I'm a graduate student currently working on the CUORE experiment. Fun fact about the detectors, they operate at a few 10's of mK (~0.010 K). At that temperature, electrons emitted during beta decay increase the temperature of our detectors enough to be picked up by our resistive thermometers. But then again, any stray charged particle would have enough deposit enough energy to be picked up by the thermometers. So, in order to shield the detectors from cosmic ray showers, it's located 1400 meters underground at the Gran Sasso Laboratory. Even with good isolation systems, the detectors are so sensitive they pick up heat generated by stray vibrations from all sorts of sources such as earthquakes, lightning strikes, etc. A faint signal can even be seen from sea waves causing noise in the data, even though the detector is 50 km inland away from the sea!
Which simply goes to show that you have never and will never detect a "neutrino", since they simply do not exist.| "Speed of Light" is a misnomer, since light is a force and has no speed. You can detect energy changes brought about by forces at very long distances, starlight is detectable by the naked eye. Imaginary force carriers not required; there is a much better explanation than extra dimension and invisible particles.
@@sonpopco-op9682youre wrong about neutrinos, you can detect them by observing reverse beta decay. But the detectors these days are crazy and give false positives all the time.
I would argue that "Failed experiments" are an extremely important part of science and deserve more credit than they get. It is a process of elimination that helps scientists narrow the field of theoretical possibilities, helping to point the way toward the light of scientific truth.
Yeah - that's why being wrong doesn't necessarily make a theory worthless; the reasons why it's wrong can still teach you things. It's also why "not even wrong" is used as a description of particularly ill-informed and ridiculous ideas.
Agreed. We also need out of the box ideas and the out of the box people who come up with them. They will often be wrong, but we’ll learn something. As long as we don’t let a single out of the box idea dominate scientific institutions without solid verification (cough, cough string theory…)
A famous example is the Michelson-Morley experiment to measure the speed and direction of Earth through the Aether of the universe . The failure to detect anything inspired Einstein to create a theory that there is no aether and the speed of light is the same from all viewpoints .
@@johndododoe1411 That's what we were taught in school but actually he was inspired by Maxwell's equations which imply that the speed of light is constant for all observers. This is why he came up with the special theory of relativity. He found out about the results of the MM experiment later.
@@finwefingolfin7113 If Einstein Relativity wasn't real, Maxwell's equations would apply only in the true universal frame of reference, and motion of the electromagnetic devices would affect the results as applicable . MM tried to electromagnetically measure the motion of their lab through the universe, but got a fat 0 even though they could easily see that the lab moved relative to the Sun and other stars, just like the rest of our planet . Philosophically this could mean that whatever carried light around the lab was held in place by Earth and/or the building, or it could mean that electromagnetism in the form of light was independent of the frame of reference .
Sabine's "Lost in Math" book is a reminder that Occam's Razor doesn't say the simplest or most elegant theory is true. It's just a "last resort" tiebreaker algorithm that guides us how to BET on which theory is true, when two or more competing theories haven't been falsified.
@@brothermine2292 Occam's Razor is widely misunderstood. All it ultimately says is the fewer assumptions, the less likely to be wrong. It's not a means of identifying the correct theory, it's a guideline for avoiding missteps on the way there.
4:08 The reason he said it was in response to the Terrence Howard drama at the time. Here he was trying to point to something actually interesting that challenges the standard model
I was surprised that Sabine did not mention the reason the right-handed neutrinos are so heavy is also why the left-handed neutrinos are so light, via the seesaw mechanism. I'm sure there are more complex explanations, but the seesaw seemed very appealing to my young self.
She didn’t mention why sterile right handed neutrons couldn’t just have the same mass as the left handed ones. Isn’t the simplest “extension” of the standard model exactly that? To assume that neutrinos are like all other particles? So then the right handed ones don’t interact weakly, like all the other right handed particles, and are therefore sterile. This is so simple and there is no new mysterious new particle or any additional free parameter required. You would get 7 parameters out of the neutrino sector as expected (and as literally are being measured right now): 3 masses and 4 MNS mixing parameters. Where is the problem. I don’t care if neutrinos are too “light” for some physicists’ taste. So the whole thing wouldn’t need a seesaw mechanism that you add additional parameters plus additional logic (=terms) to the standard model. There must be a reason why it’s not considered. But she didn’t explain that. According to what I can find on the internet, the mass range of 0-3 eV is not excluded for sterile right handed neutrinos.
@@jan7356 True enough, but although right handed neutrinos are singlets and so sterile, not all sterile neutrinos are right handed. There are models with additional left handed sterile neutrinos which can have reasonable masses. Some of those models are ruled out, but I am sure there are some not excluded by experiment.
@@jan7356 > Isn’t the simplest “extension” of the standard model exactly that? To assume that neutrinos are like all other particles? Well, in one sense yes, that is the simplest extension. OTOH, the other simplest extension is to add *all* renormalizable terms to Lagrangian which are allowed by Lorentz and internal symmetries. (This is natural because SM already includes *all* such allowed terms for the model where neutrinos are massless). Majorana term for right-handed neutrinos is the only additional allowed term compared to your proposal.
@@denysvlasenko1865 so adding sterile neutrinos as heavy as left handed ones isn’t experimentally excluded? Then why does she say we need heavy ones and therefore new particles?
Maiorana's uncleared fate is also a topic in the Catholic church, by the way, because he seems to have been a very pious catholic person and there were rumours, after his disappearance, he might have become a monk in some religious order and willingly vanished from the eyes (if not the face) of the earth. There is a German novel, "Der Ratschlag - eine Mystifikation", in which a figure who is given the name of Maiorana but who is not identical with him tells about quantum physics and metaphysics - the substance of which referees the content of the books that the Cambridge quantum physicist John Polkinghorne wrote about God and science after he had ended his scientific career and studied theolgy to become an Anglican priest.
@@dananorth895 Why would you say that? How is physics going downhill? We are doing tons of valuable research. Or what would you need to see for physics to not go downhill?
Right-handed neutrinos interact only gravitationally. How they supposed to be observed? Maybe I'm missing something, but isn't it true that in order to observe something, you have to interact with it? Why assume that the right-handed neutrino is too heavy? If it is light (like left-handed), they still cannot be observed.
The Majorana experiment is continuing as the LEGEND-200 experiment and the planned LEGEND-1000 experiment. Elon is probably referring to the Majorana experiment, as funding for LEGEND is under consideration by the DOE agency.
If I get it right, the weak force only affects left-handed particles (and right-handed antiparticles) and the Higgs interaction is changing the handedness, so... might it be that everything is right with neutrinos and we haven't detected any right-handed neutrinos because they just don't feel the weak force in that state? 🤔
Right. No right handed particle in the Standard Model feels the weak force. I think you probably even could detect right handed sterile neutrinos with missing energy or something even though they just escape and don’t interact. I am really guessing here because I am not an expert, but my guess is that we don’t see missing energy or count missing particles because neutrinos are so much near the speed of light that the “loss” due to the right handed part “disappearing into nirvana” is just very hard to measure from our frame of reference. But again, I am really not an expert.
@@jan7356 We don't detect " missing energy" due to right-handed neutrinos because absorption and emission probabilities are linked. If an existing particle is unlikely to interact, then the same particle is unlikely to be produced in a similar process. Right-handed neutrinos don't interact via weak interaction, therefore they are not produced by weak decays.
