In my free time I get stoned and watch these videos.

Leonard Susskind is an excellent speaker; I've found it difficult to find lecturers as understandable as him, in terms of his speaking manner alone. Very intellegent man.

"Joe will grab Moe's...ugh....juggling objects"

This lecture was very helpful for me. He explains how there are three core concepts--particles, fields/waves, and forces. He then then describes the fundamental particles, photon, electron, quarks (6 core types --down quark, up quark, strange quark, charm quark, with linear combinations thereof), mesons, pions. He lists particle attributes by name, symbol (particle symbol and field symbol), type (Fermion/Boson), electrical charge, baryon number, and mass.

I hope someday I can take these classes. It is really a dream of my life.

I did not know there were such conferences. They are quite academic and the teacher explains very well. I am going to see all the courses of this porfesor as they are quite adapted to the research topic that I just started, and of which I still have not mastered the basic theory. Thanks Stanford and lecturer, they're saving my life right now.

These are great videos. Anyone interested in particle physics with a background in classical and quantum physics should watch these videos. Professor Susskind as far as I am concerned is very earthy in his teaching the subject of particle physics. Practical. Sensible. He makes the difficult subject matter easy to grasp and understand. As a genuine human being, he himself does not claim to know everything. AWESOME VIDEOS! WATCH & LEARN!

thanks to the professor and stanford!

Susskind is possibly the greatest living physicist in America.

interesting video and very informative

I haven't seen a turtleneck look that good since 1979.

haha, he was struggling with his juggler analogy trying not to say "grab his balls"

He describes it effortlessly

He should have committed to the explanation and just said "balls".

But he is one of my favourite physics lectures.Susskind to Feynman is like Oasis to the Rolling Stones.

brilliant video

Is there a Sanford lecture series on Quantum Field Theory on youtube?

Were the 6 quarks once the same thing/field, and split or splayed apart due to symmetry breaking? Leaving them with related but different relationships/coupling to other fields such as the higgs?

Dear Stanford: it is impossible to navigate these lecture courses on KZfaq. You need to give the algorithm hints by making playlists that follow a single lecture series. As it stands, KZfaq keeps jumping between series, and it's very frustrating. Because all of your lectures use one channel, it is next to impossible to simply browse through all of your videos.

atoms charge as a state retaining the same condition or E=ΩC^V

Where are the lectures that this is a continuation of?

anyone know where I can find the first part of this lecture series (ie the fall semester lecture, which he is referring to)?

at 1:05:41 wouldnt it make sense that the isomorphism is what balances the functions to result in a neutral or proton?

In general I am very scientific, but I put this guy on when I can't sleep. This guy is better than sleep meds.

interesting, he says "people say there are four forces...that's not it really, there are forces for every fundamental particle", referring to the particle interchange force as I understand it. This has always bothered me, that the pauli exclusion "force" is usually excluded from being called a real force on part with gravity, e&m, strong & weak. I like his take on it.

0:42:09 Is light still considered constant? 1:04:03 Sure about that? I like much of what I have heard so far, but I can not help but think that there is something fundamental missing from this theory. Maybe this will change by the time I get to the end. Thoroughly enjoyed this, so thanks Stanford.

Thank you.

so a discreet packet of information is represented as a zero point perterbation from a small field described as "proton" "neutron" etc?

I do not know if you realize it, but this is analogous in some way to Muhammed Ali teaching you boxing.

@whothehellgivesadamn i don't think we should assotiate information with the mass. May be at the planck's scale, again, where space-time is quantized. But in macroscale the mass that brings information can vary. i hope i understood your question correctly

Is there a book for those lectures, from which he is teaching? I would love to have it for future reference. I mean, it wouldn't make much sense to rewatch everything if I require something I forget :-)

hi , I have some question , is the momentum of the photon going in opposite direction to the momentum of the massless Dirac electron ? so that's why w = k my question is k(momentum) is the momentum of the photon? and w the energy of the massless Dirac electron? when the photon is being absorbed by the massless Dirac electron it create an antiparticle with momentum -k opposite to the momentum of the massless Dirac electron and also with positive energy so k(antiparticle)= w(antiparticle) and k(dirac electron) = w(dirac electron)? so k(antipart)= k(dirac electron)? and the same with the energy of both? isn't the energy of the photon that make the electron(dirac sea) have a positive energy enough to create mass? I know they are too many question and my English is not good but maybe somebody can understand me, have a good day

@16:20 The energy barrier & quantum tunneling between protons is not real barrier for electron.

@16:47 "What happens if you try to watch the electron go back and forth?" ... someone in the audience vomits.

