This is an absolutely top comment and I wholeheartedly agree. The community that is building up here is amazing, the vast majority of commenters and their comments are adding immeasurably to the video. I really appreciate the time and effort people take to help others with their understanding (and do it better than I could). People also make excellent constructive suggestions to help me improve my videos. The quality of comments here is truly superb, and I thank each and every one of you (even if I can't do it individually). I really feel like a community is developing here of people who are willing to get involved in meaningful discussions. Thank you everyone!

@@LearningCurveScience legend replying 1 year later

I do apologize if this is going to ruffle some feathers, but this comment. Some of science greatest contributor’s were people who loved jokes and pranks. They contributed so much to human knowledge and still maintained a sense of humor, and plenty were humble. I mean, Stephen Hawking and Albert Einstein were men known for their sense of humor. I’m pretty sure Stephen Hawking loved meme culture. Pretty sure that some of the greatest minds from the past would be out here sh*t posting while at the same time making huge leaps and bounds in their areas.

@@nothereforit.605 @Not here for it. I get what you're saying, and I agree that some very smart people do enjoy the humor of the puns, memes, jokes etc. (And several smart people may make those jokes), but I do think that the OP has a point. I've been reading through the comments just for this video and there is, in general, a much higher intellectually rigorous posts to not serious posts ratio. Not saying one is better than the other, both are fun and enjoyable depending on your mood and personality, but it's nice to read and see lots of really well thought out, intelligent posts. It feels like a continuation of why I came to see this video in the first place: to learn something and have new knowledge, concepts and ideas presented to me. Though I do love say Kurgezut in a nutshell, both the video and the goofy jokes/humor in the comments. TBH, it would be kinda nice if there was 2 separate comment sections for fun and jokes and serious discussion.

NO!

That said on the premise that we are the only intelligent species in the whole of the universe. Given the abundance of other galaxies in the universe I remain open to the idea that there might be others "out there".

Given the magnets in the LHC are cooled with liquid helium, the hottest and coldest temperatures at that moment would have been a few centimetres away from each other!

satyris410 It’s always interesting when opposite extremes like this happen in close vicinities. Another one that comes to my mind is how the accretion discs of black holes (the definitively darkest objects of the universe) lying just beyond their event horizons are ironically the most luminous objects due to the extreme gravitational and frictional forces exerted on accreting matter, generating intense blackbody radiation, as well as (iirc) any stray photons which temporarily orbit and thus accumulate around the black hole in the photon sphere reflecting off of any accreting matter in great amount (adding some luminosity). Vsauce made a video on this. That said, regarding your claim, the liquid helium cooling the LHC is not a Bose-Einstein condensate and so is definitely not the *coldest* temperature reached/recorded, though it seems relatively close on human and universal temperature scales of course.

Wait we produced the coldest and hottest?

What a time to be alive

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

You speak facts!

About 60% of this sentence shouldn't have existed lol

I still think fresh tomato on hot pizza hitting your lower lip exceeds that temp.

I think you'll find the hottest temperature is pineapple on a pizza.

thats a nice idea, but space would of still been a vacuum. So your blood would boil and you would stroke out in seconds.

@@ricksanchez9669 Luckily since our body is an airtight system, your blood can only boil wherever it's exposed to the vacuum. So just don't get scratched. And wear goggles. They WILL do something!

@@z-beeblebrox you have some gaps in your knowledge my friend. Your blood will boil in your veins. Your body has these giant openings called lungs. Google what happens to a human in hard vacuum.

@@ricksanchez9669 No, I'm afraid you do. The circulatory system is by its nature, like many things in the human body, sealed off from the outside world. This is, in fact, why we bleed, as this seal represents a pressure differential. While our lungs are *obviously* not sealed from the outside world and air would be violently expelled from your lungs in vacuum (which is why you shouldn't hold your breath), it is nethertheless a fact that the nodules carrying oxygen molecules from the lungs to the bloodstream are too small to represent a leak in this seal. There is in fact a TON of misconceptions about hard vacuum and pop science looooves to oogle how gruesome it would be such that it fails to realize that it actually wouldn't be. You'd just die of asphyxiation like you'd naively expect. You won't spontaneously boil, you won't explode, you won't get turned inside out or instantly freeze (THAT'S a whole discussion about how bad people are at understanding direct vs convective radiation!), and you won't get struck dead by cosmic rays unless you're lottery-winner lucky. You just run out of air. That's it.