@@denysvlasenko1865 Wikipedia states under “sterile neutrino”: “However, a particle with mass that starts out with left-handed chirality can develop a right-handed component as it travels - unless it is massless, chirality is not conserved during the propagation of a free particle through space” Under the article about “Chirality” it states: “Chirality is Lorentz invariant, but is not a constant of motion: a massive left-handed spinor, when propagating, will evolve into a right handed spinor over time, and vice versa.” Here is my take: left handed massive particles (or the left handed part of a mixed particle) that do interact with the weak force DO all acquire a right handed component over time as the evolve over time (propagate / move away from the interaction point). Not sure if this has anything to do that mass eigenstate isn’t weak eigenstate. It’s been a while I learned that at the university. You are right: right handed neutrinos aren’t produced in the weak interaction, but they will become partially right handed when they propagate, because they are massive. Wouldn’t it cause “missing energy” if you measure those generated neutrinos after a long propagation (like on the other side of the earth (so called long baseline experiments), meaning the cross section for their interaction becomes slightly smaller as the propagate as they slowly acquire a right handed component? For some reason they CAN establish bounds on the mass of the sterile neutrinos experimentally, which I don’t understand. See “sterile neutrino” in Wikipedia.
I still think that, if we had not had a period of time where we dismissed the luminiferous Aether as a "failed theory" before we discovered the theory of the Higgs Field, we would have _called_ the theory of the Higgs Field a mathematical model of the Luminiferous Aether.
I read both of your books recently; "Lost In Math" and "Existential Physics". You touched on so many related philosophical subjects. Every politician should read your books or have their advisors read them.
I've noticed a lack of jokes until today's "bitezilla" and I'm happy you are back at it, bc honestly, ypu are good at it and it makes me laugh every time. Thanks!
Everything has mass. Otherwise, it wouldn't exist. Now, what you think of mass is just energy with an Acceleration factor < c. A photon still has mass in the form of radiant energy. F=ma, E=mc. If it exists, it has mass. What Einstein and his relativists minions don't understand is that Acceleration is the actionable force. Acceleration is what creates mass, not the other way around. Which is why modern physics is still monkeys in a tree chasing their tails.
Not that it matters much but just as a tip, Majorana is pronounced Maiorana, your pronunciation was all good except for the j, which in latin and italian is read as an i (its nickname is "i lunga", long i, for its looks not length of pronunciation), except obviously if the word/name is not an italian one. Cuore (which means 'heart') is pronounced like the website Quora but with a final e (which you pronounced correctly) instead of an a. Cheers from Italy!
Just a tangent comment on a beautifully made video. The first name is pronounced E'ttore (not Etto're) and the last name is pronounced Mayorana (not Majorana)
I found it strange that she didn't know the correct pronunciation of the surname of one of the most brilliant physicists of the 20th century. But evidently there is now a tendency to make any pronunciation anglophone.
We detect neutrinos by observing their interaction with nuclei via the weak nuclear force, correct? If so, and the weak force only acts on left-chiral particles, then how _would_ we detect a right chiral neutrino if it did exist? It seems more likely to me that they do exist but we can't see them by the usual means than hypothesizing about new families of particles or novel types of fields or whatnot. I understand how nice it would be if the solution to the neutrino mass issue also tidied up dark matter, but is there at least some reason we _should_ be able to detect right neutrinos?
We can create particles and if some energy momentum is missing from the output we can infer its a new undetectable particle, might not be a right handed neutrino but we can try to pinpoint it then. Also not sure but I think the existence of right handed neutrinos has an effect on neutrino oscillation and we have experiments checking that out iirc
@@JFDCamara I wasn’t able to find any data that light right handed sterile neutrinos are experimentally excluded. Wikipedia is a start: “sterile neutrino”. It talks about mass bounds, but the expected mass (same as left handed ones) doesn’t seem to be excluded. It would be very very helpful if someone could actually clarify why we NEED the sterile right handed neutrinos to be heavy. The seesaw mechanism only introduces additional complexity into the model for the sake of “explaining” why neutrinos are so light, essentially introducing additional unmeasurable parameters just to explain why one of them is “too small” for the taste of physicists but the top quark is also 400,000 times as heavy as the electron. So?
@@jan7356 > It would be very very helpful if someone could actually clarify why we NEED the sterile right handed neutrinos to be heavy. The explanation of "too small mass" indeed seems to be not particularly needed. A heavy neutrino is an excellent dark matter candidate. In general, something is fishy about masses (Yukawa couplings) of SM particles, their squares add up to almost exactly 1 (dimensionless). There is the unexplained Koide rule, etc. It looks far too exact to be a coincidence, feels more like undiscovered theory to me!
The standard model assumes everything Is particles and there are only 3 spacial dimensions. Even tiny fluctuations of energy are considered virtual particles. So the whole way we look at it may be a limitation.
I know I'm way out of my depth here.. but has anyone ever wondered if these different versions of neutrinos are actually just measuring a single particle at different points in it's wave function? As an audio engineer the best way I can explain this... If my measurement of a sound wave only allows for me to measure a single bit sample, That sample doesn't tell me much about the wave form. I know I've got something but not what. If I was to take multiple measurements over time I would then have a lot more information on what frequencies I'm actually working with. The thing is, I know I'm working with waves. What if we are just misinterpreting different points of a wave as different versions of particles instead of just one?
Funny - I have a PhD in Chemistry, the main reason for heading for this was to understand what the world is really made about. In hindsight, this thought was quiet chieldish, as you physicists are ten steps farther. Even though, after looking this all through, it seems to me, that we all do not really know what the foundation of everything really is. We have a lot of MODELS of our world, but no real explanation. Reminds me a bit of Goethes Faust.
What is "real" explanation? The only thing science tries to find is a model which correctly predicts experimental results. It can't promise it will be "what REALLY is happening" (among other reasons, because any two philosophers would disagree what word "REALLY" means).
Musk is probably referring to LEGEND-200 / LEGEND-1000 (future experiment) that are successor experiments to MAJORANA. They are also germanium experiments and are also at Gran Sasso.
I have to say at first the new shorter videos seemed like a good idea because attention span, right? Then again the old format stuck with me better. I bet you turn around every sentence until it's hard to follow for old adhd people like me. I am not expecting returning to the old length just because I say so. But if enough people like this proposal, maybe you should think about it.
That s how you pronounce Majorana: (/maɪəˈrɑːnə/) , Majo as you would pronounce "Mayonnaise". The way Sabine has pronounced with "g" in Italian sounds like a herb used in cooking (in English "marjoram"). I think that the great physicist who had intuitions and ideas so ahead of his time at least deserve that his name be pronounced correctly.
I like that the question you pose in the first minute is answered in the title. It's like reverse click bait that leaves me wanting to see the explanation!
Not always. I happen to have a disorder called mirror movements. That's when one hand mirrors the movement of the other. Mine is quite subtle but messes up my guitar play :D
I have been getting good laughs from your jokes lately. Please continue to say funny things while you attempt to educate our weary minds... thank you so much, Sabine!
I love the way particle physicists hijack terms like color and handedness to describe properties of particles. It makes it so much easier to understand what is being described.
Any opinion from Sabrina on Turok's CPT symmetric universe? I think it predicts that one of the three neutrinos actually has zero mass (it's possible as we have only mananged to measure difference of their masses, not the absolute mass of each one) and as a result one of the right-handed neutrino would be stable and dark matter candidate.
50 years ago, in a quantum physics class I theorized that besides quantum particles there could also be possible dimensional intersection fields to account for problem resolving quantum anomalies with relativity and special relativity. I theorized for my professor that if this was the case there would be a measurable difference (delta) between attracted or repelling particles traveling at near light speeds based on volume of intersection verses area. Since I have never been able to demonstrate this theory on a supercollider - it sits in my personal archive. I believe that the misbehavior of nutritious can be better accounted for with dimensional intersections.