@jambieyes I think that this is the continuing of the "Basic Concepts" series of lectures.

@mdiem- if you think this Susskind looks (or even sounds) like Christopher Walken, you are either a): thinking of a different Christopher Walken, the actor, or b): you have no idea who Christopher Walken is. Walken has a full head of hair, he's quite thin, he has a lower voice, a dry but witty sense of humor and has been in a lot of good films: The Deer Hunter, being one of the best films he's been in (he's been in SO many movies that it's hard to pick one or two great roles out of the air like this-I'm sure more will come to me as soon as I finish this post!)and, on the flip side Communion & The Prophecy, probably his worst movies. (and, yes, I've seen King of NY, several times-thought it was good, back in the 80s, when I was 19-20, but last time I saw it, six months ago, I realized that it wasn't the great movie I thought it was. It's almost as over-hammed-up as Brian DiPalma's remake of the 1933 classic, Scarface,w/ Al Pacino playing the part Paul Muni originally played-and man, the DiPalma/Pacino Scarface SUCKS!!! I really hate that flick).

@Xwowplaya It's because people don't come on to youtube to learn, they get on youtube to be entertained. But I see what you're saying though, and I agree

I think it's this belief that stops a lot of students from stepping forward and asking questions. They don't want to be thought of this way by the other students.

What gas could I use to get a force of 1 coulomb.

I'll be attending this school someday...

Yep. Particles physics: Basic concepts it is practically a quantum field theory

I know, I know. I was just trying to be clever. Susskind is awesome.

@whothehellgivesadamn can i look at your theory? and see the mathematical evidence of an information having mass? I just cannot imagine this.

BLINKERS 1:15:45. He means the neutron is slightly heavier. This is exquisite fine-tuning. Had the weak force been somewhat stronger, primordial neutrons produced in the first few seconds after the Big Bang would have decayed faster and less helium would have been produced. Since carbon is crucially dependent on helium for formation, there may have been little if any carbon in our universe. On the other hand, if the weak force had been somewhat weaker, this would have significantly lowered the proton-to-neutron ratio beyond its current level of six-to-one. This would have significantly reduced the amount of hydrogen in the universe, starving stars of the fuel for nuclear energy. [from Paul Davies]. As Fred Hoyle would shout, "IT'S A PUT-UP JOB." If you have to resort to multiverses to explain the unexplainable- in the same way evolutionists resort to mutation (and it's fixation), [yet they can't show you beneficient mutation]- then you're blinkering yourself. Even Sir Fred proposed panspermia; he couldn't (completly) believe the implications. Just as physicists don't want to put our Galaxy at the centre. Turns out we're unique, genetically, and right on the Golden Mean, despite about 99% junk genes. Make of that what you will. I'd spell it out; but my auto-correct is off!

Totally agree. I can't understand the Indian accent many of the lecturers have, so this helps me a lot.

I guess one thing, Dr. Susskind glossed over when describing the 'sea' of photons surrounding the electrons is wouldn't there also be the same thing going on with the protons interacting electrons via photons? Or is he saying that the electron and proton doesn't interact with similarly with photons?

No worries...it's all connected ;)

this is a continuous form of education, not a regular physics class

@ranislavir >"plus the overall decrease in IQ" Where did you get that from? Overall IQs are going up all the time, AFAIK: about 3 points/decade. Physics lectures are considered extremely boring by most people. Maybe that's the reason why this clip doesn't have many views? ;-)

in the first 2 minutes or so he mentions what he has done in previous lectutres - fields, quanta etc. which lecture set (s?) was he referring to - assuming it's here on KZfaq

1:23:00. I wonder, who is asking this question? Susskind's answer is amusing.

Yes, great lectures stoned or not.

He saved it quite well! lol

@whothehellgivesadamn oh, higgs boson.. it's possible i think. However, unlike 7 unseen dimensions in string theory, quantized space-time in loop quantum gravity looks more realistic..

is this a graduate course? or and undergraduate?

People need to stop interrupting him with questions designed to show how smart they think they are.

@whothehellgivesadamn This is a place of learning. Have some respect.

i didn't think there were any particularly pretentious questions, and it is a university class, their supposed to ask questions.

@whothehellgivesadamn oh, ive got what you mean. BUT, it's also listeners' fault, that they cannot get more information, they just wouldn't handle such amount of information, if lecturer presents all at once. This is, let's say just an introduction to particle phys. When they get used to that part of physics, they just will start to read more informative books. and study all again, but in details.

10 years after. Here I am.

