I just love having the opportunity to watch these videos. Dr. Lincoln and his team must dedicate a lot of time, and effort, to make them posible. For that, I wholeheartedly say thank you.
A basic principle of the Universe is that "information wants to be free". New elements formed from super massive exploding stars get disseminated throughout galaxies which form other stars and planets, living organisms, and eventually humans, who in turn also spread information in books, lectures, and even on UA-cam videos like this. Another mind boggling notion is that the electrons which carry a value of "0" or "1" as part of this video's data or even this text you are reading right now, has likely originated from a far away exploded star. Even when we die, our bodies just get recycled into other living or non-living matter, but we never really disappear completely, we just change shape and form. Our Universe is truly and amazing place.
So glad you guys went through the trouble of demonstrating a garbage can collider for us. One of the main things I love about this channel (besides cool science stuff like learning about the foundations of reality), is the 90's educational film feel to everything from the opening sequence and music, to the demonstrations and jokes. I think it just serves to highlight the dorky yet earnest passion you all clearly have for particle physics and science in general. Anyways, another great video as always, and I look forward to more content that makes me chuckle while making me smarter!
The most mindblowing thing about these videos for me is the realization that I am made of this stuff... And how incredibly small they are, yet science can work with them.
As the front man, Dr. Don get's a lot of praise for these wonderful videos, and rightly so. But let's take a moment to appreciate the folks behind the scenes who help make everything happen. Kudos to Ian Krass, Jim Shultz, and Allan Johnson. Thank you!
Dr. Lincoln, once again your elucidation of the subject material is superb. Thank you for your very educational and enlightening videos. Good luck with your research!
A great channel. I just discovered you a day or two ago. It feels very good to get a peak into the advances in basic physics to that have occurred since I received my masters in quantum electronics over half a century ago.
@@zenithomega19. You're correct, we can- it's called sight. Only a shmuck entertains the notion a pebble may behave as an ocean wave and contrariwise. What is matter? What is energy? Answer those and you'll surely get a prize.
Way cool. I have managed to take a private tour of TRIUMF as a family member had access there. I even went into the areas where they were constructing a brand new lab with hot boxes. Unfortunately they were not running the accelerator so I didn't get to do the trick where you stand paperclips straight up on any desk near enough to the core. It's boring and breathtakingly fascinating all at the same time.
james franklin lol...a hotbox is one of those big booths you see the scientist sitting at and using manipulator claws to handle dangerous radioactive materials at. You can look in the box through thick leaded glass.
Sean Nanoman The coolest piece of research tech I've gotten to see was a neutrino detector (actually used to detect neutrinos from Fermilab) built in the bottom of an old mine turned museum/tourist attraction. It was massive (~70ft tall from the picture, and apparently 5.4 kilotons), and roughly half a mile underground. It was really strange to take the elevator down into this old iron mine, which is as dark and dirty as you'd expect a mine to be, and then right next to the elevator is a door into a bright, clean, science facility with towering equipment. It was like something out of a James Bond movie, with the villain's high tech lab being hidden deep underground in an unassuming place like a closed down mine.
Interesting and informative! I was not aware of those particular differences and aspects in the various systems. I had wanted to be physicist since my high days when I first heard about the Fermilab. Life had other plans for me. Anyway, cool video and thank you for sharing!
Great video! We can also say that pp colliders induce less synchtron loss than e+e- colliders because protons are more massive than electrons. This is also one of the reasons why proton colliders are sometimes prefered over e+e- colliders.
When he was talking about "2 reasons" for wanting to build proton colliders, I thought this was going to the the 2nd reason -- it is hard to crank electrons up to energies as high as you can get with protons (either way, substitute antimatter equivalent as appropriate).
I would like to see a video on particle detectors. How do you detect all the different particles produced after a collision? What kind of electronics and signal processing are involved?
Time is a rate of change of a system, whether the system is a watch, the sun, the stars, or anything you are basing a derivative reference frame on of time - change. Of course, casualty occurs at different rates - time passes differently depending on the reference frame. Causality (and, so, the rate of causality - time) is relative to a lot of things, including the upper reference frame of speed/energy (c), mass/gravity (g), and quantum phenomena best modeled to us as statistical systems of potential realities collapsing to one real one. Also take note of the two definitions of time relevant whenever speaking about it: there is your subjective experience of time, then there is your subjective belief in others' beliefs in time and in an objective time that grounds your subjective experience of it and exists beyond your experience. Time is relative to your mental states just as it is relative to other physical constants like speed and gravity, because everything is a relative interaction of reference frame alignments.