I am so confused! An electron can be right or left handed. If and electrons loses a photon in the formation of Tritium ,you get a neutrino and anti-neutrino from the electron. But there are only left handed neutrinos? Charge doesn’t matter? (Ignoring the fact that charge is matter)
Wait, electron loses a photon in the formation of tritium? What are you talking about, exactly? Beta decay from He-4? The electron gets whacked with a W+ or emits a W-, either way becoming a left chiral neutrino. There's no electrons becoming neutrino anti-neutrino pairs; I think you are more confused than you think. Charge _is_ conserved, which is how you know that can't happen.
I had a dream in 2018. It was related to neutrino oscillations and how it can be distorted by relativistic effects in a way that would make it possible to find the exact masses of each flavour. But no one believes me.
What we call anti-neutrinos are particle candidates that at least have right-handedness and conceivably might be the right-handed neutrinos physicists are looking for.
Come on Sabine! That last part was pure cynicism. Larger particle accelerators have been giving results, while that phone probably cant even make a real call.
Why is there so small interest in gravity versus time? The theory says that time will go slower near mass and the opposite faster away from mass. What is the unit named for this fenomina? Second that elongate when nearing mass and shorten when leaving mass? Gravity is measured in m/s². But what if seconds elongate(stretch)? Is it something like g / (radius)distance from the mass? Or the kg / volume (kg/m³)? (m/s² / kg/m = m/s² * m/kg = m²/(s² * kg)...kg = Nm... m²/(s² * Nm) = m/Ns² The influence of mass becomes bigger when the distance gets shorter. I can remember if kg can be written in other unit Nm. Please elaborate on this?
I get a lot of knowledge from you❤🎉 Universe is mostly neutrinos❤🎉 -- In summary, while neutrinos are incredibly numerous, their very small mass and weak interactions mean they do not dominate the universe's mass-energy content. They are a significant component but not the primary one.
Separate the problem into stationary and probability I realized that the probability can be captured as a mean value ( mass ) from sampling of a new particle adatped for this probability. Electron is a probability to the core as the stationary. This means stationary and probability are relative. New probabilities give new particles since everything need a mean value to the universe.
He’s going to ask ChatGPT for a caveman name and then name it that. just like he did with Grok. Try it ask ChatGPT for a caveman name, and most of the time it will tell you Grok lol.
@@jaredf6205 I think the name Grok comes from a Robert A. Heinlein novel Stranger in a Strange Land. It means to understand at a deep level. It's kind of a meme. The fact it also sounds like a caveman word probably helped though ;)
A long time ago, when I learned that electrons were considered "wavicles" I knew there is a full but unknown layer in physics. Another early set of indicators are the laws formulated by Maxwell. It is amusing to recall that around 1900, the physics community pretty much believed they had learned all the fundamentals. There may yet be a virtual galaxy of undiscovered physics to be explored.
Neutrinos are a type of elementary particle that interacts very weakly and is difficult to detect. They are known to have mass, but the Standard Model cannot explain how they get this mass. There are three possible explanations for how neutrinos have mass: 1. Right-handed neutrinos exist: This is the simplest explanation, but it requires the existence of a new type of neutrino that we have not yet observed. These right-handed neutrinos may also be dark matter, a mysterious substance that makes up about 85% of the matter in the universe. 2. Neutrinos are Majorana particles: Most particles have left-handed and right-handed versions. If neutrinos were their own antiparticles, they would be Majorana particles. This would allow them to gain mass from the Higgs field, another particle thought to give mass to other particles in the Standard Model. 3. The left-handed neutrino takes mass from the Higgs field but is not a Majorana particle: This explanation is mathematically difficult, but it would not require any new particles beyond those already predicted by the Standard Model. guess. Experiments are still being conducted to search for neutrinoless double beta decay, a radioactive decay that can only occur if the neutrino is a Majorana particle. To date, no experiment has successfully detected this decay.
Dear Sabine. i am always watching your videos. Wish that i was a physicist too. i want to ask you a question. In how many years you think that i am going to see a Big step in these kind of topics? Roughly estimate..
I tend not to believe Majorana (*please call him correctly as "Maiorana" and not "Magiorana"*) has ever been wrong. But I may be biased. On the other hand many years of thinking have passed and knowledge has increased (Majorana didn't know about Higgs), so things may be different. As you pointed out in a previous video, Einstein could not build a "theory of everything" in any case, since he didn't know about weak and strong forces. Your videos are food for mind, as not aligned with "standard" opinions but with logical and absolutely scientific thinking. Thank you for this: you deserve your success
When I was in high school I had this simplistic idea that there are limits to energy density and if you bombard a given mass with higher and higher energies you exceeded these limits at increasing rates and would get an increasingly diverse array of particles depending on the intensity of the bombarding energy resulting in a potential infinite number of particles. This persuaded me to go into medicine but probably was a very naïve way to pick a career.
There is a wonderful add-on for Unreal Tournament that causes a player's head to get bigger as they have more success. This brings equilibrium to the game by making the successful players an easier target.
We have also known that Tau Muon and Electron leptons can morph into each other as well. This should not be a surprise that neutrinos do the same. In the early universe, all leptons started as Tau, then they decayed into Muons, and only later did they decay into electrons. Similarly, Taus, Muons and Electrons have a very small atomic mass, BUT all that positive atomic mass is purely relativistic kinetic energy based mass. When you freeze them, their rest mass is highly negative. Ie they are all exotic matter when at rest. Neutrinos measured mass is also relativistic kinetic energy based.
@@Johnny2Feathers I agree but am careful what I say and to whom. The people who now dislike Elon only seem to have emotional arguments instead of logically looking at his accomplishments and ideas. (Sabine likes to poke fun at him. I assertively suggested to her that she poke fun at some of her fellow Germans such as WEF President Claus Schwab.)
there is a relationship between neutrinos and Bose-Einstein condensates. The concept of neutrinos forming a Bose-Einstein condensate has been explored in the context of cosmology and dark matter. If neutrinos were to violate the *Pauli principle and obey Bose-Einstein statistics, they could form a condensate that could account for all or part of the dark matter in the universe... *The Pauli principle, also known as the Pauli exclusion principle, is a fundamental concept in quantum mechanics that states that no two fermions can occupy the same quantum state simultaneously. This principle was first proposed by Wolfgang Pauli in 1925 to explain the behavior of electrons in atoms.
Doesn’t local conservation of angular momentum, along with the spin statistics theorem, imply that neutrinos must be Fermions? (Due to the interactions they are known to be produced by, I mean.) Of course, composites of Fermions can act as Bosons (as occurs when people make a Bose-Einstein condensate out of atoms), so maybe that’s what you mean? But, that still wouldn’t be well described with “neutrinos follow Bose-Einstein statistics” so much as “certain combinations of neutrinos follow Bose-Einstein statistics”.
@@drdca8263 if I actually knew anything about this subject, I would probably not have tried to understand it using chat gpt. But since we're discussing it...
It's very simple, a neutrino is just spin. It's like having a man running around and then take away the man and just observe the "running around" without the man. Of course it's hard to see the running around without the man doing it but if we now put a women in the place where we expect the running around to be there is a slight change she will be running around. So you see, no mass needed to change a male spin into a female spin. But I do need a lot of money for a very large running around detector.
Unsurprising that Musk tweeted such a thing. He tweets all kinds of stuff that gives me the impression he read a single article on the topic then tweeted about it to make his followers think he's some kind of genius polymath.