@@z-beeblebrox look into the bends. Essentially a loss in pressure causes the air thats naturally disolved in our blood to come out of solution and fill our blood vessels with pokets of air. Yes, our bodies are air tight, but that doesnt mean they handle preasure very well.

"the boiling point of reality" I'm gonna steal that

@@the_seer_0421 Same

Wonderful metaphor

The fabric of reality would be the fabric of space. And the fabric of space has no temperature of any kind. What we measure the temperature of is the particles in space.

And just like a boiling point, the system won’t get any hotter until it’s all boiled away. Except it can’t, then, because once everything has been converted into hawking radiation, there’s nothing left to heat-just empty space. This does give a really good accurate and intuitive description of why the Planck Temperature is physically impassable.

Thank you very much, what a lovely comment. I try my best and really enjoy it when people enjoy my videos

that is exactly my thought, too ... and it is so good explained and easy to understand. i think it could be up there with veritassium, be smart, smarter every day, the action lab or PBS SPacetime and whoever there is :D

Yeah but it has so much filler... was all that stuff about earth's temperature really needed?

@@nopejhonson958 . Totally necessary . Contextual .

@@nopejhonson958 Yes. You start a building from its foundations, not the roof.

Isaac arthur is also non click bait science channel. Good watch. Highly recommend

Thank you, that's a lovely comment. I try to stick to the facts, and hopefully still make it entertaining. It can be a fine line at times. I'm glad you enjoyed the video.

@@spencervance8484 alweady subsqwibe!

I'd also recommend Science Asylum.

@@LearningCurveScience You do a good job. Subscribed.

The point you make is fair, however ending the video with uncertainty over the matter would certainly would have been less entertaining than the ending he gave albeit speculation. Just the possibility of what he described actually occurring is more than enough to excite the mind of the uninitiated!

@@AdamAttia007 Yes, I understand the need to entertain, but I think there was a better way to do it. Modern society places a *lot* of faith in science (one might even say too much), and so I think that it's more important than ever for scientists - and even science entertainers - to be very very clear about the limitations of our knowledge. Misconceptions and overstatements can cause a lot of damage, even if they are well intentioned.

i think 'breaking physics' referred to human physics not nature's physics & more importantly the narrator has, in many vids inc this one, demonstrated that he's not afraid of saying his knowledge is limited so he is not one of the many people who needs to be told "it's ok to say you don't know" ...your last comment was therefore irrelevant, at best, or patronising

it made me jump lol

when you actually understand the physics that you know, it just feels wrong to brake the laws of nature. instinct is an evolving thing.

@@Bug_Abuse same. it scared tf outta me! glad i'm not alone. It was just such a quiet chill video then BANG. sounded like it was actually outside my window

The delay would be less because the temperature and pressure is greater than on Earth

@@windowsxpmemesandstufflol true, very true. But we could assume that the lightning is further away than we would think on Earth from that time delay.

cus its not dramatic

Some people sucks… It’s an universal law.

That's easy: no "influencers", pranks, cute girls, wads of cash or stupid songs. Just "boring" science.

It was only created in 2019, would be one reason. A second reason may have a little to do with what been coined as the recent awakening (personally this term takes the importance away from its occurrence). Where a percentage of the global population are bringing forth alternative theories for explaining the narrative, that up til now has been documented mostly manifested events (care of the higher education beliefs and thoughts of the scientific community only) to form the world's history. This video brings forth a lot of simular views to just where this knowledge has arisen from, and if indeed it should or be it could be quantified as truthfulness and/or factual in its entirety. Though I'll save that for some other time. TRUTH OR TRANCE

Because a very large portion of the population is far more concerned about Elon musk being pale on a yacht or what's going on with Elon musk and twitter. And I know that's something that seems like it's an incredibly ignorant statement but it's the truth. So many people don't want to learn anything they just want gossip gossip gossip. Personally I can't handle that shit. I spend almost no time on social media I guess if you were to consider KZfaq social media yes I spend quite a bit of time on here but typically I'm learning things. My search queries are interesting to say the least. This was very well done. Makes me want to watch more on this channel.