How do you get the source "material" in the first place? How do you seperate protons and how do you create positrons? I thought anti matter can only be observed in a collider in the first place.
+ScienceNinjaDude can't we get positrons through positron decay? when an nycleous has more protons than necessary, the emit a positron and a neutrino, and a neutron remains in the nucleous
I'm just baffled how can they detect and measure these man made collisions which happen in a time frame of pico-seconds or faster. What kind of detectors/cameras do they use and how is it being visualized? Truly amazing stuff.
Discovering the messy trash can like nature of protons and neutrons had been one of the most fascinating parts of learning about this whole subject so far
Excellent video. I admit that the LHC seemed like an expensive version of colliding two pulsed firehoses, a big splash, before the concepts of quantum fields, starting with the universal field of electrons oscillating between past and future, was presented. The idea fits with branes and nested loops of the vector combinations that make numerical codimensions as in 3D and sequences of scale that Dirac supposed were related as reciprocal relationships, (but there's every kind of mathematical connection that can be imagined from modulated information). So if there's a particle soup produced by the LHC, then it's probably a lot more efficient than putting the same value of particle "telescopes" on mountain tops and waiting for rare events made by Cosmic rays. A "tuned" synchronous detector, (like an eye) sees the universe at a particular frequency that appears to be here-now and distributed to infinity where synchronous interference intersects, the way radar or sonar works by at a "Tachyon" frequency.., so it's confusing enough to imagine the "inside" of an atom that is an "outside" frequency we see because of total internal reflection. Put numbers on it adds another layer of simplified confusion, while making it easier to do practical applications. Quantum froth and bubbles in the bins?
Great information, but I am curious about one thing. Besides measuring energies then calculating velocities from relativistic energy and momentum equations, is there any other way to "clock" the speeds of particles?
1)if I draw a person on paper I can move the "idea" by moving the paper, 2) if the "idea" is to move across the paper then the idea must be made and remade from the paper 3) If the idea is to move on top of the paper then it must take parts of the paper with it 4) If an idea is moving on top of the paper why would it stay there not just float off 5) Following this logic wouldn't particles be part plasma changing all the time as the idea moved as a wave through space 6) They'd have different properties depending on the underlying plasma?
Este normal sa nu admiteti ce nu scrie in manuale. Dar dupa ce se descifreaza constanta de actiune h si cu legile electromagnetismului, rezulta structura bipolara a electronului. Inpartiti lungimea de unda a fotonului gama electronic la 137 si apoi la 2.pi si o sa obtineti raza clasica a electronului. Ceeace dovedeste ca electronul este unda stationara bipolara de mare amplitudine a fotonului gama electronic. Si ca fotonul gama, ca orisicare foton are exact masa particulei din care se naste prin mecanismul reactiei de anihilare. It is normal not to admit what is not written in the manuals. But after deciphering the action constant h and the laws of electromagnetism, the bipolar structure of the electron results. Divide the wavelength of the electronic gamma photon by 137 and then by 2.pi and you will get the classical radius of the electron. Which proves that the electron is the high-amplitude bipolar standing wave of the electronic gamma photon. And that the gamma photon, like any photon, has exactly the mass of the particle from which it is born through the mechanism of the annihilation reaction.
This channel is amazing, and Dr. Don Lincoln is such a fucking boss. Thank you so much for all the incredible videos and information!! What a time to be alive lol
What's the 'hit rate' of an electron/positron collision? What I mean is, isn't an electron just a cloud of potential locations? So how can you accurately aim and fire a cloud? Especially when we know the velocity fairly well as we accelerated the electron to that velocity ourselves.
Doesn't the LHC also occasionally collide lead nuclei? What's the advantage and disadvantage there? If it's only the elementary particles actually colliding, what in fact is the difference at all?
If I understand it correctly there seems to be almost infinite possible outcomes of colliding protons together. Is there any value in doing this considering it sounds as outcomes are random and can't be forecast? .
Have you ever considered the possibility that your most basic assumptions about the proton are wrong? What would happen if you ditched the assumption that the charge of the proton is the same as the electron and for a thought experiment postulated that it is 1/8th that of the electron. Interestingly it leads to a perfectly balanced electrical model for elemental atomic structures. I wonder what would happen if you applied the value to proton mass derivations based on divergence and curl? Does the mass defect problem go away?