The interesting thing about setting new bounds every time you get a negative result is that under that criterion, every religion in the world counts as a science.
@@deltalima6703, I suspect you've never had a delightful conversation with a Talmudic scholar on whether pushing an elevator button on the Sabbath is work. This kind of conversation was a new experience, but I got into physics so deeply that it was an enormous amount of fun. Until then, I had never appreciated how carefully Talmudic scholars go over their sets of premises. They treat them as axioms and hypotheses and get strikingly rigorous from that point forward. My point is that it is inaccurate to think of all religions are disorganized piles of superstition. I don't doubt that some are, but many are incredibly deep in their intellectual detail to elaborate on this or that premise. Another example is that the first Jesuit missionaries to China were avid and powerful advocates of the emerging European physics of that time and made no apologies for doing so. What is always distinguished science is a relentless pursuit of experimental reproducibility. If you abandon that by treating every negative result as a reason to do more research while never changing what you believe most fervently in your heart, it is no longer science.
It occurrs to me that the phrase, “(needs) new physics” isn’t doing physics any favours. It fuels the attitude amongst the deliberately ignorant that (the “old”) physics were “just made up.” I would suggest saying instead that we use phraseology like, “we need to extend/broaden physics into whole new areas of research.”
I thought that a Majorana article was one which is its own antiparticle, not one whose left chirality version was the same as the right chirality version. Csn you thus explain what a LH versus RH particle is, please ?
Option 4. Assuming what we have is all there is. Take a 3D matrix of pixels, of which resonant entities move across, that we equate with spacetime existance. There would be millions of those pixels moving through matter at any time (as in reality the matter is moving across them), yet they must not really cause any drag upon those entities, as they move across that substrate. Which means they must be minimally interacting in the context of any force, and only tangentially related to gravity. Also if they come in 'heavier versions' with generations that necessitated much hotter envrionments to exist. That implies that they may have had much greater gravitational interaction, at the beginning of the universe. Thus with an ever cooling universe, the nature of that pixel would change its form/state, to one of less gravitational impact. Hence, the acceleration rate would change, depending upon the current ratio of those generations.
You should make an entire series on the science history of past scientists. What they got right, and wrong. What other big discoveries, their discoveries enabled later on. Maybe the history of a few petty squabbles between scientists?
I'm curious. Instead of refering to 'right handed' and 'left handed' why not use 'left handed' and 'NOT left handed'. Is there a chance that neutinos might have a 'not left handed' version that is just not 'right handed'...and that we have not observed?
I mean, a negative result still tells us what it can't be. From what I understand, the search for the Higgs was to some degree eliminating what it wasnt until we could zero in on what it was. I'm wondering what alternatives there are to building bigger detectors (since Sabine clearly finds the idea distasteful) especially given how elusive neutrinos are.
Illegal in most states. In Minnesota you ll get cited for anything in that location. My wife’s phone holder attaches with a microfiber pad and is immovable unless you intend to move it. It does not leave a mark.
I'm a graduate student currently working on the CUORE experiment. Fun fact about the detectors, they operate at a few 10's of mK (~0.010 K). At that temperature, electrons emitted during beta decay increase the temperature of our detectors enough to be picked up by our resistive thermometers. But then again, any stray charged particle would have enough deposit enough energy to be picked up by the thermometers. So, in order to shield the detectors from cosmic ray showers, it's located 1400 meters underground at the Gran Sasso Laboratory. Even with good isolation systems, the detectors are so sensitive they pick up heat generated by stray vibrations from all sorts of sources such as earthquakes, lightning strikes, etc. A faint signal can even be seen from sea waves causing noise in the data, even though the detector is 50 km inland away from the sea!
Astonishing
Interesting, thank you for sharing.
Which simply goes to show that you have never and will never detect a "neutrino", since they simply do not exist.|
"Speed of Light" is a misnomer, since light is a force and has no speed. You can detect energy changes brought about by forces at very long distances, starlight is detectable by the naked eye. Imaginary force carriers not required; there is a much better explanation than extra dimension and invisible particles.
@@sonpopco-op9682youre wrong about neutrinos, you can detect them by observing reverse beta decay. But the detectors these days are crazy and give false positives all the time.
@@sonpopco-op9682Magie ist Physik durch Wollen!
I would argue that "Failed experiments" are an extremely important part of science and deserve more credit than they get. It is a process of elimination that helps scientists narrow the field of theoretical possibilities, helping to point the way toward the light of scientific truth.
Yeah - that's why being wrong doesn't necessarily make a theory worthless; the reasons why it's wrong can still teach you things. It's also why "not even wrong" is used as a description of particularly ill-informed and ridiculous ideas.
Agreed. We also need out of the box ideas and the out of the box people who come up with them. They will often be wrong, but we’ll learn something.
As long as we don’t let a single out of the box idea dominate scientific institutions without solid verification (cough, cough string theory…)
A famous example is the Michelson-Morley experiment to measure the speed and direction of Earth through the Aether of the universe . The failure to detect anything inspired Einstein to create a theory that there is no aether and the speed of light is the same from all viewpoints .
@@johndododoe1411 That's what we were taught in school but actually he was inspired by Maxwell's equations which imply that the speed of light is constant for all observers. This is why he came up with the special theory of relativity. He found out about the results of the MM experiment later.
@@finwefingolfin7113 If Einstein Relativity wasn't real, Maxwell's equations would apply only in the true universal frame of reference, and motion of the electromagnetic devices would affect the results as applicable . MM tried to electromagnetically measure the motion of their lab through the universe, but got a fat 0 even though they could easily see that the lab moved relative to the Sun and other stars, just like the rest of our planet . Philosophically this could mean that whatever carried light around the lab was held in place by Earth and/or the building, or it could mean that electromagnetism in the form of light was independent of the frame of reference .
X-Pensive is actually a good name when you think about the definition of pensive...
Yeah, both suggestion are quite good, Xpensive and BiteZilla.. Take note Elon!
Hahaha
Well all his stuff is overpriced tat, That cyber truck is a ludicrous joke.
I'd just call it SabineX
My vote is for X-Pensive. Pretty sure any marketing bot will reject that though.
Maybe they could go for X-Twit.
Saying I have to work before saying I love you and hanging up was TOO realistic
haha yea I cracked up at that.
shes wants musk's husk.
It bugs me that haven't discovered more particle and stuff.
@@placer7412 *tusk
I don't which of the two is the luckiest...
Big respect for buying a giant inflatable phone for that one second visual gag. That's the hard hitting science that keeps me coming back.
that gag made me lol
It's a bigger detector. Needed to detect teletrinos. You were not paying attention at all.
it's tax deductible now
Hear, hear!
That was the most honest, heartfelt "love you too" I've heard in my life 🙀😹
That killed me :)
@@Hlbkomer can I have your stuff?
The way to a particle physicist's heart is through new physics.
I nearly vomited...
I’m wondering why Brilliant sponsors someone who repeatedly goes out of their way to disparage Elon Musk.
I still think the Majorana solution is the most elegant one. But I read Sabine's book and know it does not make it automatically the true one.
💯
Yeah, the same logic went for String theory and Super Symmetry, which both so far seem to be a bust.
Sabine's "Lost in Math" book is a reminder that Occam's Razor doesn't say the simplest or most elegant theory is true. It's just a "last resort" tiebreaker algorithm that guides us how to BET on which theory is true, when two or more competing theories haven't been falsified.
