Strange Quark 96 / Muon 105.66 = 0.9085746734809767 or around 1 Bottom Quark 4180 / Muon 1776.8 = 2.352543899144529 or around 2 The above Pattern Factors ratio = 4 : 1 : 2 The most possible Pattern Factors = 0.5 : 4 : 1 : 2 OR 2 : 4 : 1 : 2 OR 3 : 4 : 1 : 2 The 1st Possibility: A possible mass of a small Down Quark 0.00173 / A small Electron 0.0034 = 0.5088235294117647 or around 0.5 The Pattern Factor of the 0.00173 small Down Quark matches the above most possible Pattern Factor 0.5 which came from this pattern factors 0.5 : 4 : 1 : 2. The 2nd Possibility: A possible mass of a small Down Quark 0.006286 / A small Electron 0.0034 = 1.848823529411765 or around 2 The Pattern Factor of the 0.006286 small Down Quark matches the above most possible Pattern Factor 2 which came from this pattern factors 2 : 4 : 1 : 2. Final Prediction: According to the impacts of the most Pattern Factors the most possible previous layer of the Up Quark, Down Quark and Electron: The most possible Mass of a nearest main small Up Quark (Upper Quark) = 0.00257 MeV/c^2 (OR maximum around 0.008441 MeV/c^2) The most possible Mass of a nearest main small Down Quark (Lower Quark) = 0.00173 MeV/c^2 (OR maximum around 0.006286 MeV/c^2) The most possible Mass of a nearest main small Electron (Mini Electron) = 0.0034 MeV/c^2 The 27km long LHC could discover the 4.7 MeV/c^2 particle, and maybe a 100km long LHC or a maximum a 500km long LHC can discover can discover a 0.00257 MeV/c^2 Upper Quark, 0.00173 MeV/c^2 Lower Quark and a 0.0034 MeV/c^2 Mini Electron particles etc. - W. Suresh Madusanka

@smlanka4u 3 жыл бұрын

Combination of the duality of 6 directions and the 6 distances of the first start of the Universe: (+0-0)^6 + (-0+0)^6 = MATTER + ANTIMATTER (+0-0)^6 = i: (+1-(-1))^3 X ii: (+0.0-0.0)^3 = ( This should be the Pure Eight (Pali: Suddhātthaka) in Buddhism: Maybe there is a fundamental cause for the stable existence of the Heat, Solid, Liquid and Gas. Heat...: + (+1)^3 Solid..: - ((+1)^3 x (-1) Liquid.: - ((-1)^2 x (+1)^2)) Gas....: + (-1)^2 x (+1) - ( + (+1)^2 x (-1) - ((+1)^2 x (-1)^2 - ((-1)^3 x (+1))) + (-1)^3) )) x ii: (+0.0-0.0)^3 = ( This should be the 12 elementary particles (of matter) of Standard Model (in particle physics): 01. electron neutrino: + (+(1))(+1)^3 02. electron: - ((+(1))(+1)^3 x (-1) 03. down quark: - ((+(1))(-1)^2 x (+1)^2)) 04. up quark: + (+(1))(-1)^2 x (+1) - ( { Standard Forces } AND/OR { 05. charm quark: + (+(1))(+1)^2 x (-1) 06. strange quark: - (+(1))((+1)^2 x (-1)^2 07. muon: - (+(1))((-1)^3 x (+1))) 08. muon neutrino: + (+(1))(-1)^3 } ) - ( 09. tau neutrino: + (-(1))(+1)^3 10. tau: - ((-(1))(+1)^3 x (-1) 11. bottom quark: - ((-(1))(-1)^2 x (+1)^2)) 12. top quark: + (-(1))(-1)^2 x (+1) - ( Mini Forces: 13. Mini Z^0 boson: + (-(1))(+1)^2 x (-1) 14. Mini W^+ boson: - (-(1))((+1)^2 x (-1)^2 15. Mini gluon: - (-(1))((-1)^3 x (+1))) 16. Mini photon: + (-(1))(-1)^3)) ))) x This should be the Higgs boson field in Standard Model (in particle physics): 17: (0.000 - 0.000) x (+0.0-0.0) OR = ( This should be position and structure of the 12 standard elementary particles and the 4 forces of the Standard Model (in particle physics): 01. electron neutrino (Mass Ratio Array: (i.) 0.0022 | (ii.) 0.000468 | (iii.) 0.000052631 | (iv.) 0.000011198): + (+(1))(+1)^3 02. electron (Mass Ratio Array: (i.) 0.511 | (ii.) 0.1087 | (iii.) 0.01222489 | (iv.) 0.00260104): - ((+(1))(+1)^3 x (-1) 03. down quark (Mass Ratio Array: (i.) 4.7 | (ii.) 1 | (iii.) 0.112440192 | (iv.) 0.023923445): - ((+(1))(-1)^2 x (+1)^2)) 04. up quark (Mass Ratio Array: (i.) 2.2 | (ii.) 0.468 | (iii.) 0.05263159 | (iv.) 0.01119821): + (+(1))(-1)^2 x (+1) - ( { Forces: 05. Z^0 boson (Mass Ratio Array: (i.) 91190 | (ii.) 19402.1 | (iii.) 2181.5789475 | (iv.) 464.1657335): + (+(1))(+1)^2 x (-1) 06. W^+ boson (Mass Ratio Array: (i.) 80390 | (ii.) 17104.25 | (iii.) 1923.205742 | (iv.) 409.192711): - (+(1))((+1)^2 x (-1)^2 07. gluon: - (+(1))((-1)^3 x (+1))) 08. photon: + (+(1))(-1)^3 } AND/OR { 05. charm quark (Mass Ratio Array: (i.) 1280 | (ii.) 272.34 | (iii.) 30.62201 | (iv.) 6.5153212): + (+(1))(+1)^2 x (-1) 06. strange quark (Mass Ratio Array: (i.) 96 | (ii.) 20.4 | (iii.) 2.2966508 | (iv.) 0.4886491): - (+(1))((+1)^2 x (-1)^2 07. muon (Mass Ratio Array: (i.) 105.66 | (ii.) 22.48 | (iii.) 2.527754 | (iv.) 0.53782): - (+(1))((-1)^3 x (+1))) 08. muon neutrino (Mass Ratio Array: (i.) 0.17 | (ii.) 0.036 | (iii.) 0.004067004 | (iv.) 0.00086532): + (+(1))(-1)^3 } ) - ( { 09. mini neutrino: + (-(1))(+1)^3 10. mini electron: - ((-(1))(+1)^3 x (-1) 11. lower quark: - ((-(1))(-1)^2 x (+1)^2)) 12. upper quark: + (-(1))(-1)^2 x (+1) } AND/OR { 09. tau neutrino (Mass Ratio Array: (i.) 18.2 | (ii.) 3.87 | (iii.) 0.435408 | (iv.) 0.09264): + (-(1))(+1)^3 10. tau (Mass Ratio Array: (i.) 1776.8 | (ii.) 378 | (iii.) 42.50727 | (iv.) 9.0441): - ((-(1))(+1)^3 x (-1) 11. bottom quark (Mass Ratio Array: (i.) 4180 | (ii.) 889.36 | (iii.) 100 | (iv.) 21.276596): - ((-(1))(-1)^2 x (+1)^2)) 12. top quark (Mass Ratio Array: (i.) 173100 | (ii.) 36829.787 | (iii.) 4141.148333 | (iv.) 881.09539): + (-(1))(-1)^2 x (+1) } - ( { Mini Forces (including Quantum Gravity): 13. Mini Z^0 boson: + (-(1))(+1)^2 x (-1) 14. Mini W^+ boson: - (-(1))((+1)^2 x (-1)^2 15. Mini gluon: - (-(1))((-1)^3 x (+1))) 16. Mini photon: + (-(1))(-1)^3)) } AND { 13. mini charm quark: + (-(1))(+1)^2 x (-1) 14. mini strange quark: - (-(1))((+1)^2 x (-1)^2 15. mini muon: - (-(1))((-1)^3 x (+1))) 16. mini muon neutrino: + (-(1))(-1)^3)) } ))) x 17: (0.000 - 0.000) x (+0.0-0.0) = nearly: ( Maybe there are 6 layers of elementary particles with spin (0.5 or 1/2), and Charge 2/3 and -1/3: ((+0.5......-(-0.5......)) + (+0.5......-(-0.5......)) + (+0.5......-(-0.5......))) x (2,/3 / (1........x(7/7)) x 1......x(5/5) x 1_..../(3/3) / (1...... x 1_../(1/1)) - 1..../3 x (1....../(5/5) x (NEUTRAL)/5 X5) x 1_..../(3/3) / (1.....x(5/5) x (NEUTRAL) x 1_../(1/1))) x 0.00000 According to my mathematical calculations, the unstable 6th dimension caused to make 1/2 Spin, 2/3 and -1/3 Charge, 6 layers of elementary particles, Combinations of layers etc. - W. Suresh Madusanka