What happens to protons after proton-proton collision, if quarks n gluons are released from proton then what happens to original proton and particles in it ??
One more thing .. as it is told that matter and anti matter annihilate into energy but in proton both matters are present yet proton is stable and doesn't dissociate, how any explanation ? It seems every matter has anti matter as an integral part of it!!
can we store protons in a sort of proton battery? to be released in a controlled way to power a proton circuit such as in a proton chip... what would the storage device look like? i vision a dark box... the box is filled with individual protons and they are compressed into a power storage system like a loop that can be "discharged" systematically... excess or used protons could them be returned and stored tasing to another material and then replenished as in a rechargeable battery? would that involve compacting quarks?
Start with a wave and this premise: The crests are positive and the troughs are negative. But in the case of the electron and proton, the waves are so fast that they do not travel in a straight line, but curve such that they spin into a ball or particle - each spins in the opposite direction. The proton spins such that the crest sides are on the outside When the crest positive side is on the outside the particle is positive charged. The electron spins such that the trough sides are on the outside. When the troughs negative side is on the outside the particle is negative charged The electron and proton spinning particles are the same size but opposite charges so they attract each other. The neutrino and the neutron do not form like the electron and proton for some unknown reason. Let's say the current state is true on charge - so you will have to say : The electron has the same charge of a proton though the proton is 1865 times more massive. Then explain why two waves would have the same exact charge but such massive differences in mass? The electron and proton are both waves (as well as particles). So that means that the electron wave and the proton wave both show charge on the wave - so where is it? My scenario is the first to suggest where it is. Where on the proton wave does it show that it's 1865 times more massive than the electron wave? The idea of waves of probability seems like a dodge to avoid finding out what's going on. BTW a quark is both a particle and wave, so where on the quark wave is 1/3 charge??? We can't dodge everything that doesn't make sense and then throw in endless complexity to rationalize it.
I read in Sir James Jeans book Philosophy and Physics of the mystery of why the weight ratio of the proton to electron is Mp/me = 1835.16666. Why? We don't know. I read it in Kenneth Atkins Physics Once Over Lightly and also in Richard Morris book. This mystery is not yet solved but I found 1835.1666... × 6 = 11011.
when talking about colliding gluons, are they within the confines of the proton? Would the gluon move at the speed if light because it's massless if it were free from the proton?
Gluons can't appear outside the proton or another particle, because they carry a color charge. If you tried to remove a quark or a gluon from a particle, its energy will increase so much that it will create a quark-antiquark pair. And indeed, this is what happens in a high-energy particle collision. (There's a hypothetical - heavy and unstable - particle called a glueball, which consists only of gluons, but the rule that any observed particle must be color-neutral holds even for it.)
But how do you force two protons to collide head on in the same circular magnetic tube? The Lorentz-Force can only force the positively charged proton in a unique clockwise direction. The other proton would need an opposite magnetic field, isn't it? How is this technically accomplished?
im thinking , can you polarize the ions, so as to structure the Quark content of the particle. before it enters explosion . You can also include Photons into the bunch before entering explosion .Cathode Ray : TV coils .
You could look at the proton model as an atom, with any number of electrons(quarks) you can look at a photon being ejected or absorbed by an atomic nuclei as a gluon (the force that binds quarks together/electromagnetic wave for electrons(photons) ) They come with there own pairs (Graviton can be looked at as the pair for photons, or you can just say that a gluon and boson is the same as a photon, (it's lower dimensional pair) The faster or slower you go (smaller) the more you'll see of the same thing. Metals such as uranium and plutonium can be seen as more difficult particles/forces to study based That can decay into other particles when exposed to different beams (temps, pressure)
Light does have mass because it's there, same goes for gravity. The faster you go the more "quantum" (weightless/non existent) it might seem but it's just going faster.
+Ganjanaut gravity is like entropy in our 3 dimensional view, it's the movement of space (infinitely divisible force/as much particles as you want) inward.
I think I know the answer to my question ,but I would like to hear it from a scientist or Dr. Don Lincoln. If you collide 2 particles at 99.999 the speed of light what speed is the of the collision ? I'm guessing 99.999 the speed of light. But why? Short answer please.