@@brothermine2292 Occam's Razor is widely misunderstood. All it ultimately says is the fewer assumptions, the less likely to be wrong. It's not a means of identifying the correct theory, it's a guideline for avoiding missteps on the way there.
The US will legalize Majorana soon, hopefully that accelerates the progress
4:08 The reason he said it was in response to the Terrence Howard drama at the time. Here he was trying to point to something actually interesting that challenges the standard model
Thanks for the reminder about Terrance Howard.
Good catch!
I was surprised that Sabine did not mention the reason the right-handed neutrinos are so heavy is also why the left-handed neutrinos are so light, via the seesaw mechanism. I'm sure there are more complex explanations, but the seesaw seemed very appealing to my young self.
She didn’t mention why sterile right handed neutrons couldn’t just have the same mass as the left handed ones.
Isn’t the simplest “extension” of the standard model exactly that? To assume that neutrinos are like all other particles? So then the right handed ones don’t interact weakly, like all the other right handed particles, and are therefore sterile. This is so simple and there is no new mysterious new particle or any additional free parameter required. You would get 7 parameters out of the neutrino sector as expected (and as literally are being measured right now): 3 masses and 4 MNS mixing parameters. Where is the problem. I don’t care if neutrinos are too “light” for some physicists’ taste. So the whole thing wouldn’t need a seesaw mechanism that you add additional parameters plus additional logic (=terms) to the standard model.
There must be a reason why it’s not considered. But she didn’t explain that.
According to what I can find on the internet, the mass range of 0-3 eV is not excluded for sterile right handed neutrinos.
@@jan7356 True enough, but although right handed neutrinos are singlets and so sterile, not all sterile neutrinos are right handed. There are models with additional left handed sterile neutrinos which can have reasonable masses. Some of those models are ruled out, but I am sure there are some not excluded by experiment.
@@jan7356 > Isn’t the simplest “extension” of the standard model exactly that? To assume that neutrinos are like all other particles?
Well, in one sense yes, that is the simplest extension. OTOH, the other simplest extension is to add *all* renormalizable terms to Lagrangian which are allowed by Lorentz and internal symmetries. (This is natural because SM already includes *all* such allowed terms for the model where neutrinos are massless).
Majorana term for right-handed neutrinos is the only additional allowed term compared to your proposal.
@@denysvlasenko1865 so adding sterile neutrinos as heavy as left handed ones isn’t experimentally excluded? Then why does she say we need heavy ones and therefore new particles?
Maiorana's uncleared fate is also a topic in the Catholic church, by the way, because he seems to have been a very pious catholic person and there were rumours, after his disappearance, he might have become a monk in some religious order and willingly vanished from the eyes (if not the face) of the earth. There is a German novel, "Der Ratschlag - eine Mystifikation", in which a figure who is given the name of Maiorana but who is not identical with him tells about quantum physics and metaphysics - the substance of which referees the content of the books that the Cambridge quantum physicist John Polkinghorne wrote about God and science after he had ended his scientific career and studied theolgy to become an Anglican priest.
Interesting! I should read about John Polkinghorne!
Fascinating topic, wonderful video. The life story of Ettore Majorana would be worth a whole video too, I suggest.
💯
It should be investigation video about his disappearance
There are some youtubes about his life and two about the mystery of his disappearance. I've just been going down that rabbit hole myself.
Coincidence that he has the same initials as Elon Musk...🫨
@@jeremywilliams5107 right there was about one chance in 676
Neutrinos are, as the name suggests, Italian in nature. They have a keen sense of style and perform frequent costume changes.
Elon Musk is a p1g.
Good one! 😎
So in the 90s Phone detectors were bigger ?
the architect of the matrix was right. 1999 WAS the pinnacle of our civilization!
Actually they were boxes with a door and you could step into them. 🙂
And physics has been going downhill ever since.
Don’t worry modern phones are bigger on the inside.
@@dananorth895 Why would you say that? How is physics going downhill? We are doing tons of valuable research.
Or what would you need to see for physics to not go downhill?
I am Italian. J of Majorana is an "i" and not a "g". With the g sound it becomes very close to maggiorana, the herb marjoram...😅😂
marioram?
@@retyroni "Maiorana". As if J is a i.
I wish I could give two thumbs up for that larger detector at the end!
Me too, but now I want to see a Large Telephone Colider
Then we could have both a Left Thumbs Up and a Right Thumbs up resulting in mass.
Maybe one bigger thumb would do it as well...
I want to give Sabine a right-handed and a left-handed thumbs up.
Sabine: Your sense of humor, mixed in here and there, is amazing! Science and comedy can co-exist! Keep it up.
"How about X-Pensive?" 😅
Right-handed neutrinos interact only gravitationally. How they supposed to be observed? Maybe I'm missing something, but isn't it true that in order to observe something, you have to interact with it? Why assume that the right-handed neutrino is too heavy? If it is light (like left-handed), they still cannot be observed.
When Sabine pulled out that big phone, I busted out laughing. 👍👍👍
Her name is Sabine
@@vimal-cliobconsulting Thank you. I knew that. My bad. Will edit.
😂 and the Woodstock voice
The Majorana experiment is continuing as the LEGEND-200 experiment and the planned LEGEND-1000 experiment. Elon is probably referring to the Majorana experiment, as funding for LEGEND is under consideration by the DOE agency.
If I get it right, the weak force only affects left-handed particles (and right-handed antiparticles) and the Higgs interaction is changing the handedness, so... might it be that everything is right with neutrinos and we haven't detected any right-handed neutrinos because they just don't feel the weak force in that state? 🤔
Right. No right handed particle in the Standard Model feels the weak force.
I think you probably even could detect right handed sterile neutrinos with missing energy or something even though they just escape and don’t interact. I am really guessing here because I am not an expert, but my guess is that we don’t see missing energy or count missing particles because neutrinos are so much near the speed of light that the “loss” due to the right handed part “disappearing into nirvana” is just very hard to measure from our frame of reference. But again, I am really not an expert.
@@jan7356 We don't detect " missing energy" due to right-handed neutrinos because absorption and emission probabilities are linked. If an existing particle is unlikely to interact, then the same particle is unlikely to be produced in a similar process. Right-handed neutrinos don't interact via weak interaction, therefore they are not produced by weak decays.
@@denysvlasenko1865 Wikipedia states under “sterile neutrino”: “However, a particle with mass that starts out with left-handed chirality can develop a right-handed component as it travels - unless it is massless, chirality is not conserved during the propagation of a free particle through space”
Under the article about “Chirality” it states: “Chirality is Lorentz invariant, but is not a constant of motion: a massive left-handed spinor, when propagating, will evolve into a right handed spinor over time, and vice versa.”
Here is my take: left handed massive particles (or the left handed part of a mixed particle) that do interact with the weak force DO all acquire a right handed component over time as the evolve over time (propagate / move away from the interaction point). Not sure if this has anything to do that mass eigenstate isn’t weak eigenstate. It’s been a while I learned that at the university.
You are right: right handed neutrinos aren’t produced in the weak interaction, but they will become partially right handed when they propagate, because they are massive.
Wouldn’t it cause “missing energy” if you measure those generated neutrinos after a long propagation (like on the other side of the earth (so called long baseline experiments), meaning the cross section for their interaction becomes slightly smaller as the propagate as they slowly acquire a right handed component?
For some reason they CAN establish bounds on the mass of the sterile neutrinos experimentally, which I don’t understand. See “sterile neutrino” in Wikipedia.
I still think that, if we had not had a period of time where we dismissed the luminiferous Aether as a "failed theory" before we discovered the theory of the Higgs Field, we would have _called_ the theory of the Higgs Field a mathematical model of the Luminiferous Aether.