@smlanka4u 3 жыл бұрын

There is space for 6 dimensions because of the 6 directons of the Universe. I have explained how (+1-(-1))3 dimensions combined and make 8 dimensional formations including 4 dimensional forms with 3 dimensions and 4 dimensional forms with 4 dimensions. And then a 5th dimension (+1-(-1)) from this (+0.0-0.0)3 with a strange field (0.000 - 0.000) x (+0.0-0.0) which caused to form the 6 quarks, 6 leptons, 4 forces and a strange Higgs boson of the standard model in particle physics. (+0-0) x (+0-0) x (+0-0) x (+0-0) x (+0-0) x (+0-0) = (+1-(-1))3 x (+0.0-0.0)3 (+0.0-0.0)3 = (+(1)-(-(1))) x (0.000 - 0.000) x (+0.0-0.0) Most Possible or Probable Outputs of (+0.000 - 0.000) x (+0.0-0.0) : (+0.000 - 0.000) x (+0.0-0.0) = (+0.0-0.0) x (0) x (0) x (+0.0-0.0) ----(A) (+0.000 - 0.000) x (+0.0-0.0) = (+0.000/(0) - 0.000/(0)) x (+0.0x(0)-0.0x(0)) ----(B) From the (A): (+0.000 - 0.000) x 1_../(1/1) = (+0.0-0.0) x (0) x (0) x 1..x(1/1) ----(P) ((+0.000 - 0.000) x 1_../(1/1))/ ((0) x 1..x(1/1)) = (+0.0-0.0) x (0) ----(C) From the (B) and (C): (+0.000 - 0.000) x (+0.0-0.0) = (+0.000/(0) - 0.000/(0)) x ((+0.000 - 0.000) x 1_../(1/1))/ ((0) x 1..x(1/1)) 1_..../(3/3) x (+0.0-0.0) = (+0.000/(0) - 0.000/(0)) x (1....x(3/3) x 1_../(1/1))/ ((0) x 1..x(1/1)) ----(Q) (+0.000/(0) - 0.000/(0)) = 1_..../(3/3) x 1..x(1/1) x (+0.0-0.0) x (0) / (1....x(3/3) x 1_../(1/1)) ----(D) From the (B) and (D): (+0.000 - 0.000) x (+0.0-0.0) = 1_..../(3/3) x 1..x(1/1) x (+0.0-0.0) x (0) / (1....x(3/3) x 1_../(1/1)) x (+0.0x(0)-0.0x(0)) (+0.000 - 0.000) x (+0.0-0.0) = (+0.00-0.00) x (+0.00-0.00) x 1_..../(3/3) x 1..x(1/1) / (1....x(3/3) x 1_../(1/1)) Using this (a+b)^2=a^2+2ab+b^2 mathematical formula to get the Most Possible or Probable outputs of this result: (+0.00-0.00) x (+0.00-0.00) x 1_..../(3/3) x 1..x(1/1) / (1....x(3/3) x 1_../(1/1)) = (0.00^2 - (1...... x 1......) x 0.00 x 0.00 + 0.00^2) x 1_..../(3/3) x 1....x(3/3) / (1......x(5/5) x 1_../(1/1)) = (0.00000/(1......x(5/5)) - (1......) x (NEUTRAL) x 0.00000 /5 X5) + 0.00000/(1......x(5/5))) x 1_..../(3/3) x 1....x(3/3) / ((NEUTRAL) x 1_../(1/1)) = ((0.00000/(1......x(5/5)) + 0.00000/(1......x(5/5))) x 1....x(3/3) - (1......) x 0.00000 x (NEUTRAL)/5 X5 x 1....x(3/3)) x 1_..../(3/3) / ((NEUTRAL) x 1_../(1/1)) Starting to use the 6th dimension. But it makes many small forms of it, because it is unable to make a large main dimension. = ((0.00000/(1......x(5/5)) + 0.00000/(1......x(5/5))) x 1....x(3/3) - (+0.5......-(-0.5......)) x 1....x(3/3) x 0.00000 x (NEUTRAL)/5 X5) x 1_..../(3/3) / ((NEUTRAL) x 1_../(1/1)) = (((0.00000/(1......x(5/5)) + 0.00000/(1......x(5/5))) x 1....x(3/3)) - ((+0.5......-(-0.5......)) x 1....x(3/3) x 0.00000 x (NEUTRAL)/5 X5)) x 1_..../(3/3) / ((NEUTRAL) x 1_../(1/1)) = (0.00000/(1........x(7/7)) x 2, x 3 /3 x (+0.5......-(-0.5......)) - (+0.5......-(-0.5......)) x 1....x(3/3) x 0.00000 x (NEUTRAL)/5 X5) x 1_..../(3/3) / ((NEUTRAL) x 1_../(1/1)) = (+0.5......-(-0.5......)) x (0.00000/(1........x(7/7)) x 2, x 3 /3 - 1....x(3/3) x 0.00000 x (NEUTRAL)/5 X5) x 1_..../(3/3) / ((NEUTRAL) x 1_../(1/1)) = (+0.5......-(-0.5......)) x (2, x 3 /3 /(1........x(7/7)) - 1....x(3/3) x (NEUTRAL)/5 X5) x 0.00000 x 1_..../(3/3) / ((NEUTRAL) x 1_../(1/1)) = (+0.5......-(-0.5......)) x 3 x (2,/3 / (1........x(7/7)) - 1..../3 x (NEUTRAL)/5 X5) x 0.00000 x 1_..../(3/3) / ((NEUTRAL) x 1_../(1/1)) = ((+0.5......-(-0.5......)) + (+0.5......-(-0.5......)) + (+0.5......-(-0.5......))) x (2,/3 / (1........x(7/7)) x 1......x(5/5) - 1..../3 x 1....../(5/5) x (NEUTRAL)/5 X5) x 0.00000 x 1_..../(3/3) / (1......x(5/5) x (NEUTRAL) x 1_../(1/1)) = ((+0.5......-(-0.5......)) + (+0.5......-(-0.5......)) + (+0.5......-(-0.5......))) x (2,/3 / (1........x(7/7)) x 1......x(5/5) x 1_..../(3/3) / (1...... x 1_../(1/1)) - 1..../3 x (1....../(5/5) x (NEUTRAL)/5 X5) x 1_..../(3/3) / (1.....x(5/5) x (NEUTRAL) x 1_../(1/1))) x 0.00000 So, the final output of this (+0.000 - 0.000) x (+0.0-0.0) is nearly: ((+0.5......-(-0.5......)) + (+0.5......-(-0.5......)) + (+0.5......-(-0.5......))) x (2,/3 / (1........x(7/7)) x 1......x(5/5) x 1_..../(3/3) / (1...... x 1_../(1/1)) - 1..../3 x (1....../(5/5) x (NEUTRAL)/5 X5) x 1_..../(3/3) / (1.....x(5/5) x (NEUTRAL) x 1_../(1/1))) x 0.00000 According to the Standard Model of Particle Physics, the Spin of most elementary particles = 1/2 (or 0.5) the Charge of some Quarks = 2/3 the Charge of other Quarks = -1/3 the Charge of electrons = -1 According to my mathematical calculations the 6th +1-1 dimension is unstable, because already there are +0.5-0.5 half dimension with larger +2/3 dimension against the -1/3 dimension, so that is why those dimensions behave like Spin and Charge of elementary particles. I think my mathematical calculations clearly show a similarity to the elementary particles of the Standard Model in Particle Physics. - W. Suresh Madusanka (That was the second part of My Theory Of Everything.)