Why then if you stretch out a rubber band then let it contract does the rubber band get cooler?

Too true m8

@@mandelabrein8116 because when you stretch the elastic, it gets hotter than its surroundings. The heat is quickly radiated away to the environment. When you release the elastic, its energy is less than when when it was before. Less energy equals lower temperature.

Well you're failing to consider something - which is that when a star fuses hydrogen into helium, it does it over millions to billions of years. When a star fuses aluminum and silicon into iron, it lasts for about a day. So YES, much less binding energy is available from silicon fusion and much less energy is released per kilogram when it fuses, and yet the power produced is still much more, so you are mistaken in your premise anyway. It's like comparing a tank of gasoline to a stick of dynamite. Yes the dynamite releases less heat than the total from burning the gasoline, and yet you shouldn't be underestimating the dynamite.

Actually the higher temps required are due to the way higher coulomb barriers between the heavier elements, in other words, their kinetic energy has to be much higher to overcome it and have nuclei touch each other to fuse into even heavier elements. In other words, beyong hydrogen-hydrogen fusion, the process starts to hinder itself when it fuses progressively heavier and heavier elements. The input required for larger nuclei increases as the yield decreases. And it so happens that crossover beetween net positive and net negative fusion is at...Iron. Oh the Irony. Yes, the reason why Neutron stars have an Iron crust.

I think, and hope, you are right. Would be kind of narcissistic to think everything interesting must be happening where we can see it. Who knows that kind of tech we could create if weird stuff does start happening? Every new phenomena opens up so many possibilities.

Reminds me of how most of the useful information in music is in the bass, even though the high frequencies are capable of carrying more information.

What you would consider interesting events, are events that occur in stable environments. The issue of temperature and kinetic energy then becomes: what environments allow interesting things to occur? The most stable ones do. So every **sustained** temperature will be in an "interesting" environment. And it's no surprise we find ourselves in the place with the most "interesting" things happening, as we are the most stable environment by definition, as far as we know, as it has produced the most complex things we know of : humans. What you mean by "interesting" is "complex" and only the most stable environments do not override complexity with some simple metric gone rampant. Like temperature. Too much temperature, does not allow the other forces to produce complex things before the temperature destroys them. Complexity (that considers what is complex to be interesting) must find itself in an environment that does not override any forces too much. Tidbit: if the universe as a whole manages to stay stable while being hotter, (all forces balance in that environment), then that will be where all the most "interesting" things will happen. When less of one thing occurs, more of all the others occurs, basically.

@@douggale5962 That's not entirely true if you scale the frequencies logarithmically, which is how our ears perceive them. Octaves are derived from the doubling of frequencies. So 100-200 Hz is the same jump as 10,000-20,000 Hz.

Actually, there are five states of matter...you forgot about gels.

Yeah that would be an interesting postulation, I'm left wondering if it would lead to another big bang, with the mass and energy required to create a sizable quantity of plank level state "matter" would that be the tipping point for another big bang? Totally guessing based on some of the points raised in the video, no idea the creation of plank state matter is even possible without all the matter in our observable universe.

the big bang was probably at that temperature so that gives you an idea of what would happen

@@Chippie-O not even close

Your question depends on the density of the cube in question. It will have a very different answer if you mean a cube of actual sugar or a cube of matter at the Planck density. Remember, don't confuse temperature with heat! The corona of the sun is millions of degrees hot but you could stand in it just fine because there is very little heat in it.

@@ObjectsInMotion As I was asking that question, I was thinking of density in my head. The matter would be a quark soup no? How dense is that. With the amount of energy in that, is there any constraint that would dictate the density? Or it's simply a function of the mass we decide on? I think someone did a "what if" with a spoon of neutron star before. Is quark plasma more dense than a neutron star?

sounds like a gaming setup

We live in a simulation!

Apparently it just relates to Planck distance which is why they called it Planck temperature. Due to the way temperature is described, something at "max temperature" emits light with wavelengths only at 1 Planck Distance, so the lowering of one Planck Temperature unit would be to increase at least one light particle emitted to 2 Planck Lengths, the smallest unit of temperature that we can decrease from a heat source.

@@iCarus_A So really you could say it is about the Planck frequency of light?