I know they go like 99.99999% the speed of light but is it theoretically possible to just keep adding energy to a particle beam or is there a fundamental limit to the energy you can impart?
The speed of light IS the fundamental limit for Velocity (betting you already knew that). As a result, at an infinitesimally slower "speed" than that of light, all of the energy being applied to the system is contributing to the Mass of the object and is no longer accelerating the object in a translational sense. After that, the Mass will continue to increase, while the Velocity is maintained, all the way up to a Mass/Volume ratio of a Schwartzschild Radius, whereby you have created a Black Hole, or at least an event horizon....... Such energy levels long long way away in a technological sense, though.
DangerZone you can keep adding energy, buy due to relativistic effects the faster a particle goes, the more its mass increases. so it takes more and more energy input to create smaller and smaller increases in velocity, and as a result you can't accelerate a massive particle to the speed of light.
Richard Aversa - the mass of the particle does NOT increase. Because of the VERY elementary concept of relative motion it should be clear that you statement makes no sense. i.e. if I move at near c will some massive bodies become black holes? of course not.
Protonul este un neutron cuplat cu un pozitron. Neutronul este un sistem de cam 1836 de unde stationare de foarte mare amplitudine, care se roteste pe cercul de raza neutronului Rn cu viteza de c/274 (m/s). Fiecare unda are masa cat a unui electron. Semiundele din sistem sunt propulsate in rotatie de catre forta electromagnetica. Forta care este la echilibru cu firta de inertie. B.I.L=m.a The proton is a neutron coupled to a positron. The neutron is a system of about 1836 standing waves of very high amplitude, which rotates on the circle of the neutron radius Rn with a speed of c/274 (m/s). Each wave has the mass of an electron. The half-waves in the system are propelled in rotation by the electromagnetic force. The force that is in balance with the inertial force. B.I.L=m.a
I just love having the opportunity to watch these videos. Dr. Lincoln and his team must dedicate a lot of time, and effort, to make them posible. For that, I wholeheartedly say thank you.
A basic principle of the Universe is that "information wants to be free". New elements formed from super massive exploding stars get disseminated throughout galaxies which form other stars and planets, living organisms, and eventually humans, who in turn also spread information in books, lectures, and even on UA-cam videos like this.
Another mind boggling notion is that the electrons which carry a value of "0" or "1" as part of this video's data or even this text you are reading right now, has likely originated from a far away exploded star. Even when we die, our bodies just get recycled into other living or non-living matter, but we never really disappear completely, we just change shape and form. Our Universe is truly and amazing place.
My thoughts exactly, I couldn't have said it better
So glad you guys went through the trouble of demonstrating a garbage can collider for us. One of the main things I love about this channel (besides cool science stuff like learning about the foundations of reality), is the 90's educational film feel to everything from the opening sequence and music, to the demonstrations and jokes. I think it just serves to highlight the dorky yet earnest passion you all clearly have for particle physics and science in general. Anyways, another great video as always, and I look forward to more content that makes me chuckle while making me smarter!
You nailed it!
They are scientists bro... Not video making experts, obviously there video quality will look like 90s quality 😂😂
The most mindblowing thing about these videos for me is the realization that I am made of this stuff... And how incredibly small they are, yet science can work with them.
Helo i m from india
I think stuff like that when I'm HIGH AF.
Next step: shooting you at 99% speed of light into your anti-you
Thank you Professor Lincoln for taking us (laypeople) deeper into experimental particle physics than anyone else on youtube!
As the front man, Dr. Don get's a lot of praise for these wonderful videos, and rightly so. But let's take a moment to appreciate the folks behind the scenes who help make everything happen. Kudos to Ian Krass, Jim Shultz, and Allan Johnson. Thank you!
I had searched videos of science in youtube but your videos are truly up to the point. thankyou sir for giving your time for us
Dr. Lincoln, once again your elucidation of the subject material is superb. Thank you for your very educational and enlightening videos. Good luck with your research!
A great channel. I just discovered you a day or two ago. It feels very good to get a peak into the advances in basic physics to that have occurred since I received my masters in quantum electronics over half a century ago.
Perfect Host, explained very well.
Dr Don should receive the Nobel prize for the explanation of high tech physics.!! Love it.🚀
Dr. Lincoln... You da man!
Now I want to see two garbage cans collide at 99.9999% the speed of light
Garbage just collided with your ear to muddy the mind.