@glenwoofit 3 жыл бұрын

I love these videos

@monkerud2108 3 жыл бұрын

liked the video tho what I was trying to say even more simply; the Weyl hypothesis= open past + possible new future evolution after exponential expansion. which is not that far fetched, it's the predictions that are bad in my opinion. its actually completely compatible with the standard picture in cosmology, apart from the pieces we cant see because of limitations in measurement and wiping out of information.

@zbyszekz77 3 жыл бұрын

Can we have episode covering fine-structure constant and maybe other dimensionless constants?

@morkovija 3 жыл бұрын

Oh hey, a fellow man of culture i see!

@jimroyal 3 жыл бұрын

Dr. Lincoln, a question on relativity: When time dilation is explained to people, it's usually illustrated with two observers moving past each other (such as the photon clock thought experiment), to make the explanation simple. But does it get more complex when observers move directly toward or directly away from each other? If two observers are moving toward each other, do they still observe time slow down for the other, or does the observed rate of time speed up and slow down as the observers approach and then recede from each other?

@drdon5205 3 жыл бұрын

The time dilation occurs in all of the cases you mention.

@sigmawaves8970 3 жыл бұрын

OMG.. my question got picked 🤓🤓

@TupacMakaveli1996 3 жыл бұрын

Hello Prof. Don, I really like your videos. Thanks for great videos. I have a question to ask. What are your thought about TOE and Gödel incompleteness theorem? Do you think the two can coexist? Thanks

@randolphtimm6031 3 жыл бұрын

The physical universe as we, observe it, is built on dimensions: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4 .... With 0 dimensions we have a point, the beginning. Then, extend that point along a line and we have 1 dimension. Gravity is a 1 dimensional force between 2 points. Extend the line perpendicularly and we get a plane, 2 dimensions. Electroweak is the force of 2 dimensions, with positive and negative charge. But to make a closed universe, rather than extend the line perpendicularly, we must extend it radially creating the closed surface of a sphere. Light is the force of 2 dimensions. Extend that spherical manifold perpendicularly and we get the 3 dimensional space that we call the universe. The 4th dimension is not time. Time is the 1 dimensional manifold upon which the other dimensions are built. The 4th dimension is mass, also 1 dimensional, like gravity, and not perpendicular to anything. It does warp the manifold of the 3dimensions of space, however. Any ideas what the Fifth Dimension might be?? This is all theoretical, of course.

@RussellSubedi 3 жыл бұрын

I'm just glad that the conformal cyclic cosmology got mentioned. While I agree that it would be foolish to bet money on it being right, you must admit that it's mathematically pleasing. Probably in the same way Kepler's conic orbits were pleasing, but then GR showed up and (pardon the drama) ruined everything.

@thstroyur 3 жыл бұрын

"in the same way Kepler's conic orbits were pleasing" A more likely comparison would be his polyhedra ( en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mysterium_Cosmographicum )

@RussellSubedi 3 жыл бұрын

@@thstroyur I wholeheartedly agree.

@absoluteego 3 жыл бұрын

8:25 how i want to be greeted by dr. lincoln every morning

@TheSilentWhales 3 жыл бұрын

Cannot...stop...laughing 😂👍.

@Bassotronics 3 жыл бұрын

Hi beautiful!

@mogenslysemose6757 3 жыл бұрын

Didn't know there were groupies in high energy physics, i stand corrected.

@RittervonNord 3 жыл бұрын

Say there is a technological limit we can't cross to run experiments, can we infer reality just from theory and equations? If a theory is supposedly so complete and flawless but our experiments can't observe a certain phenomenon, can we still agree that a theory represents reality? Could simulations replace practical observations?

@sadakotube 3 жыл бұрын

I think its an impossible goal because everything is a huge scope. But its the journey that matters. The journey has given us many advancements.

@DoDoENT 3 жыл бұрын

If we could build a Dyson sphere and use it as lens to focus all of the Sun's energy into a point of size of a proton, how far this point would be from having a Planck energy?

@DoDoENT 3 жыл бұрын

@spaghettarius* from magic mirrors 😛

@setharnold9764 3 жыл бұрын

Oh man are you going to explain TimeCube next episode!? I'm so excited!

@grayaj23 3 жыл бұрын

To be fair, even Penrose says that CCC is unlikely. It's interesting enough to be worth thinking about -- but only just.

@dogcarman 3 жыл бұрын

Interesting ideas are always worth the effort. When the idea has been twisted, bent and knocked around and declared quite dead, someone may look at a detail in the wreckage and go “Hang on - what’s **that**?” And that’s where science starts, not with a shout of “Heureka!” but a simple question.