@@iCarus_A I wonder if blackbody radiation would be the only thing that really breaks at the planck temperature. I could imagine that the photons are emitted at 1 planck length, but just.. more of them as you get hotter. The only true limit to temperature I can imagine, and I may be mistaken for assuming this is higher than the planck temperature described, would be the point where the speed of each particle is the speed of light.

10 to the 15th power times more? Really? So 1.05 times 10 to the 19th power total then? He should have over a billion subscribers for every human on Earth?

@@medexamtoolsdotcom well done for taking a jokey positive comment on a video regard ludicrous scales in exactly the manner it was intended. 🥳👍

He deserves Plank number of subscribers. That should be way more than 10^15, not enough mass for them to collapse into a black hole. Should be about 10^28.

@@medexamtoolsdotcomwoah you really don’t realize that was just a joke?

@@emsa5034 woah u really didn’t realize he was joking to?

But nothing with mass can get to the speed of light.

LMAO I was searching for this comment. Scared the crap outta me😂

Apologies, I didn't mean to scare anyone.

@@LearningCurveScience It's fine lol, at least I had a good chuckle out of me getting spooked by an unexpected attention grabber😆

@@LearningCurveScience btw I like your in-depth dives into these topics! Keep up the great work!

Scared the shit out of me too!

Thank you very much. I'm glad you enjoyed the video.

Thank you very much. I try to do my best and make factual entertaining content

@@LearningCurveScience Just to give my opinion: I did not like it because you talk for 10 mins about some other stuff before going to what the title promised: "planck temperature" and talk about it for 4mins. so i think you should consider changing the title of the video.

@@srmeister1 he gave perspective on the temperate

@@srmeister1 Well the average person needs some kind of prospective first before jumping straight into this kind of topic, not everyone is a quantum physicist like you.

Sin leads to hell, keep focused, the devil is on earth to destroy your soul. But God wants to give you everlasting Joy. But our sin is keeping this from happening. You must stop sinning and turn to Jesus Christ he is your only hope. He can save you from eternal suffering under the Earth, where hell is hot.. Not everyone who calls me their Lord will get into the kingdom of heaven. Only the ones who obey my Father in heaven will get in. Matthew 7:21

Sin leads to hell, keep focused, the devil is on earth to destroy your soul. But God wants to give you everlasting Joy. But our sin is keeping this from happening. You must stop sinning and turn to Jesus Christ he is your only hope. He can save you from eternal suffering under the Earth, where hell is hot.. Not everyone who calls me their Lord will get into the kingdom of heaven. Only the ones who obey my Father in heaven will get in. Matthew 7:21

It's an interesting possibility, but I'm not sure the video really proved that such a temperature is the maximum possible. Rather, the theory within places an upper limit on the energy of individual photons. I see no reason to think that the temperature of matter should be thus limited, just (maybe) the rate at which it cools itself by emitting photons. As you add energy to a particle to increase its speed, and as it approaches the speed of light, the rate at which you add more (relativistic) mass overtakes the rate at which you add speed -- since no massive particle can move at the speed of light (from your reference frame). So, I don't see the speed of light placing any limit on temperature, either. I would be curious to see the effect of frame dragging on "relativistically hot" substances. For that matter, as I understand it, it is incorrect to think of planck length as the smallest possible distance. Rather, it's the smallest, theoretically measurable distance. Imagine a photon with planck length wavelength... now blueshift it by moving toward it. This increases its energy, because you can't make it move any slower.

Sickness

I think it would be near infinite energy, as particles with mass get closer and closer to the speed of light, the amount of energy required to accelerate it approaches infinity since the mass approaches infinity. At least that’s as much as I understand

Perhaps a Big Bang’s worth?

Not necessarily. If you had a small enough sample of it, it wouldn't need to be that much energy. We're talking about 1 planck energy (3 gigajoules) average energy per particle collision. So you know we're still talking about a substance where every particle collision has the energy of a stick of dynamite but that's hardly a universal scale quantity of energy.

But you know, you don't typically see things like 2 protons hit each other with 3 gigajoules of energy, or a single photon with 3 gigajoules of energy, so you would definitely not want to be near a large quantity of anything at anything near the planck temperature.

Now there’s a thought.