I read both of your books recently; "Lost In Math" and "Existential Physics". You touched on so many related philosophical subjects. Every politician should read your books or have their advisors read them.
I've noticed a lack of jokes until today's "bitezilla" and I'm happy you are back at it, bc honestly, ypu are good at it and it makes me laugh every time. Thanks!
Well, she is German afterall...
We have hypothesized, since the '60s, that neutrinos have mass. Hypothesizing and knowing are not the same thing.
Everything has mass. Otherwise, it wouldn't exist. Now, what you think of mass is just energy with an Acceleration factor < c. A photon still has mass in the form of radiant energy.
F=ma, E=mc. If it exists, it has mass. What Einstein and his relativists minions don't understand is that Acceleration is the actionable force. Acceleration is what creates mass, not the other way around. Which is why modern physics is still monkeys in a tree chasing their tails.
Not that it matters much but just as a tip, Majorana is pronounced Maiorana, your pronunciation was all good except for the j, which in latin and italian is read as an i (its nickname is "i lunga", long i, for its looks not length of pronunciation), except obviously if the word/name is not an italian one. Cuore (which means 'heart') is pronounced like the website Quora but with a final e (which you pronounced correctly) instead of an a. Cheers from Italy!
Just a tangent comment on a beautifully made video. The first name is pronounced E'ttore (not Etto're) and the last name is pronounced Mayorana (not Majorana)
I found it strange that she didn't know the correct pronunciation of the surname of one of the most brilliant physicists of the 20th century. But evidently there is now a tendency to make any pronunciation anglophone.
@massimilianomusso5661
Well she is a German speaking English pronouncing an Italian name. 😳
German speaking Italian name in English way even if the italian prononciation is like the German one.
We detect neutrinos by observing their interaction with nuclei via the weak nuclear force, correct? If so, and the weak force only acts on left-chiral particles, then how _would_ we detect a right chiral neutrino if it did exist? It seems more likely to me that they do exist but we can't see them by the usual means than hypothesizing about new families of particles or novel types of fields or whatnot. I understand how nice it would be if the solution to the neutrino mass issue also tidied up dark matter, but is there at least some reason we _should_ be able to detect right neutrinos?
We can create particles and if some energy momentum is missing from the output we can infer its a new undetectable particle, might not be a right handed neutrino but we can try to pinpoint it then. Also not sure but I think the existence of right handed neutrinos has an effect on neutrino oscillation and we have experiments checking that out iirc
@@JFDCamara I wasn’t able to find any data that light right handed sterile neutrinos are experimentally excluded. Wikipedia is a start: “sterile neutrino”. It talks about mass bounds, but the expected mass (same as left handed ones) doesn’t seem to be excluded.
It would be very very helpful if someone could actually clarify why we NEED the sterile right handed neutrinos to be heavy.
The seesaw mechanism only introduces additional complexity into the model for the sake of “explaining” why neutrinos are so light, essentially introducing additional unmeasurable parameters just to explain why one of them is “too small” for the taste of physicists but the top quark is also 400,000 times as heavy as the electron. So?
@@jan7356 > It would be very very helpful if someone could actually clarify why we NEED the sterile right handed neutrinos to be heavy.
The explanation of "too small mass" indeed seems to be not particularly needed.
A heavy neutrino is an excellent dark matter candidate.
In general, something is fishy about masses (Yukawa couplings) of SM particles, their squares add up to almost exactly 1 (dimensionless). There is the unexplained Koide rule, etc. It looks far too exact to be a coincidence, feels more like undiscovered theory to me!
The standard model assumes everything Is particles and there are only 3 spacial dimensions. Even tiny fluctuations of energy are considered virtual particles. So the whole way we look at it may be a limitation.
Sorry for the clarification, Majorana is pronounced Maiorana.
I know I'm way out of my depth here.. but has anyone ever wondered if these different versions of neutrinos are actually just measuring a single particle at different points in it's wave function? As an audio engineer the best way I can explain this... If my measurement of a sound wave only allows for me to measure a single bit sample, That sample doesn't tell me much about the wave form. I know I've got something but not what. If I was to take multiple measurements over time I would then have a lot more information on what frequencies I'm actually working with. The thing is, I know I'm working with waves. What if we are just misinterpreting different points of a wave as different versions of particles instead of just one?
Funny - I have a PhD in Chemistry, the main reason for heading for this was to understand what the world is really made about. In hindsight, this thought was quiet chieldish, as you physicists are ten steps farther. Even though, after looking this all through, it seems to me, that we all do not really know what the foundation of everything really is. We have a lot of MODELS of our world, but no real explanation. Reminds me a bit of Goethes Faust.
Goethes Faust🥰🥰
There making up particles faster than anyone would have suspected. Can't let good funding go to waste
What is "real" explanation? The only thing science tries to find is a model which correctly predicts experimental results. It can't promise it will be "what REALLY is happening" (among other reasons, because any two philosophers would disagree what word "REALLY" means).
Thanks Sabine. This is beautiful and we should hear more from you about Majorana-Particles and Neutrinos.
Greetings from Frankfurt - Andreas
Musk is probably referring to LEGEND-200 / LEGEND-1000 (future experiment) that are successor experiments to MAJORANA. They are also germanium experiments and are also at Gran Sasso.
I have to say at first the new shorter videos seemed like a good idea because attention span, right? Then again the old format stuck with me better. I bet you turn around every sentence until it's hard to follow for old adhd people like me. I am not expecting returning to the old length just because I say so. But if enough people like this proposal, maybe you should think about it.
That s how you pronounce Majorana: (/maɪəˈrɑːnə/) , Majo as you would pronounce "Mayonnaise". The way Sabine has pronounced with "g" in Italian sounds like a herb used in cooking (in English "marjoram"). I think that the great physicist who had intuitions and ideas so ahead of his time at least deserve that his name be pronounced correctly.
Lol
...not to mention how she pronounced "ettore"... lol
I like that the question you pose in the first minute is answered in the title. It's like reverse click bait that leaves me wanting to see the explanation!
You know the left hand never knows what the right hand is doing.
Unless it has a warrant!
Not always. I happen to have a disorder called mirror movements. That's when one hand mirrors the movement of the other.
Mine is quite subtle but messes up my guitar play :D
Saw "Musk is right" and my skepticism compelled me to watch this video first today.
I have been getting good laughs from your jokes lately. Please continue to say funny things while you attempt to educate our weary minds... thank you so much, Sabine!
I love the way particle physicists hijack terms like color and handedness to describe properties of particles.
It makes it so much easier to understand what is being described.
Love the humor and the skepticism. Thank you, Sabine.
Any opinion from Sabrina on Turok's CPT symmetric universe? I think it predicts that one of the three neutrinos actually has zero mass (it's possible as we have only mananged to measure difference of their masses, not the absolute mass of each one) and as a result one of the right-handed neutrino would be stable and dark matter candidate.
"Love you too! Byeee." You killed me with that.
50 years ago, in a quantum physics class I theorized that besides quantum particles there could also be possible dimensional intersection fields to account for problem resolving quantum anomalies with relativity and special relativity. I theorized for my professor that if this was the case there would be a measurable difference (delta) between attracted or repelling particles traveling at near light speeds based on volume of intersection verses area. Since I have never been able to demonstrate this theory on a supercollider - it sits in my personal archive. I believe that the misbehavior of nutritious can be better accounted for with dimensional intersections.