@spudhead169 3 жыл бұрын

I have a problem with CCC and dark energy, if it is a constant density then there would be an absolute butt load of it by the time of the next aeon. Where would it all go? If it becomes a part of the new aeon then each time it recycles the amount of dark energy would increase by a ludicrous amount.

@gr00veh0lmes 3 жыл бұрын

Even though it’s published and makes predictions that have been confirmed by analysis to have a 99.98% accuracy. It also accounts for the required low entropy seen in the CMB. 🤷🏽‍♂️

@monkerud2108 3 жыл бұрын

i think the idea of "eons" is probably right in some sense, it would basically just be a phase transition, of the vacuum in some sense. although a more realistic version would likely not have quite the same consequences or look quite like Penrose's idea.

@gr00veh0lmes 3 жыл бұрын

@@spudhead169 Dark energy, (or the cosmological constant Lambda) has been experimentally tested. It isn’t constant.

@roshanismailrm 3 жыл бұрын

I always watch your channel with my Wife. Thank God she is also a Physics lover like me.

@oisnowy5368 3 жыл бұрын

One of the reasons I don't think strings will work is because of their scale - jumping from a quark to a string is way too big a leap. But assuming something fundamental exists how many "levels" (molecules/atoms, nuclear particles, quarks, so on) would be between that what we know? 2? 3? 4?

@bobinmaine1 3 жыл бұрын

Hidden in the math of string theory does it find what causes the vibrations? What keeps the regions or strings vibrating at the same frequency to maintain the specific Quarks, Neutrinos and what nots? Or does it state that once a "particle" is created that particle now exists in whatever dimension it has propagated? When I ask these question it seems that there must be something even smaller to set the "fine tuning" of the string field/dimension.

@KoalaMeatPie 3 жыл бұрын

Q: How much energy would it take to knock the higgs field down to its lowest resting state? How is easy would it be for 21stC fleshbags of saltwater to utterly annihilate the literal entirety of the Universe?

@qzbnyv 3 жыл бұрын

I mean... doesn’t vacuum decay spread at C anyway? So due to the rate of expansion of the universe, anything outside of the Local Group would never find out that us fleshbags had done anything. We’re already out of range of most of the observable Universe. Kurzgesagt has good videos both on how we’re confined to the Local Group and on vacuum decay

@BlueRoomEfx 3 жыл бұрын

Hi Don, your good friend Matt O'Dowd over at PBS Spacetime will back me on this - Koalas are NOT BEARS! Sorry - but we get a little touchy about this one in Australia.

@absoluteego 3 жыл бұрын

can you please talk more about these possible cinnamon plantations

@briandiehl9257 3 жыл бұрын

And what energies we need to test our theories on them

@JohnJohansen2 3 жыл бұрын

0:50 Looks like me, Saturday at 4 am. Well. Also at Sunday 4 am. ;-)

@sapelesteve 3 жыл бұрын

Great video as always Dr. L! So, even if we found the answer for TOE, it wouldn't change anything that we already know or would it? What real difference would it make? Just curious... 👍👍😉😉

@ozzymandius666 3 жыл бұрын

It may open the door to better quantum computers or teleportation, maybe even the synthesis of matter or products...

@vineetverma6645 3 жыл бұрын

Toe is incomplete without our theory of existence

@smlanka4u 3 жыл бұрын

There are mathematical structures and mathematical ratios between elementary particles: Finding a mathematical beauty between the elementary particles in the standard model of particle physics: The Mass of a Up Quark = 2.2 MeV/c^2 The Mass of a Charm Quark = 1280 MeV/c^2 The Mass of a Top Quark = 173100 MeV/c^2 The Mass of a Electron = 0.511 MeV/c^2 The Mass of a Muon = 105.66 MeV/c^2 The Mass of a Tau = 1776.8 MeV/c^2 2.2 / 0.511 = 4.305283757338552 ---- (A) 1280 / 105.66 = 12.11432897974636 ---- (B) 173100 / 1776.8 = 97.42233228275552 ---- (C) From (B) and (C); 97.42233228275552 / 12.11432897974636 = 8.041909085153082 or around 8 ---- (D) Bottom Quark 4180 MeV/C^2 / Strange Quark 96 MeV/C^2 = 43.5 or around 40 ---- (E) Strange Quark 96 MeV/C^2 / Down Quark 4.7 MeV/C^2 = 20.4 or around 20 ---- (F) From (E) and (F); Main Pattern Factor = 40/20 = 2 ---- (G) From (D) and (G); 8/2 = 4 ---- (H) From (B) and (H); 12.11432897974636 / 4 = 3.02858224493659 (But (A) = 4.305283757338552) Finding a mathematical beauty: From (A); (2.2 - 0.511) / 0.511 = 3.305283757338552 ---- (I) 11.11432897974636 / 4 = 2.77858224493659 96.42233228275552 173100 / 4180 = 41.41148325358852 1280 / 96 = 13.33333333333333 2.2 / 4.7 = 0.4680851063829787 41.41148325358852 / 13.33333333333333 = 3.105861244019139 13.33333333333333 / 0.4680851063829787 = 28.48484848484848 28.48484848484848 / 3.105861244019139 = 9.171320367160919 ------------------------------------------------------- Finding a mathematical beauty: 173100 / 1280 = 135.234375 Pattern Factor = 2 135.234375 / 2 = 67.6171875 1280 / 67.6171875 = 18.93009820912767 18.93009820912767 / 4.7 = 4.027680470027164 18.93009820912767 / 0.511 = 37.04520197480953 37.04520197480953 / 4.027680470027164 = 9.197651663405088 1280 / 105.66 = 12.11432897974636 12.11432897974636 / 13.33333333333333 = 0.908574673480977 ------------------------------------------------------- Finding a mathematical beauty: 173100 / 1776.8 = 97.42233228275552 97.42233228275552 / 41.41148325358852 = 2.352543899144529 or around 2.35 or 4.7/2 A mathematical beauty: 2.352543899144529 x 2 = 4.705087798289058 (around the mass of a down quark) According to the Pattern of the Down, Strange and Bottom Quarks: 4.7/10 = 0.47 0.47/5 = 0.094 If the Down Quark is at the center; The Mass of a quark in the smaller 3rd quarks group = 4.7 / 50 = 0.094 4.705087798289058 / 50 = 0.0941017559657812 or around 0.093463217 MeV/c^2 The number of standard elementary particles groups (columns) = 3 The most obvious impact between the last particles group with the first particles group of the standard model: The impact = (The Up quark position / 8) for (The Tau position / 2) OR The impact = (The Tau position / 2) for (The Up quark position / 8) Start of the Pattern Factor = 2 Growth of the Pattern Factor = 2 x 2 x 2 = 8 18.93009820912767 / 8 = 2.366262276140959 (2 + 2.366262276140959)/2 = 2.18313113807048 (around the mass of a up quark) My calculations show a mathematical beauty between some elementary particles in the Standard Model which can help to find the missing links of the other particles. - W. Suresh Madusanka