It's sad that teachers have to deal with classrooms full of disinterested teens xD Kids could learn so much if they were as fascinated with the material as some of their teachers are. (By which I of course don't try to blame kids for being kids. I'm just saying that classrooms aren't always the best pedagogic environment)

Thank you very much. I get stupidly excited about all aspects of science. Proper geek.

Thanks for the info. I'm not specifically a physicist, but I'll watch the video. I'm just doing my research for Planck mass and whilst I can't promise I won't make any mistakes I'll do my best to keep it accurate and entertaining.

@@LearningCurveScience There's also this: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_in_special_relativity

Unfortunately you would be floating in a very dark near vacuum with occasional atoms of hydrogen and helium bumping into you, so my guess is that you would freeze to death as you radiate all the heat away and there's not much matter and radiation to warm you up

If you survived the crazy amount of radiations coming with the cozy warm :)

@@calgar42k Just about everything around you currently emits blackbody radiation at around room temperature. i.e. IR frequencies. No scary radiation needed. Things have to get pretty hot to start emitting even UV.

Thank you very much. To be honest, I don't worry about subscriber numbers, I just enjoy making videos.

@@LearningCurveScience in any case with content of this quality there'll eventually be millions of subscribers, it'll just happen at some point. Thank you for providing such a superb educational resource some.very cool videos here

Thank you very much. Most of my viewers are American so it just seems polite to use units they understand as often as I can, and yes the nice hot cup of tea was absolutely a reference to the infinite improbability drive!

Technically there's also this french one that I can't pronounce, the symbol is an R. Kelvin and Celsius are the same scale just with a different Zero Point.

@@dorderre I know there is a Rankine scale. Based on the Fahrenheit scale, with 0 Rankine being absolute zero, which is around -459 degrees Fahrenheit.

@@cfltheman He was talking about the Réaumur scale ( en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R%C3%A9aumur_scale ) but Rankine was definitely worth mentioning too :)

@@tinu5779 I never was taught that in school. Honestly I was never taught the Rankine scale either.

Lmao so true😂😂😂

You need to stop reading the Daily Express. Next week it’ll be a white horror whiteout.

The real problem is that you guys can't seem to buy a good AC unit, tho I'm not sure the reason for that. Over here in the US I can go to the hardware store, spend maybe $150 USD, and come out of the store with an air conditioner unit that I can mount in a window that doesn't even need a 15A 125v circuit to run. That's a 9000 BTU unit by the way, which is more than capable of keeping at least a few rooms plenty cool. I don't think you can do that over in the UK. Affordable access to cooling technologies is basically impossible over there I've heard. I'm not sure why that's the case, but that's the problem.

@@44R0Ndin Also, our homes are designed to retain heat, not let it go.

@@horntail-wyvern2803 That doesn't matter nearly as much as you think it does. Insulation works both ways, and there's workarounds to reduce the effectiveness of house features intended to capture solar heat passively during the day. About the insulation, I have a few examples. Your fridge is insulated so it doesn't have to constantly be running the motor to keep your food cold (likely using a ~2.5-5cm layer of styrofoam, more is better from an efficiency standpoint), and your furnace or boiler, and water heater are also insulated so they don't burn your house down (likely with a cm or 2 of rock wool, fiberglass, or other high-temperature tolerant insulation, efficiency matters less here but there is still a balance to be struck). Another example, and I've adapted it to UK tastes. A thermos flask will keep tea hot just as well as it will keep some other beverage cold (for US people like myself I'd say coffee, naturally). Now on to the features of a house that may be designed to capture heat from the sun, and you don't want them to do that right now: If you have windows that face the sun most of the day and you don't want the sun's heat coming in the house that way, the solution is to put shutters or shades on them, on the OUTSIDE of the house, because the shutters or shades will also get heated and if they're inside that still ends up heating the house, but if they're outside that just heats the outside and who really cares. Also, in case you don't remember, something very similar to this happened either last year or the year before, so either the UK and the rest of Europe is going to have to invest in air conditioning systems and the power grid upgrades that come with that (and before you say it, I'm speaking geographically here, and in that way the UK is still very much a part of Europe, Brexit or not), or well I'm not really sure what other option there is to stay cool other than perhaps vests filled with cold packs that you put in the freezer overnight (those are indeed a thing, tho again they're strangely hard to find in UK amazon but they're within the first 10 results on US amazon). ... side note, if you do cosplay and the character you cosplay has a particularly warm costume, those vests can really come in handy. Same solution also works if you wear a fursuit at a convention, in both cases it can be very effective at preventing heat exhaustion and/or heatstroke. I don't know it from personal experience mind you, I may be a furry but I don't have a suit... yet (expensive enough where I'd need a plan for how to get it, and my engineering-aligned mind desperately wants a solution to the heat problem before I even consider saving up for one, my first idea was to adapt the idea NASA uses to keep astronauts in space suits cool (liquid cooling garment) but the vest full of cold packs is an off-the-shelf solution that is a perfectly good enough passive solution at least until the cold packs fully melt, which seems like a superior solution in that it's just a lot simpler with less to go wrong).