I am so confused! An electron can be right or left handed. If and electrons loses a photon in the formation of Tritium ,you get a neutrino and anti-neutrino from the electron. But there are only left handed neutrinos? Charge doesn’t matter? (Ignoring the fact that charge is matter)
neutrinos are all left-handed, anti-neutrinos are all right-handed. but maybe more importantly, it's not a conserved quantity
Wait, electron loses a photon in the formation of tritium? What are you talking about, exactly? Beta decay from He-4? The electron gets whacked with a W+ or emits a W-, either way becoming a left chiral neutrino. There's no electrons becoming neutrino anti-neutrino pairs; I think you are more confused than you think.
Charge _is_ conserved, which is how you know that can't happen.
I had a dream in 2018. It was related to neutrino oscillations and how it can be distorted by relativistic effects in a way that would make it possible to find the exact masses of each flavour. But no one believes me.
One day your phone will ring and Elon Musk will actually call.
Bet
Hopefully from prison
He'll call Sabine long before he calls Thunderf00t! 🙂
@@realGBx64seething
@@realGBx64Least unhinged Elon-hater
What we call anti-neutrinos are particle candidates that at least have right-handedness and conceivably might be the right-handed neutrinos physicists are looking for.
"love you too..."
spat my coffee lol
Come on Sabine! That last part was pure cynicism. Larger particle accelerators have been giving results, while that phone probably cant even make a real call.
Great video! Also with 5:09 [ Jazz Hands " O' oo! " ] 😂
I actually want an in-depth look on every of these hypothesis. Please!
Thank you for this one - Your bigger detector was a great way to start my day.
Why is there so small interest in gravity versus time? The theory says that time will go slower near mass and the opposite faster away from mass. What is the unit named for this fenomina? Second that elongate when nearing mass and shorten when leaving mass?
Gravity is measured in m/s². But what if seconds elongate(stretch)? Is it something like g / (radius)distance from the mass? Or the kg / volume (kg/m³)?
(m/s² / kg/m = m/s² * m/kg = m²/(s² * kg)...kg = Nm... m²/(s² * Nm) = m/Ns²
The influence of mass becomes bigger when the distance gets shorter.
I can remember if kg can be written in other unit Nm.
Please elaborate on this?
I get a lot of knowledge from you❤🎉 Universe is mostly neutrinos❤🎉
--
In summary, while neutrinos are incredibly numerous, their very small mass and weak interactions mean they do not dominate the universe's mass-energy content. They are a significant component but not the primary one.
The last part of that post sounds like it was written by chatgpt :D I recognize its signature.
Separate the problem into stationary and probability I realized that the probability can be captured as a mean value ( mass ) from sampling of a new particle adatped for this probability. Electron is a probability to the core as the stationary. This means stationary and probability are relative. New probabilities give new particles since everything need a mean value to the universe.
Odds are 10 to 1 Musk now calls his new supercomputer "Bitezilla" or mayde BiteXilla... (Byte ?)
XiloByte
Xomputer, of course. Just one key to the left.
He’s going to ask ChatGPT for a caveman name and then name it that. just like he did with Grok. Try it ask ChatGPT for a caveman name, and most of the time it will tell you Grok lol.
@@jaredf6205 No. He now use xAI. ChatGPT is not in the hand of Evil Bill Gates.
@@jaredf6205 I think the name Grok comes from a Robert A. Heinlein novel Stranger in a Strange Land. It means to understand at a deep level. It's kind of a meme. The fact it also sounds like a caveman word probably helped though ;)
The whole theory of neutrino including its mass was described in a recent paper entitled " Direct derivation of the neutrino mass ".
That Elon call…Sabine kills me😂
A long time ago, when I learned that electrons were considered "wavicles" I knew there is a full but unknown layer in physics. Another early set of indicators are the laws formulated by Maxwell. It is amusing to recall that around 1900, the physics community pretty much believed they had learned all the fundamentals. There may yet be a virtual galaxy of undiscovered physics to be explored.
0:03 Imagine "tweeting" in 2024... ☎
The irony of your username 😂
Neutrinos are a type of elementary particle that interacts very weakly and is difficult to detect. They are known to have mass, but the Standard Model cannot explain how they get this mass.
There are three possible explanations for how neutrinos have mass:
1. Right-handed neutrinos exist: This is the simplest explanation, but it requires the existence of a new type of neutrino that we have not yet observed. These right-handed neutrinos may also be dark matter, a mysterious substance that makes up about 85% of the matter in the universe.
2. Neutrinos are Majorana particles: Most particles have left-handed and right-handed versions. If neutrinos were their own antiparticles, they would be Majorana particles. This would allow them to gain mass from the Higgs field, another particle thought to give mass to other particles in the Standard Model.
3. The left-handed neutrino takes mass from the Higgs field but is not a Majorana particle: This explanation is mathematically difficult, but it would not require any new particles beyond those already predicted by the Standard Model. guess.
Experiments are still being conducted to search for neutrinoless double beta decay, a radioactive decay that can only occur if the neutrino is a Majorana particle. To date, no experiment has successfully detected this decay.
Appreciated the Einstein Ghost.
wasn't that Mayorana's?..
The way you showed Peter Higgs reminded me of Holly from Red Dwarf.
Super erklärt.
Besten Dank ! 👍🌷
Dear Sabine. i am always watching your videos. Wish that i was a physicist too. i want to ask you a question. In how many years you think that i am going to see a Big step in these kind of topics? Roughly estimate..
Bitezilla…, yeah, that is brilliant…, go for it, I would say😂😂❤
Especially in France where bite means c*ck 😅
Did Elon Musk actually invent something rather than picking it from other people?
@@JZsBFF why would he invent? He is not a inventer
@@ankitnmnaik229 That's obvious, isn't it?
@@JZsBFF he is a great business man who actually understand science and engineering...he is a great entrepreneur and CEO.
I tend not to believe Majorana (*please call him correctly as "Maiorana" and not "Magiorana"*) has ever been wrong. But I may be biased. On the other hand many years of thinking have passed and knowledge has increased (Majorana didn't know about Higgs), so things may be different. As you pointed out in a previous video, Einstein could not build a "theory of everything" in any case, since he didn't know about weak and strong forces.
Your videos are food for mind, as not aligned with "standard" opinions but with logical and absolutely scientific thinking. Thank you for this: you deserve your success
A UA-cam physicist with a sense of humour!
When I was in high school I had this simplistic idea that there are limits to energy density and if you bombard a given mass with higher and higher energies you exceeded these limits at increasing rates and would get an increasingly diverse array of particles depending on the intensity of the bombarding energy resulting in a potential infinite number of particles. This persuaded me to go into medicine but probably was a very naïve way to pick a career.
😲 Sabine! Don't tell Elon he's right! His head will get even bigger! 😛
There is a wonderful add-on for Unreal Tournament that causes a player's head to get bigger as they have more success. This brings equilibrium to the game by making the successful players an easier target.
Let be, we all know what happened to Humpty Dumpty...
I mean, he's kinda earned having a big head.
@@pilotmorgan8669 Not really he is just a scammer, Not very intelligent.
@@dogwalker666 You're obviously an ideologue with an emotional bent. Pointless talking to people like you.
We have also known that Tau Muon and Electron leptons can morph into each other as well. This should not be a surprise that neutrinos do the same. In the early universe, all leptons started as Tau, then they decayed into Muons, and only later did they decay into electrons.
Similarly, Taus, Muons and Electrons have a very small atomic mass, BUT all that positive atomic mass is purely relativistic kinetic energy based mass. When you freeze them, their rest mass is highly negative. Ie they are all exotic matter when at rest.