@whothehellgivesadamn he just tries to explain all in simple terms, so not only physicists could get it.

@whothehellgivesadamn Protip: turn off the caps lock

@Xwowplaya Sadly for the same reason India has more Honors students currently than we have students. Man I hope the pendulum swings the other way soon..for all our sake! Kudo to all of you expanding your mind here:)

anyone else never remember talking about the stuff in the beginning...

@APPOCALYYPS3 HOW DOES JUSTIN BIEBER GET ON A PARTICLE PHYSICS VIDEO..

31:49 Almost awkward

@ProjectAwesome1 you can see the earlier lectures at watch?v=2eFvVzNF24g

@______@; why are these guys in a particle physics class before having taken quantum/classical mechanics...?

Why is there so little math ?

Oct. 2nd 1869

Come on dude, he was a good friend of Feynman, but he has his own style, Feynman had more energetic way of teaching, he has more relaxed way and tells things like stories :)

That that? Really?

@whothehellgivesadamn He did gluons in a previous lecture. Don't be so quick to post criticisms.

Itom is no more an single entity.

Anyone else reminded of Christopher Walken with this guy? :-D

>strange bottom/top *snort* Here! Uh? Oh...

"So we've talked about a lot of things so far: fields, quanta of fields, the relationship between fields and particles..." Where in the hell did we talk about these? This is lecture one! Can someone clue me in to where the intro to this lecture is?

Leonard Susskind is like a rock star who would be really cool if he wasn't so self conscious. I bet he stays awake at night asking himself "Why don't people think I'm as hip as Feynman. What does he got that I don't?"

Sounds like Peter Griffin

@Xwowplaya But hey - not a single dislike ;-)

I love Internet

I have my doubts about Dirac's Sea Of Antiparticles; and so did Wheeler: "I received a telephone call one day at the graduate college at Princeton from Professor Wheeler, in which he said, "Feynman, I know why all electrons have the same charge and the same mass" "Why?" "Because, they are all the same electron!" This isn't the place to suggest it's the proton emanating the electron. Has to be. That's why it has that funny mass ratio. The wave moves; the particle bobs up and down, like a buoy. "Wheeler suggested that they could all be parts of one single line like a huge tangled knot, traced out by the one electron. Any given moment in time is represented by a slice across spacetime, and would meet the knotted line a great many times. Each such meeting point represents a real electron at that moment." Just an idea, to show how fragile current 'flavour-of-the-month' theories are. It used to be philosophers who came up with one hare-brained idea a month. I'm not saying Dirac's idea is hare-brained. But particle physicists have built a world upon it; just as they founded quantum theory on 2 wrong equations from Planck. In the world of physics, 2 wrongs can make a right. I'm just noting most fruitful data is coming from satellites, though I'm not sure they've confirmed BB gravity waves yet. Cahill [Reginald] confirmed them useing co-axial cable. But "real" experimenters need to crash particles together to get more of the same up the harmonic wave. Pythagorus could have taught them how harmonics work. Mad world. Rip an hole in space and time to prove Pythagorus.

@jambieyes lol

Move along Leonard :p

Listen you all to Current Value's uncertainty principal and learn you can be dump ;)

probably not, he's just being himself. It would be weird to act like Feynman :p

hej bra frjohnb.

@Xwowplaya my guess is that world wants to be stupid, good for us :)

I think the lectures are better stoned.

Isn't there a way to rename what make no sense ? Astronomy is FULL of ridiculous name that, with recent discovery are even more ridiculous ... I mean as science evolved so much, there is no way we can structure everything back with logic name ? I don't care why they decided to call Quarks strange up down and charm ... there is no good reason to keep these names ...

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahaahahahahahahhaahahahahahahahahahahahahahhaah

@whothehellgivesadamn ok.. w+, w-, z, photon, 8 gluons, 18 quarks, 18 antiquarks, 12 leptons. thats it. p.s. you should grow up man ;)

wow many trolls here it seems

what else? maybe you believe in god?

thats ego.

Can you see what is written? Horrible white board. So sad😢

@smarthandsomeguy : There is a higher birth-rate among ppl with lower IQ, which is a trend in last 2-3 decades. In our times educated people do not have much children, if any. So, maybe "dysgenics" will be possible in future, assuming that the IQ is highly dependent on our genes.

He's a terrible lecturer. He doesn't explain Charge/Time Symmetry, and expects students to understand that quarks have same mass as antiquarks, but negative charge and baryon numbers. When his students ask him about it, he doesn't even attempt to clairfy their confusion.

This guy sure does write a lot of funny symbols just to say "God Did It."