The atom is yet to be proved.
The amount of energy will be equal to the birth of a new black hole.
@@Bassotronics .
Amazing, yet rubbish remains untouched...
Ron van der Horst we are able to direct image atoms. Take your pseudo science elsewhere you shmuck
@@zenithomega19.
You're correct, we can- it's called sight.
Only a shmuck entertains the notion a pebble may behave as an ocean wave and contrariwise.
What is matter?
What is energy?
Answer those and you'll surely get a prize.
You folks always make awesome educational videos. Thanks.
Way cool. I have managed to take a private tour of TRIUMF as a family member had access there. I even went into the areas where they were constructing a brand new lab with hot boxes. Unfortunately they were not running the accelerator so I didn't get to do the trick where you stand paperclips straight up on any desk near enough to the core. It's boring and breathtakingly fascinating all at the same time.
james franklin lol...a hotbox is one of those big booths you see the scientist sitting at and using manipulator claws to handle dangerous radioactive materials at. You can look in the box through thick leaded glass.
Sean Nanoman The coolest piece of research tech I've gotten to see was a neutrino detector (actually used to detect neutrinos from Fermilab) built in the bottom of an old mine turned museum/tourist attraction. It was massive (~70ft tall from the picture, and apparently 5.4 kilotons), and roughly half a mile underground. It was really strange to take the elevator down into this old iron mine, which is as dark and dirty as you'd expect a mine to be, and then right next to the elevator is a door into a bright, clean, science facility with towering equipment. It was like something out of a James Bond movie, with the villain's high tech lab being hidden deep underground in an unassuming place like a closed down mine.
I collided my Lexus with a Bentley and discovered things about my insurance company.
lmfao
When are you publishing the results?
lol
the insurance uncertainty principle.
A Bentley?
That's just bad luck.
This is a great Fermilab video!
One of my favorite channels! :)
You just got to love that retro style intro!
Thank you for simplifying the information so that I can understand it.
great explanation and breakdown , I love fermilab
This channel is very important for any student .. and so amazing video sir ... Thanks sir good explanation... I am so glad
This video really accelerated my learning.
Interesting and informative!
I was not aware of those particular differences and aspects in the various systems.
I had wanted to be physicist since my high days when I first heard about the Fermilab. Life had other plans for me.
Anyway, cool video and thank you for sharing!
Most underrated channel...
such detail! amazing video
Great video!
We can also say that pp colliders induce less synchtron loss than e+e- colliders because protons are more massive than electrons. This is also one of the reasons why proton colliders are sometimes prefered over e+e- colliders.
When he was talking about "2 reasons" for wanting to build proton colliders, I thought this was going to the the 2nd reason -- it is hard to crank electrons up to energies as high as you can get with protons (either way, substitute antimatter equivalent as appropriate).
Excellent. No fluff.
I think this is one of your best videos.
Thank you Dr. Lincoln!
Very much enjoying these videos! Please keep them coming! :)
I would like to see a video on particle detectors. How do you detect all the different particles produced after a collision? What kind of electronics and signal processing are involved?
THANK YOU PROFESSOR LINCOLN...!!!
Can you do a video on The nature of time, cause that concept is a little hard to visualize...please
Entropy...
Time is a rate of change of a system, whether the system is a watch, the sun, the stars, or anything you are basing a derivative reference frame on of time - change. Of course, casualty occurs at different rates - time passes differently depending on the reference frame. Causality (and, so, the rate of causality - time) is relative to a lot of things, including the upper reference frame of speed/energy (c), mass/gravity (g), and quantum phenomena best modeled to us as statistical systems of potential realities collapsing to one real one. Also take note of the two definitions of time relevant whenever speaking about it: there is your subjective experience of time, then there is your subjective belief in others' beliefs in time and in an objective time that grounds your subjective experience of it and exists beyond your experience. Time is relative to your mental states just as it is relative to other physical constants like speed and gravity, because everything is a relative interaction of reference frame alignments.
Excellent channel.
How do you get the source "material" in the first place? How do you seperate protons and how do you create positrons? I thought anti matter can only be observed in a collider in the first place.
Thank you !
+ScienceNinjaDude
can't we get positrons through positron decay? when an nycleous has more protons than necessary, the emit a positron and a neutrino, and a neutron remains in the nucleous
Mind Blown!!! Thanks for the video.