Neutrinos measured mass is also relativistic kinetic energy based.
You could suggest another AI name to Elon - XTInction?
When Elon stopped censorship at Twitter (now X) he made a lot of new enemies.
Elon sure made a lot of enemies when he stopped censorship at Twitter (now X.)
@@douglaswilkinson5700'stopped'
@@douglaswilkinson5700and he couldn’t care less .. that’s why he’s the man.
@@Johnny2Feathers I agree but am careful what I say and to whom. The people who now dislike Elon only seem to have emotional arguments instead of logically looking at his accomplishments and ideas. (Sabine likes to poke fun at him. I assertively suggested to her that she poke fun at some of her fellow Germans such as WEF President Claus Schwab.)
Give it a go drop particle physics and look into spherical harmonics
there is a relationship between neutrinos and Bose-Einstein condensates. The concept of neutrinos forming a Bose-Einstein condensate has been explored in the context of cosmology and dark matter. If neutrinos were to violate the *Pauli principle and obey Bose-Einstein statistics, they could form a condensate that could account for all or part of the dark matter in the universe...
*The Pauli principle, also known as the Pauli exclusion principle, is a fundamental concept in quantum mechanics that states that no two fermions can occupy the same quantum state simultaneously. This principle was first proposed by Wolfgang Pauli in 1925 to explain the behavior of electrons in atoms.
never heard of that
Aren’t BECs only able to be formed in absolutely extreme and specific circumstances?
I dunno about their condensates but my 4 channel amp is wonderful.
Doesn’t local conservation of angular momentum, along with the spin statistics theorem, imply that neutrinos must be Fermions? (Due to the interactions they are known to be produced by, I mean.)
Of course, composites of Fermions can act as Bosons (as occurs when people make a Bose-Einstein condensate out of atoms), so maybe that’s what you mean?
But, that still wouldn’t be well described with “neutrinos follow Bose-Einstein statistics” so much as “certain combinations of neutrinos follow Bose-Einstein statistics”.
@@drdca8263 if I actually knew anything about this subject, I would probably not have tried to understand it using chat gpt. But since we're discussing it...
It's very simple, a neutrino is just spin. It's like having a man running around and then take away the man and just observe the "running around" without the man. Of course it's hard to see the running around without the man doing it but if we now put a women in the place where we expect the running around to be there is a slight change she will be running around. So you see, no mass needed to change a male spin into a female spin. But I do need a lot of money for a very large running around detector.
😁
Unsurprising that Musk tweeted such a thing. He tweets all kinds of stuff that gives me the impression he read a single article on the topic then tweeted about it to make his followers think he's some kind of genius polymath.
+1
Got it in one.
Elon comes up with all kinds of crap, especially after a Special K weekend. He's always pushing the boundaries of his limitless ignorance.
Elon invented neutrioX
He's smart and widely read, but no, he's not a polymath, and not as smart as he thinks.
Didn't South Park already figure this out? 4:45 rotate the hand!
Joke ^
A part of me thinks Starlink should be called X-communicate...
Love the Elon Musk conversation-hilarious! And I love how well you explain complex concepts to simple folk like me :)
The interesting thing about setting new bounds every time you get a negative result is that under that criterion, every religion in the world counts as a science.
Sure, if you are counting with imaginary numbers. Explains why religion is so disordered.
@@deltalima6703, I suspect you've never had a delightful conversation with a Talmudic scholar on whether pushing an elevator button on the Sabbath is work. This kind of conversation was a new experience, but I got into physics so deeply that it was an enormous amount of fun. Until then, I had never appreciated how carefully Talmudic scholars go over their sets of premises. They treat them as axioms and hypotheses and get strikingly rigorous from that point forward.
My point is that it is inaccurate to think of all religions are disorganized piles of superstition. I don't doubt that some are, but many are incredibly deep in their intellectual detail to elaborate on this or that premise.
Another example is that the first Jesuit missionaries to China were avid and powerful advocates of the emerging European physics of that time and made no apologies for doing so.
What is always distinguished science is a relentless pursuit of experimental reproducibility. If you abandon that by treating every negative result as a reason to do more research while never changing what you believe most fervently in your heart, it is no longer science.
It occurrs to me that the phrase, “(needs) new physics” isn’t doing physics any favours. It fuels the attitude amongst the deliberately ignorant that (the “old”) physics were “just made up.” I would suggest saying instead that we use phraseology like, “we need to extend/broaden physics into whole new areas of research.”
Hello. Option 4: It is something completely different. I put my money on this.
I thought that a Majorana article was one which is its own antiparticle, not one whose left chirality version was the same as the right chirality version.
Csn you thus explain what a LH versus RH particle is, please ?
Wikipedia has reasonably good articles on all this stuff.
Option 4. Assuming what we have is all there is.
Take a 3D matrix of pixels, of which resonant entities move across, that we equate with spacetime existance.
There would be millions of those pixels moving through matter at any time (as in reality the matter is moving across them),
yet they must not really cause any drag upon those entities, as they move across that substrate.
Which means they must be minimally interacting in the context of any force, and only tangentially related to gravity.
Also if they come in 'heavier versions' with generations that necessitated much hotter envrionments to exist.
That implies that they may have had much greater gravitational interaction, at the beginning of the universe.
Thus with an ever cooling universe, the nature of that pixel would change its form/state, to one of less gravitational impact.
Hence, the acceleration rate would change, depending upon the current ratio of those generations.
Elon talking about the Standard Model is like my cat knocking over my chess pieces.
Well, he studied physics. You, too?
You should make an entire series on the science history of past scientists.
What they got right, and wrong.
What other big discoveries, their discoveries enabled later on.
Maybe the history of a few petty squabbles between scientists?
My Sabine x Elon musk fanfic is coming true
Sabine, you really are one of the best personalities on YT - long may you continue.
Elon Musk PLEASE hire Sabine already
What did she do to deserve that? He just fired the entire supercharger team, arguably the most successful part of Tesla.
@@jeffryborror4883 haha I was gonna say the same thing. :D
Since we have some interesting bounds on neutrino masses, were those masses were used to provide intresting bounds on the right handed neutrinos?
Physics needs new physics, apparently. Shout out to Terrence Howard for getting criticism for questioning the status quo.
I'm curious. Instead of refering to 'right handed' and 'left handed' why not use 'left handed' and 'NOT left handed'. Is there a chance that neutinos might have a 'not left handed' version that is just not 'right handed'...and that we have not observed?
The physics of far islands of elemental stability.
He's a narcissistic man-child, but he's on to something.
Information elements. Valence neutrinos.
Video on Neil Turok's SM/LCDM work modifying the standard model would dovetail nicely with this 👌
Even a broken clock is right twice a day
Exactly.
Depends on how it is broken… it may still be moving intermittently, so occasionally it may only be right once a day etc
my first thought
why you guys hating on Elon so much?
@@DrDeuteron Because he is a conman, And a fraud, People actually think he is smart!
I mean, a negative result still tells us what it can't be. From what I understand, the search for the Higgs was to some degree eliminating what it wasnt until we could zero in on what it was. I'm wondering what alternatives there are to building bigger detectors (since Sabine clearly finds the idea distasteful) especially given how elusive neutrinos are.
Musk misread the article, he thought it was Marijuana.
Peanut section much.
Illegal in most states. In Minnesota you ll get cited for anything in that location. My wife’s phone holder attaches with a microfiber pad and is immovable unless you intend to move it. It does not leave a mark.
Even a dead clock is right twice a day.
Stopped clocks are technically right more often than slightly slow or fast ones.