@smlanka4u 3 жыл бұрын

Finding a mathematical beauty to calculate the Masses of nearest main small elementary particles: According to the ratios of the Masses there are many Pattern Factors. Eg: The Pattern Factors of Electron, Muon and Tau should be equal to 3. And there are Pattern Factors for Up, Charm and Top quarks around 4 : 8 or 2 : 4 : 8, and it shows an impact to the Electron too. If we remove the impact to the Tau then the virtual mass of the Tau = 1776.8 x 2 = 3553.6 MeV/c^2 The virtual mass of the Tau 3553.6 MeV/c^2 / The mass of the Muon 105.66 MeV/c^2 = 33.63240583002082 The Pattern Factor of Leptons = 3 The mass of the Muon 105.66 MeV/c^2 / The virtual mass of the Electron = 33.63240583002082 x 3 The virtual mass of the Electron = 105.66 / 100.8972174900625 = 1.047204299864926 MeV/c^2 The virtual mass of the Electron 1.047204299864926 MeV/c^2 / 2 = 0.5236021499324629is or around the standard mass of the Electron = 0.511 MeV/c^2 So the most possible impacts (ratio); (The Up quark position / 8) : (The Electron position / 2) : (The Tau position / 2) Prediction 1: The virtual mass of the Electron 1.047204299864926 MeV/c^2 / A small Electron = 100.8972174900625 x 3 A small Electron = 1.047204299864926 / 302.6916524701875 = 0.0034596404998914 MeV/c^2 OR A small Electron = 0.511 x 2 / 302.6916524701875 = 0.0033763732552904 MeV/c^2 The most possible Mass of a small Electron = 0.0034 MeV/c^2 Prediction 2: -------------------- The 1st possibility: Main Pattern Factor = 2 135.234375 / 2 = 67.6171875 67.6171875 / 2 = 33.80859375 A small Up Quark = 2.2 / 33.80859375 = 0.0650722125938764 MeV/c^2 But, A small Up Quark / A small Electron = 0.0650722125938764 / 0.0034 = 19.13888605702246 And, A small Up Quark / A small Electron should be equal to around 3.02858224493659 / 4 = 0.7571455612341475 -------------------- The 2nd possibility: 2.2 / 135.234375 = 0.0162680531484691 MeV/c^2 But, A small Up Quark / A small Electron = 0.0162680531484691 / 0.0034 = 4.784721514255616 And, A small Up Quark / A small Electron should be equal to around 0.7571455612341475 -------------------- The 3rd possibility: 1280 / 2.2 = 581.8181818181818 581.8181818181818 / 135.234375 = 4.302295047529016 or around 4 A possible Pattern Factor = 4 A possible Pattern = 4 x 135.234375 x 4 (OR 581.8181818181818 x 4) The virtual mass of the Up Quark = 18.93009820912767 MeV/c^2 A small Up Quark = 18.93009820912767 / (4 x 135.234375 x 4) = 0.0087487455616997 MeV/c^2 OR A small Up Quark = 2.2 x 8 / 2163.75 = 0.0081340265742345 MeV/c^2 (0.0087487455616997 + 0.0081340265742345) / 2 = 0.0084413860679671 A possible mass of a small Up Quark = 0.008441 MeV/c^2 (OR 0.00874 OR 0.00813 MeV/c^2) But, A small Up Quark / A small Electron = 0.00844 / 0.0034 = 2.482352941176471 And, A small Up Quark / A small Electron should be equal to around 0.7571455612341475 -------------------- The 4th possibility: 2.2 / 581.8181818181818 = 0.00378125 MeV/c^2 But, A small Up Quark / A small Electron = 0.00378125 / 0.0034 = 1.112132352941177 And, A small Up Quark / A small Electron should be equal to around 0.7571455612341475 -------------------- The 5th possibility: 2.2 / ((135.234375 x 4) x 3 / 2) = 2.2 / 811.40625 = 0.0027113421914115 MeV/c^2 But, A small Up Quark / A small Electron = 0.0027113421914115 / 0.0034 = 0.7974535857092647 And, A small Up Quark / A small Electron should be equal to around 0.7571455612341475 -------------------- The 6th possibility: A small Up Quark / A small Electron should be equal to around 0.7571455612341475 So the required mass of a small Up Quark = 0.00844 x (0.7571455612341475 / 2.482352941176471) = 0.00844 x 0.3050112450469314 MeV/c^2 So the most possible Mass of a small Up Quark = 0.0025742949081961 MeV/c^2 OR around 0.00257 MeV/c^2 A small Up Quark / A small Electron = 0.0025742949081961 / 0.0034 = 0.7571455612341471 -------------------- Conclusion: It seems that there are many types of small Up Quarks (Upper Quarks). The most possible main Mass of a small Up Quark should be around 0.00257 MeV/c^2 OR 0.00271 MeV/c^2 OR 0.00844 MeV/c^2 --------------------------------------------------------- Finding a mathematical beauty: 41.41148325358852 / 13.33333333333333 = 3.105861244019139 (The Pattern Factor = around 3) 13.33333333333333 / 3 = 4.444444444444443 (But; Up Quark 2.2 / Down Quark 4.7 = 0.4680851063829787) -------------------------------------- If a small Up Quark = 0.00257 MeV/c^2; A small Up Quark 0.00257 MeV/c^2 / A small Down Quark 0.467 MeV/c^2 = 0.0055032119914347 ------------------- The 1st Possibility: 0.4680851063829787 / 3 = 0.1560283687943262 0.1560283687943262 / 0.0055032119914347 = 28.35223666418296 A possible mass of a small Down Quark = 0.467 MeV/c^2 / 28.35223666418296 = 0.01647 MeV/c^2 ------------------- The 2nd Possibility: 4.444444444444443 / 3 = 1.481481481481481 1.481481481481481 / 0.0055032119914347 = 269.2030551952725 A possible mass of a small Down Quark = 0.467 MeV/c^2 / 269.2030551952725 = 0.00173 MeV/c^2 ------------------- The 3rd Possibility: The virtual Up Quark 18.93009820912767 / Down Quark 4.7 = 4.027680470027164 4.027680470027164 / 3 = 1.342560156675721 1.342560156675721 / 0.0055032119914347 = 243.9593747733699 A possible mass of a small Down Quark = 0.467 MeV/c^2 / 243.9593747733699 = 0.00191 MeV/c^2 -------------------------------------- If a small Up Quark = 0.00844 MeV/c^2; A small Up Quark 0.00844 MeV/c^2 / A small Down Quark 0.467 MeV/c^2 = 0.0180728051391863 ------------------- The 1st Possibility: 0.4680851063829787 / 3 = 0.1560283687943262 0.1560283687943262 / 0.0180728051391863 = 8.633323249638665 A possible mass of a small Down Quark = 0.467 MeV/c^2 / 8.633323249638665 = 0.05409 MeV/c^2 ------------------- The 2nd Possibility: 4.444444444444443 / 3 = 1.481481481481481 1.481481481481481 / 0.0180728051391863 = 81.97296822889235 A possible mass of a small Down Quark = 0.467 MeV/c^2 / 81.97296822889235 = 0.005697 MeV/c^2 ------------------- The 3rd Possibility: The virtual Up Quark 18.93009820912767 / Down Quark 4.7 = 4.027680470027164 4.027680470027164 / 3 = 1.342560156675721 1.342560156675721 / 0.0180728051391863 = 74.28620772127507 A possible mass of a small Down Quark = 0.467 MeV/c^2 / 74.28620772127507 = 0.006286 MeV/c^2 ----------------------------------------------------------- Finding a mathematical beauty: Down Quark 4.7 / The virtual mass of the Electron 1.047204299864926 = 4.488140471354282 or around 4 Strange Quark 96 / Muon 105.66 = 0.9085746734809767 or around 1 Bottom Quark 4180 / Muon 1776.8 = 2.352543899144529 or around 2 The above Pattern Factors ratio = 4 : 1 : 2 The most possible Pattern Factors = 0.5 : 4 : 1 : 2 OR 2 : 4 : 1 : 2 OR 3 : 4 : 1 : 2 The 1st Possibility: A possible mass of a small Down Quark 0.00173 / A small Electron 0.0034 = 0.5088235294117647 or around 0.5 The Pattern Factor of the 0.00173 small Down Quark matches the above most possible Pattern Factor 0.5 which came from this pattern factors 0.5 : 4 : 1 : 2. The 2nd Possibility: A possible mass of a small Down Quark 0.006286 / A small Electron 0.0034 = 1.848823529411765 or around 2 The Pattern Factor of the 0.006286 small Down Quark matches the above most possible Pattern Factor 2 which came from this pattern factors 2 : 4 : 1 : 2. Final Prediction: According to the impacts of the most Pattern Factors the most possible previous layer of the Up Quark, Down Quark and Electron: The most possible Mass of a nearest main small Up Quark (Upper Quark) = 0.00257 MeV/c^2 (OR maximum around 0.008441 MeV/c^2) The most possible Mass of a nearest main small Down Quark (Lower Quark) = 0.00173 MeV/c^2 (OR maximum around 0.006286 MeV/c^2) The most possible Mass of a nearest main small Electron (Mini Electron) = 0.0034 MeV/c^2 The 27km long LHC could discover the 4.7 MeV/c^2 particle, and maybe a 100km long LHC or a maximum a 500km long LHC can discover can discover a 0.00257 MeV/c^2 Upper Quark, 0.00173 MeV/c^2 Lower Quark and a 0.0034 MeV/c^2 Mini Electron particles etc. - W. Suresh Madusanka