I am lucky to get your vedio, this is pure physics, but unfortunate in Kashmir we lack it .
Thanks Regards
Thank you for making those wonderful videos.
I'm just baffled how can they detect and measure these man made collisions which happen in a time frame of pico-seconds or faster. What kind of detectors/cameras do they use and how is it being visualized? Truly amazing stuff.
they use pico cameras
Here are the detectors used in the LHC > ua-cam.com/video/xG_YtASz7gY/v-deo.html
Discovering the messy trash can like nature of protons and neutrons had been one of the most fascinating parts of learning about this whole subject so far
I cant wait to see this after work!
A show about the Alcubierre drive would be most appreciated
So why do moons/stars spin backwards creating an angular problem?
I love the way Dr. Don low key flexes his cool t-shirts 😄
The details of Proton pair collisions was totally new to me.
Thank you for explaining this!
Excellent video. I admit that the LHC seemed like an expensive version of colliding two pulsed firehoses, a big splash, before the concepts of quantum fields, starting with the universal field of electrons oscillating between past and future, was presented. The idea fits with branes and nested loops of the vector combinations that make numerical codimensions as in 3D and sequences of scale that Dirac supposed were related as reciprocal relationships, (but there's every kind of mathematical connection that can be imagined from modulated information).
So if there's a particle soup produced by the LHC, then it's probably a lot more efficient than putting the same value of particle "telescopes" on mountain tops and waiting for rare events made by Cosmic rays.
A "tuned" synchronous detector, (like an eye) sees the universe at a particular frequency that appears to be here-now and distributed to infinity where synchronous interference intersects, the way radar or sonar works by at a "Tachyon" frequency.., so it's confusing enough to imagine the "inside" of an atom that is an "outside" frequency we see because of total internal reflection. Put numbers on it adds another layer of simplified confusion, while making it easier to do practical applications.
Quantum froth and bubbles in the bins?
Thank you sir...love from India 🇮🇳...
very nice informing video, keep up the good job
Great information, but I am curious about one thing. Besides measuring energies then calculating velocities from relativistic energy and momentum equations, is there any other way to "clock" the speeds of particles?
I did not find " what happened when p and e are collided ?
Thank You so much...much appreciated for your contribution
1)if I draw a person on paper I can move the "idea" by moving the paper, 2) if the "idea" is to move across the paper then the idea must be made and remade from the paper 3) If the idea is to move on top of the paper then it must take parts of the paper with it 4) If an idea is moving on top of the paper why would it stay there not just float off 5) Following this logic wouldn't particles be part plasma changing all the time as the idea moved as a wave through space 6) They'd have different properties depending on the underlying plasma?
is there any way to collide neutrons?
For what very specific circumstances would you collide electrons with electrons? You dismissed it at the beginning but why?
Este normal sa nu admiteti ce nu scrie in manuale. Dar dupa ce se descifreaza constanta de actiune h si cu legile electromagnetismului, rezulta structura bipolara a electronului. Inpartiti lungimea de unda a fotonului gama electronic la 137 si apoi la 2.pi si o sa obtineti raza clasica a electronului. Ceeace dovedeste ca electronul este unda stationara bipolara de mare amplitudine a fotonului gama electronic. Si ca fotonul gama, ca orisicare foton are exact masa particulei din care se naste prin mecanismul reactiei de anihilare.
It is normal not to admit what is not written in the manuals. But after deciphering the action constant h and the laws of electromagnetism, the bipolar structure of the electron results. Divide the wavelength of the electronic gamma photon by 137 and then by 2.pi and you will get the classical radius of the electron. Which proves that the electron is the high-amplitude bipolar standing wave of the electronic gamma photon. And that the gamma photon, like any photon, has exactly the mass of the particle from which it is born through the mechanism of the annihilation reaction.
Great stuff man
This channel is amazing, and Dr. Don Lincoln is such a fucking boss. Thank you so much for all the incredible videos and information!! What a time to be alive lol
Please do not pollute my reading of comments with your disrespectful use of gutter descriptions. Thank you.
What's the 'hit rate' of an electron/positron collision? What I mean is, isn't an electron just a cloud of potential locations? So how can you accurately aim and fire a cloud? Especially when we know the velocity fairly well as we accelerated the electron to that velocity ourselves.
What about colliding Electrons with Protons?
thank you for this magnificent content
This guy is one of my idols, and I‘m not even joking!
love how they go out of their way to make videos that can be understood by laypeople
1.) What is the form of energy your institution calls protons and electrons?
