Відео

good talk :)

Your title feels like Astrology, but the topics are pretty academically sound.

Just like Moon, once humans visit Mars, there will also be water bottles. The first thing out of the lunar landing module was a bag of garbage. Mars aready has old cars pzrked in the front yard. Space agencies should be made to take away their garbage.

Great information. Needs to be edited down to information and less Zoom conversations. Thanks. I’d be glad to help.

This guy makes me nervous

My great grandfather

NOT BAD! You need S M Zeus!!!

Wonderful talk. Answered a lot of my questions about optics and light.

9:30 AIM; angry gas Giants & hot super earths 10:30 pebbles to planetesimals 18:40 SILICATE, H2O, Snow/ CO 19:50 meteorite isotope dichotomy

15:00 earth formation,200mya 17:30 37:00 AL 26 short lived radionuclides

It would be a good idea to have a link of those publications in the description.

Nice talk. Thanks.

Disappointing talk. Wilczek, trying to justify his reason for being in this lecture series, makes an absurd rationalization that Compton worked with photons...so any topic concerning photons should be fair game. He then goes on to give a pretty boring talk on color blindness. He deserved a Nobel prize for his work on the strong force, but the current work he presents is pretty mundane.

I also want to say that Professor Ogilvie's talk was wonderful. Thank you for the informative and entertaining talk!

At the 1:11 mark in the video, the lecturer mentions talking to a former professor at Wash U that had AHC's grandson in his class. Well, AHC had two grandsons. One, Peter, attended Wooster University, and the other, John, attended Carlton and Stanford. Arthur's brother, Wilson, did have a grandson who attended Wash U.

the audio quality SUCKS.

This is the 100 clicks content I need

A minor added side note for emphasis and completeness: As I explained in the lecture, the entropy change is the ratio of heat provided in a reversible process (which we label as "delta Q_{rev}") divided by the temperature T. Given one of the examples that I gave, I should perhaps quickly explain and note that more generally (i.e., for both irreversible and reversible processes), the change in the entropy between the initial and final states is greater than or equal to the sum (or integral) of the change in heat (delta Q) divided by the temperature T. That is, the entropy change is bounded from below by the net sum of ((delta Q)/T) between the initial and final states (a consequence of a relation known as the Clausius inequality). For general closed systems (whether reversible or irreversible), no heat may come into the system (delta Q =0) and it thus follows that the change in entropy as the system evokes in time cannot be negative- i.e., the entropy may only increase or stay the same. As mentioned in the talk, this is the common form of the second law of thermodynamics. For irreversible processes such as friction (including that of rubbing my hands mentioned in this talk), the change in entropy is greater than the heat generated divided by the temperature. An equality between entropy change and the heat change divided by temperature only holds for the reversible process (and thus as was explained in the talk the change in entropy is equal to (delta Q_{rev}/T)). The important point that I wish to emphasize and reiterate again here is that entropy is a state function that is determined uniquely by the state (its information content) that does not care about the history as to how the state was formed.

Wow the seemingly contradictory results for the nuclear equation of state are quite interesting I would love to see how other measurements compare with a larger sample size. Thanks for sharing your physics Colloquium series Washington University physics department!

Sowhy do our single star have a Jupiter instead of a second sun orbiting - I guess a second star would be common but Jupiter uncommon or Brown dwarf .

Interesting talk to get an idea of where the field is currently in exoplanet science. On the question of whether substellar objects form via gravitational collapse or core accretion it is a fascinating ongoing area of discussion though I would argue that one aspect that wasn't really discussed likely because it is outside his area of expertise that could be enlightening for this discussion is the study of objects in our own solar system. There is some potential growing evidence for large planetesimals potentially forming via direct collapse the best evidence to date being the Classical Kuiper belt object visited as New Horizons second trans Neptunian flyby 486958 Arrokoth which appears to show a formation history dominated by very low velocity collisions. Of course there are more ambiguous evidence too such as the comparison of nitrogen isotope ratios between Earth and interstellar dust grains within undifferentiated minor planetesimals which suggest most of Earth's nitrogen likely came from the material that initially formed the Earth with similar results suggesting this may be true for Earth's water as well which if true suggests Earth had to form quickly before it could begin to differentiate. One of the proposals to explain these results is that the Earth and presumably other rocky protoplanets may have formed by instability driven coalescence of astrophysical dust grains within the protosolar nebula which has taken a very interesting light given the recent results of NASA's Insight mission finding evidence that Mars deep interior core is much less differentiated than our models expected. Given that gravity harmonics measurements have found similar results for the two gas giants in our solar system, it may be building a strong case for disk instabilities driving all or nearly all large protoplanet formation, though this is much more ambiguous since models also suggest that highly diffuse cores may be able to arise via dissolution of rocky cores into degenerate(metallic) hydrogen. Thanks for posting your colloquium speaker series online Washington University Department of Physics.

Very interesting! You might think of sticking to math, and leaving out the political haha's. That's an area that propaganda and its friend cognitive dissidents can raise their ugly heads.

This is a great channel! A hidden gem!

Heard recently of the state of matter at the core and have been looking to learn more... The reading I've had the time to enjoy has been interesting, so this should be good. Thanks for the content, I'm a trucker and have alot of time to study but have limitations so this format is great for me. Any chance you have any comments to make about the recent simulations suggesting the superionic state in Earth's core, and how seismic anisotropy applies to that and the content in this video? Here's to your channels birthday soon, and may you have many many more!

This was interresting.

I like the enthusiasm and clarity of the presentation. One question: In the discussion (around 18:04), the particle orbits are shown going one way (counter clockwise), but if the particle has negative charge, like an electron, then it will go clockwise instead?

No sound:(

Very interesting topic

This is a really good review of the topic thanks for that

Really fantastic video! It was great to see all of my friends and colleagues in such an uplifting advertisement for our department. Happy physics, everyone!

so clear thanks a lot

Here is a demon that works! The Second Law is now soundly violated! ua-cam.com/video/u7JDFRz2yfA/v-deo.html

Thank you so much for this information.