@LynxBlackWind 3 жыл бұрын

Hi Doc, If EM force is exchanging photons between charges and the force is very curved, do photns fly on such a curved lines intead stright? The spacetime is not that bent between magnetic poles, is it?

@sistajoseph 3 жыл бұрын

We now have a theory of everything. A short Treatise on the space time continuum.

@arthjai 3 жыл бұрын

Hello Dr Don Electromagnetic interactions occurs due to exchange of momentum of virtual photons so what causes weak interactions to occur? Do they also exchange momentum of w boson? Also please tell me why virtual particles have less mass compared to real particle?

@edwardlulofs444 3 жыл бұрын

Weak interaction comes from W and Z bosons. And they are the reason that the Higgs had to be added to the standard model. The SM has more holes than swiss cheese. But it's the best we have. . . .

@arthjai 3 жыл бұрын

@@edwardlulofs444 I was asking that how exchange of w and z bosons result in weak interactions

@user-eh5xn2eo9w 3 жыл бұрын

So big difference between achievable scales and the scales of the toe unification. Is there any hint of how could we get to needed energy even if we had all the time there is?

@KasiusKlej 3 жыл бұрын

If we had all the time there is, it would be easy. We could harvest solar energy and store it in a big battery and once we gathered enough of it, run the experiment. I would put that battery on a space station far from Earth by the way.

@mikeclarke952 3 жыл бұрын

Cosmology and all the instruments need to make better measurements of all things electromagnetic, including better rockets to get them into space.

@monkerud2108 3 жыл бұрын

hawking points are not tied to the refutation of the mapping tho, if they don't exist something is wrong with Penrose conclusions, I would suggest a kind of vacuum phase transition, that would replace inflation, and to some extent, it does have this conformal invariance, but it's kind of trivial, it's just a statement of the structure emerging after being wiped out to some extent, I was gonna write about some stuff I'm working on but I won't. the essential point is just that I think Penrose has a good basic idea of conformal invariance allowing an open past. other than that the statements are not very well founded. some great advances will have to be made before we can extrapolate in that way in my opinion, the predictions are as good as guesses, they are based on concrete ideas in GR but still they have no real constraints on them that makes any sense, its essentially a characterization of weyl curvature being 0 and conformal invariance etc. its not actually a solid prediction, because you simply dont know how the early or late part really evolves.

@cranjismcbasketball2118 3 жыл бұрын

8:25... Well Hello!!! 😉😊

@shawnchong5196 3 жыл бұрын

You're hair style got better!!!!

@eatmyshortsanytime 3 жыл бұрын

Hi, what's the role of neutrons? They do something important of they are just sitting there? Thanks

@davesutherland1864 3 жыл бұрын

I have a question that I am sure must have been considered by physicists, but I can not find any discussion of it anywhere. As part of a theory of everything, is it possible that general relativity is correct as it stands and the singularities can just be eliminated by a boundary condition? This would mean there is no need for a quantum theory of gravity. For example, in the case of looking at increasingly dense energy/matter concentrations, can you map an evolution from a neutron star to a black hole and apply a boundary condition at the surface of the entity? If I understood a video I saw on PBS Space time a neutron star is nominally compose of neutrons, but if it acquires enough mass the neutrons may start to transform into quarks (quark matter) and these quarks may then transform into strange quarks (strange matter). If you just keep adding mass will you go through various ‘matter/energy’ transformations where the minimum size will be determined by quantum properties, which then set a boundary condition (non zero volume) beyond which general relativity does not really have meaning?

@mosgnz 3 жыл бұрын

In my understanding, the frequency of a photon depends on the velocity of the source and the observer, which we call as the doppler effect. Are other force carrying particles affected by doppler shift? Also, the mass carrying particles are basically vibrations in a field. Do they experience or affected by doppler shift? Sorry if these questions are not related to the topic in the video. I discovered this series recently and I'm binge watching them multiple time. I assumed my comments won't be read if I put them in the older videos. Thank you

@drdon5205 3 жыл бұрын

Yes.