3.) How is excreted ‘energy’ gauged versus created and or emitted?
Ok and now back to the electron-electron collisions. What are these specialized cases?
Doesn't the LHC also occasionally collide lead nuclei? What's the advantage and disadvantage there? If it's only the elementary particles actually colliding, what in fact is the difference at all?
Terrific video
Whenever I get curious about electron/proton collisions in an accellerator, I end up here and it never answers my question :P
When are electron-electron collisions used?
the thing is , I wanted to know what happens when you collide two electron together (but we can eliminate that one) ?
Even if you had a superfast camera wouldn't the uncertaincy principle prevent you from successfully observing it (the proton)? Just askin'
If I understand it correctly there seems to be almost infinite possible outcomes of colliding protons together. Is there any value in doing this considering it sounds as outcomes are random and can't be forecast?
.
What about colliding protons with electrons? Would that give off even more different things?
I have a easiest way to collide 2 electrons what will be the result sir?
I've heard good things about inverse tachyon pulses and main deflector dishes, maybe try those someday?
IF you have an unlimitied amount of power, could your collisions create short life strings and if so would it even be possible to detect them?
strings? if it existed, maybe...
Can u upload video on energy density of space time curvature.
proton proton collisions may be a mess but since there is a limited amount of particles it stil can be sortedout right ?
I like this explanation!
What happens if you collide two electrons then?
Thanks Don! I should be going to bed, but I keep clicking on your titles...
How do you get those curved lines in particle accelerator collision illustration everybody keeps using ?
But does the precision of antimatter elections produce anything for discovery? Also, where does the missing energy go in proton-proton collisions???
Have you ever considered the possibility that your most basic assumptions about the proton are wrong? What would happen if you ditched the assumption that the charge of the proton is the same as the electron and for a thought experiment postulated that it is 1/8th that of the electron. Interestingly it leads to a perfectly balanced electrical model for elemental atomic structures. I wonder what would happen if you applied the value to proton mass derivations based on divergence and curl? Does the mass defect problem go away?
What happens to protons after proton-proton collision, if quarks n gluons are released from proton then what happens to original proton and particles in it ??
One more thing .. as it is told that matter and anti matter annihilate into energy but in proton both matters are present yet proton is stable and doesn't dissociate, how any explanation ?
It seems every matter has anti matter as an integral part of it!!
can we store protons in a sort of proton battery? to be released in a controlled way to power a proton circuit such as in a proton chip... what would the storage device look like? i vision a dark box... the box is filled with individual protons and they are compressed into a power storage system like a loop that can be "discharged" systematically... excess or used protons could them be returned and stored tasing to another material and then replenished as in a rechargeable battery? would that involve compacting quarks?
Start with a wave and this premise:
The crests are positive and the troughs are negative.
But in the case of the electron and proton, the waves are so fast that they do not travel in a straight line, but curve such that they spin into a ball or particle - each spins in the opposite direction.
The proton spins such that the crest sides are on the outside
When the crest positive side is on the outside the particle is positive charged.
The electron spins such that the trough sides are on the outside.
When the troughs negative side is on the outside the particle is negative charged
The electron and proton spinning particles are the same size but opposite charges so they attract each other.
The neutrino and the neutron do not form like the electron and proton for some unknown reason.
Let's say the current state is true on charge - so you will have to say :
The electron has the same charge of a proton though the proton is 1865 times more massive. Then explain why two waves would have the same exact charge but such massive differences in mass?
The electron and proton are both waves (as well as particles).
So that means that the electron wave and the proton wave both show charge on the wave - so where is it?
My scenario is the first to suggest where it is.
Where on the proton wave does it show that it's 1865 times more massive than the electron wave?
The idea of waves of probability seems like a dodge to avoid finding out what's going on.
BTW a quark is both a particle and wave, so where on the quark wave is 1/3 charge???
We can't dodge everything that doesn't make sense and then throw in endless complexity to rationalize it.
I read in Sir James Jeans book Philosophy and Physics of the mystery of why the weight ratio of the proton to electron is Mp/me = 1835.16666. Why? We don't know. I read it in Kenneth Atkins Physics Once Over Lightly and also in Richard Morris book. This mystery is not yet solved but I found 1835.1666... × 6 = 11011.
when talking about colliding gluons, are they within the confines of the proton? Would the gluon move at the speed if light because it's massless if it were free from the proton?