Sure they can! Neutrinos in OPERA have been found to move 1.000002 times faster than the speed of light.

​@@reyanshagrawal2613confirmed false

i went to study physics but i couldnt get over all the math. at some point we actually had more math courses than physics courses.

@@guguigugu I swear, I haven’t taken a non math course that’s related to engineering since high school.

This video is absolutely fascinating, thank you so much for taking the time to make this video!!

Err.. A lightning bolt and a screen transition? Is your audience really so fragile? People switching on lights and coming through doorways must be terrifying to these people.

@@datapoint6859 lol

@@datapoint6859 he meant 12:36

timestamps are made with ":" 5:40 12:40

kg^1?!

Also, there's a typo in the speed of light.

It is my pet hypothesis that time asymptotically approaches the moment of the big bang but, due to the density of energy, never reaches it. Spacetime can bend, so I'm not sure this is an absurd statement. Either way, space was probably infinite in size, both then and now, it's just... a bigger infinite, now, and that spreading out is what has cooled the background radiation over time. Well, that and being absorbed by matter. Go back far enough and you reach "infinite" energy density. That's the idea, anyway. That's why I don't think of the big bang as an actual event that literally occurred within linear time, but rather as a point on some axis that is never intersected by spacetime.

The singularity that created the Big Bang was infinitely not, and also likely not even from this universe to begin with (0+0=0 in a closed system, doesn’t matter what you do, nothing can ever change that).

What do you mean?

@@ikariameriks simple. Has planck temperature, time, or space been measured?

physics start to break down when you unbind matter in to it's subatomic components.

the universe itself will never reach absolute zero. It's a limit, it will asymptotically go towards it but never reach it.

Would temperature not just seize to be measurable as particles become unable to interact thus meaning nothing could be recorded?

@@sadfrog1192 there will be nothing able to care about it long before that happens...

Even scarier that the universe might be like that forever after the last black hole evaporates.

Auto-correct knows!! Thanks for the sub.

"Yea, what he said."

The formula for kinetic energy isn't 1/2mv^2 in relativity though.

@@Motown222 not exactly. He was referring to different constants, like Planck’s

@@Nukestarmaster Sure, as you have to consider Lorentz factor. But that’s the idea

@@ascaniosobrero Thing is, in relativity, kinetic energy actually can keep going up forever, even if velocity can't. Kinetic energy asymptotically approaches infinity as velocity approaches c. This is one of the major reasons the speed of light is so inaccessible in the first place, it'd take an infinite amount of energy to actually reach it.

Opposite of absolute zero is negative absolute zero. In thermodynamics scale, any negative temperature is hotter than any positive temperature, where negative absolute zero is hottest.

Pun intended, at the end?

I'm just working on one at the moment.

If you think that's weird, check out the Planck impedance (electrical resistance). As I recall, it's about 60 ohms. I can hardly think of a more mundane and boring value for it to have. It's like some sort of cosmic joke.

Also: the units are wrong. They are m^2.kg.s^-1 (rather than m^2.kg^-1.s^-1). Otherwise the units of the Planck Temperature come out as K.kg^-1, which is clearly wrong.

Above a million, °C and K are basically the same. °F is more or less twice as big as °C and K.

Well it matters whether you use Fahrenheit or Rankine vs Kelvin or Celcius because being off by 32 or 273 or 459 degrees doesn't matter, but being off by a factor of 1.8 could be important.