@nHans 3 жыл бұрын

Didn't find as many ToE jokes and puns in the comments as I hoped. So I added some, including direct quotes from the video taken out of context: 😎 Hey Dr. Lincoln, did you put your fingers 🖐 between the ToEs and pick your feet 🦶 in Poughkeepsie? Jimmy Doyle was asking. 😎 4:10 *Dr. Lincoln:* "Scientists have even tried to imagine what a ToE might look like." *Me:* I have some suggestions: • Have the scientists-I'm assuming Dr. Lincoln means "physicists"-tried asking biologists, doctors, pathologists, morticians, or literally anyone else, what one looks like? • Assuming they have intact feet, have they tried looking at it directly? Of course, they'll need to take off their footwear, including socks. So don't do this on a construction site or in Antarctica. • Alternatively, have they tried googling it? • As for Nick Vujicic-you're an inspiration-what do you imagine one might look like? I'd love to see; it'll be fascinating for sure. 😎 By the way-true story-I started typing "what does a toe look like " into the Google search bar, and it gave me these suggestions: • what does a toenail fungus look like 😝 • what does a toe infection look like 🤢 • what does a toe look like without a toenail 🤮 😎 *Dr. Lincoln:* The most successful ToE-and it's not all that successful, by the way-is called the Superstring Theory. *Me:* Well, for one, it has a name. That's more than you can say for almost every other toe out there. 😎 *Dr. Lincoln:* So you might ask yourself if a ToE's a reasonable idea. *Me:* Prehensile, sure. Vestigial stubs like mine-definitely not. *Dr. Lincoln:* Well in my opinion it is. I don't know if it's right, but it's reasonable.

@ukasznowak5422 3 жыл бұрын

Hi. Question for the Q&A section: Is it possible that dark matter or/and dark energy are photons ? Light is everywhere and going in all directions, so if mass of photons is very, very small (so we can't measure) but number of photons is very big, maybe it is missing mass of universe ?

@angelomarcio8382 3 жыл бұрын

Dear Don Lincoln, what is the most dangerous "matter" for the "ordinary matter"? Antimatter, strange (quark) matter or high generation (2nd or 3rd quarks generation) matter?

@smlanka4u 3 жыл бұрын

Combination of the duality of 6 directions and the 6 distances of the first start of the Universe: (+0-0)^6 + (-0+0)^6 = MATTER + ANTIMATTER (+0-0)^6 = i: (+1-(-1))^3 X ii: (+0.0-0.0)^3 = ( This should be the Pure Eight (Pali: Suddhātthaka) in Buddhism: Maybe there is a fundamental cause for the stable existence of the Heat, Solid, Liquid and Gas. Heat...: + (+1)^3 Solid..: - ((+1)^3 x (-1) Liquid.: - ((-1)^2 x (+1)^2)) Gas....: + (-1)^2 x (+1) - ( + (+1)^2 x (-1) - ((+1)^2 x (-1)^2 - ((-1)^3 x (+1))) + (-1)^3) )) x ii: (+0.0-0.0)^3 = ( This should be the 12 elementary particles (of matter) of Standard Model (in particle physics): 01. electron neutrino: + (+(1))(+1)^3 02. electron: - ((+(1))(+1)^3 x (-1) 03. down quark: - ((+(1))(-1)^2 x (+1)^2)) 04. up quark: + (+(1))(-1)^2 x (+1) - ( { Standard Forces } AND/OR { 05. charm quark: + (+(1))(+1)^2 x (-1) 06. strange quark: - (+(1))((+1)^2 x (-1)^2 07. muon: - (+(1))((-1)^3 x (+1))) 08. muon neutrino: + (+(1))(-1)^3 } ) - ( 09. tau neutrino: + (-(1))(+1)^3 10. tau: - ((-(1))(+1)^3 x (-1) 11. bottom quark: - ((-(1))(-1)^2 x (+1)^2)) 12. top quark: + (-(1))(-1)^2 x (+1) - ( Mini Forces: 13. Mini Z^0 boson: + (-(1))(+1)^2 x (-1) 14. Mini W^+ boson: - (-(1))((+1)^2 x (-1)^2 15. Mini gluon: - (-(1))((-1)^3 x (+1))) 16. Mini photon: + (-(1))(-1)^3)) ))) x This should be the Higgs boson field in Standard Model (in particle physics): 17: (0.000 - 0.000) x (+0.0-0.0) OR = ( This should be position and structure of the 12 standard elementary particles and the 4 forces of the Standard Model (in particle physics): 01. electron neutrino (Mass Ratio Array: (i.) 0.0022 | (ii.) 0.000468 | (iii.) 0.000052631 | (iv.) 0.000011198): + (+(1))(+1)^3 02. electron (Mass Ratio Array: (i.) 0.511 | (ii.) 0.1087 | (iii.) 0.01222489 | (iv.) 0.00260104): - ((+(1))(+1)^3 x (-1) 03. down quark (Mass Ratio Array: (i.) 4.7 | (ii.) 1 | (iii.) 0.112440192 | (iv.) 0.023923445): - ((+(1))(-1)^2 x (+1)^2)) 04. up quark (Mass Ratio Array: (i.) 2.2 | (ii.) 0.468 | (iii.) 0.05263159 | (iv.) 0.01119821): + (+(1))(-1)^2 x (+1) - ( { Forces: 05. Z^0 boson (Mass Ratio Array: (i.) 91190 | (ii.) 19402.1 | (iii.) 2181.5789475 | (iv.) 464.1657335): + (+(1))(+1)^2 x (-1) 06. W^+ boson (Mass Ratio Array: (i.) 80390 | (ii.) 17104.25 | (iii.) 1923.205742 | (iv.) 409.192711): - (+(1))((+1)^2 x (-1)^2 07. gluon: - (+(1))((-1)^3 x (+1))) 08. photon: + (+(1))(-1)^3 } AND/OR { 05. charm quark (Mass Ratio Array: (i.) 1280 | (ii.) 272.34 | (iii.) 30.62201 | (iv.) 6.5153212): + (+(1))(+1)^2 x (-1) 06. strange quark (Mass Ratio Array: (i.) 96 | (ii.) 20.4 | (iii.) 2.2966508 | (iv.) 0.4886491): - (+(1))((+1)^2 x (-1)^2 07. muon (Mass Ratio Array: (i.) 105.66 | (ii.) 22.48 | (iii.) 2.527754 | (iv.) 0.53782): - (+(1))((-1)^3 x (+1))) 08. muon neutrino (Mass Ratio Array: (i.) 0.17 | (ii.) 0.036 | (iii.) 0.004067004 | (iv.) 0.00086532): + (+(1))(-1)^3 } ) - ( { 09. mini neutrino: + (-(1))(+1)^3 10. mini electron: - ((-(1))(+1)^3 x (-1) 11. lower quark: - ((-(1))(-1)^2 x (+1)^2)) 12. upper quark: + (-(1))(-1)^2 x (+1) } AND/OR { 09. tau neutrino (Mass Ratio Array: (i.) 18.2 | (ii.) 3.87 | (iii.) 0.435408 | (iv.) 0.09264): + (-(1))(+1)^3 10. tau (Mass Ratio Array: (i.) 1776.8 | (ii.) 378 | (iii.) 42.50727 | (iv.) 9.0441): - ((-(1))(+1)^3 x (-1) 11. bottom quark (Mass Ratio Array: (i.) 4180 | (ii.) 889.36 | (iii.) 100 | (iv.) 21.276596): - ((-(1))(-1)^2 x (+1)^2)) 12. top quark (Mass Ratio Array: (i.) 173100 | (ii.) 36829.787 | (iii.) 4141.148333 | (iv.) 881.09539): + (-(1))(-1)^2 x (+1) } - ( { Mini Forces (including Quantum Gravity): 13. Mini Z^0 boson: + (-(1))(+1)^2 x (-1) 14. Mini W^+ boson: - (-(1))((+1)^2 x (-1)^2 15. Mini gluon: - (-(1))((-1)^3 x (+1))) 16. Mini photon: + (-(1))(-1)^3)) } AND { 13. mini charm quark: + (-(1))(+1)^2 x (-1) 14. mini strange quark: - (-(1))((+1)^2 x (-1)^2 15. mini muon: - (-(1))((-1)^3 x (+1))) 16. mini muon neutrino: + (-(1))(-1)^3)) } ))) x 17: (0.000 - 0.000) x (+0.0-0.0) = nearly: ( Maybe there are 6 layers of elementary particles with spin (0.5 or 1/2), and Charge 2/3 and -1/3: ((+0.5......-(-0.5......)) + (+0.5......-(-0.5......)) + (+0.5......-(-0.5......))) x (2,/3 / (1........x(7/7)) x 1......x(5/5) x 1_..../(3/3) / (1...... x 1_../(1/1)) - 1..../3 x (1....../(5/5) x (NEUTRAL)/5 X5) x 1_..../(3/3) / (1.....x(5/5) x (NEUTRAL) x 1_../(1/1))) x 0.00000 According to my mathematical calculations, the unstable 6th dimension caused to make 1/2 Spin, 2/3 and -1/3 Charge, 6 layers of elementary particles, Combinations of layers etc. - W. Suresh Madusanka