Gluons can't appear outside the proton or another particle, because they carry a color charge. If you tried to remove a quark or a gluon from a particle, its energy will increase so much that it will create a quark-antiquark pair. And indeed, this is what happens in a high-energy particle collision. (There's a hypothetical - heavy and unstable - particle called a glueball, which consists only of gluons, but the rule that any observed particle must be color-neutral holds even for it.)
But how do you force two protons to collide head on in the same circular magnetic tube?
The Lorentz-Force can only force the positively charged proton in a unique clockwise direction.
The other proton would need an opposite magnetic field, isn't it?
How is this technically accomplished?
im thinking , can you polarize the ions, so as to structure the Quark content of the particle. before it enters explosion . You can also include Photons into the bunch before entering explosion .Cathode Ray : TV coils .
quantum physics/mechanics engineering - using proton particle accelerators as the main driving force?
You could look at the proton model as an atom, with any number of electrons(quarks) you can look at a photon being ejected or absorbed by an atomic nuclei as a gluon (the force that binds quarks together/electromagnetic wave for electrons(photons) ) They come with there own pairs (Graviton can be looked at as the pair for photons, or you can just say that a gluon and boson is the same as a photon, (it's lower dimensional pair) The faster or slower you go (smaller) the more you'll see of the same thing. Metals such as uranium and plutonium can be seen as more difficult particles/forces to study based That can decay into other particles when exposed to different beams (temps, pressure)
Light does have mass because it's there, same goes for gravity. The faster you go the more "quantum" (weightless/non existent) it might seem but it's just going faster.
+Ganjanaut gravity is like entropy in our 3 dimensional view, it's the movement of space (infinitely divisible force/as much particles as you want) inward.
I think I know the answer to my question ,but I would like to hear it from a scientist or Dr. Don Lincoln. If you collide 2 particles at 99.999 the speed of light what speed is the of the collision ? I'm guessing 99.999 the speed of light. But why? Short answer please.
I know they go like 99.99999% the speed of light but is it theoretically possible to just keep adding energy to a particle beam or is there a fundamental limit to the energy you can impart?
The speed of light IS the fundamental limit for Velocity (betting you already knew that). As a result, at an infinitesimally slower "speed" than that of light, all of the energy being applied to the system is contributing to the Mass of the object and is no longer accelerating the object in a translational sense. After that, the Mass will continue to increase, while the Velocity is maintained, all the way up to a Mass/Volume ratio of a Schwartzschild Radius, whereby you have created a Black Hole, or at least an event horizon....... Such energy levels long long way away in a technological sense, though.
There is no energy limit, you can continue accelerating forever, but you will never reach light speed. You will just come closer and closer!
Very cool. Pretty crazy that some day we may be able to harness that amount of energy.
DangerZone you can keep adding energy, buy due to relativistic effects the faster a particle goes, the more its mass increases. so it takes more and more energy input to create smaller and smaller increases in velocity, and as a result you can't accelerate a massive particle to the speed of light.
Richard Aversa - the mass of the particle does NOT increase. Because of the VERY elementary concept of relative motion it should be clear that you statement makes no sense. i.e. if I move at near c will some massive bodies become black holes? of course not.
Great vid
Protonul este un neutron cuplat cu un pozitron. Neutronul este un sistem de cam 1836 de unde stationare de foarte mare amplitudine, care se roteste pe cercul de raza neutronului Rn cu viteza de c/274 (m/s). Fiecare unda are masa cat a unui electron. Semiundele din sistem sunt propulsate in rotatie de catre forta electromagnetica. Forta care este la echilibru cu firta de inertie. B.I.L=m.a
The proton is a neutron coupled to a positron. The neutron is a system of about 1836 standing waves of very high amplitude, which rotates on the circle of the neutron radius Rn with a speed of c/274 (m/s). Each wave has the mass of an electron. The half-waves in the system are propelled in rotation by the electromagnetic force. The force that is in balance with the inertial force. B.I.L=m.a
Well, there is also heavy nucleus collision like lead or gold that give other things like a quark-gluon plasma.
the relative motion or speed between single electron and proton when they are atract toward each other??
Rapá, vô solicitar a esse pessoal do Fermilab que dê aulas de física no meu lugar já que não tem mais nada pra fazer lá...