@Oniongarlicginger 3 жыл бұрын

What is the temperature at which the Higgs field turns off? Can we reach that temperature at Fermilab or CERN?

@drdon5205 3 жыл бұрын

High. No.

@Mandragara 3 жыл бұрын

Dear Dr. Don, I'm interested to know your thoughts on the challenges of physics outreach. What are some of the biggest hurdles you think science communicators need to overcome when interacting with the layperson? Greetings from Australia (USyd Physics dept)

@maxiclmaths1289 3 жыл бұрын

Stephen Wolfram's theory is also quite interesting and allows dark matter, energy etc. Maybe not the actual TOE but very thought provoking!

@xgrnsxs 3 жыл бұрын

Dear Dr. Lincoln, I really like your series. I have one question about dark matter, that has bothered me for a long time. It is thought, that particles of dark matter neither interact with matter, nor with itself, except via gravity. The hotter an ordinary gas is, the more unlikely it is to collapse into a star forming cloud. I think, we can suppose the same principle is true for any matter, e.g. dark matter. But if we suppose, that dark matter is hot, it cannot collapse. If it is cold, how can it clump to large blobs that stabilize galaxies etc., because If it collapses, it MUST heat up, due to gravity accelerating the particles. But dark matter has no way of radiating that energy, because it doesn't produce radiation. And if we suppose that it still can clump, what stops dark matter from collapsing into black holes? In Stars it is the pressure of the heat in the core, in neutron stars it is the fermi-pressure. But in the case of dark matter, there is no force (that we know of) other than gravity, so in my understanding, it just could collapse directly into a black hole. Can you shed some light on this contradiction? Maybe (most likely) i am missing something here... Thank you, and keep up the good series ;) It always brings new ideas to my mind!

@dr.kasrafarahani1172 3 жыл бұрын

Hi Dr Don. Thanks for your great videos. A quick question. If gravity is quantised and transferred via graviton Boson, then for a black hole, how can a graviton escape a black hole to reach another mass for force interaction? If photon can't escape black hole, so can't graviton. I'm not physicist but looks like graviton idea doesn't make sense. Thanks for your answer.

@nHans 3 жыл бұрын

Inside a nucleus, do the nucleons-protons and neutrons-maintain their identity or individuality? A nucleon is just 3 quarks whizzing around in close proximity to each other, held together by the strong force aka gluons. Unlike cells in biology, the nucleons don't have a physical shell or wall that separates them from one other. So I visualize the nucleus as a soup of quarks whizzing around in a larger volume than they would if the nucleons were isolated. But held together (as a composite nucleus, not individual nucleons) by the same strong nuclear force and gluons.

@BLung-tq2mm 3 жыл бұрын

I dont think we can ever truly have a "Theory of Everything"

@unbeatableox3846 3 жыл бұрын

Nope! It’s plausible, that someday we’ll understand all things. I think it makes impossible if we can’t understand how chaos work.

@Brandon75689 3 жыл бұрын

Unless you're Christopher Langan xD

@unbeatableox3846 3 жыл бұрын

@ Because chaos is everything. Can you be certain with quantum mechanics?

@arjunsinha4015 3 жыл бұрын

You should renamed it the theory of science

@StanleyKowalski. 3 жыл бұрын

5:10 proxima centauri is the nearest star, nonetheless, i wish Mr Lincoln was my physics teacher in college.

@DaveyGa 3 жыл бұрын

Isn't it a binary system?

@drdon5205 3 жыл бұрын

If you're being pedantic, Sol is the nearest star. Just saying.... ;-)

@varunravindranath6153 3 жыл бұрын

What kind of travel mechanism is required for a interstellar or fast travel in space according to theory? We have been hearing about concept of wormhole is this really possible? Can you talk or provide some theoretical articles about the new tech evolved on the space travel?

@behappy5081 3 жыл бұрын

Hello Dr. Don, thank you for taking the time to make these programs I greatly enjoy - I wondered have you time for a question? Q: Would it be possible to use quantum entanglement to 'see' inside a black hole? (This certainly isn't my idea but it sort of seems plausible in a 'spooky' way - I'd share where I heard it but shamefully I can't remember!! )

@cloudpoint0 3 жыл бұрын

Entanglement doesn’t convey any information. Entanglement just tells us the likely state of the partner particle that we can’t observe.

@drdon5205 3 жыл бұрын

As cloudpoint says, there is no transfer of information in entanglement. In addition, a particle falling from the outside, never actually enters the black hole - at least from the perspective of an external observer who would measure the entanglement.

@behappy5081 3 жыл бұрын

@@drdon5205 Thank you Dr. Don....... Oh well, I thought it was to good to be true! I'm glad I asked the question as your answer(s) have made me understand a little more deeply the implications of the statement 'nothing escapes'. My brain has now locked up. Mind truly blown. Thank you!!! : )

@behappy5081 3 жыл бұрын

@@cloudpoint0 Thank you

@Hovado_Lesni 3 жыл бұрын

When I was at high school I had a very hot physics teacher but You are the best physics teacher

@OldGamerNoob 3 жыл бұрын

Speaking of unity, is there a similarity in the relation between electicity and magnetism around charged particles and the relationship of how mass both creates effects of gravity AND inertia? (both attraction and resisting acceleration)

@mattcontact1 3 жыл бұрын

Could time be the product of expanding space? And could that explain the discrepancy when we measure the expansion rate using the CMBR method and measuring closet galaxies?