Katie Mack on the end of it all - and new beginnings
Вставка
- Опубліковано 26 кві 2022
- Katie Mack was recently appointed as Perimeter’s inaugural Hawking Chair in Cosmology and Science Communication. An adept science communicator, she is best known as @Astrokatie to her 400,000+ Twitter followers. She published her first book in 2020, The End of Everything (Astrophysically Speaking), in which she explains the various ways our universe could come to its end. During this conversation, she tells us about her early interactions with Stephen Hawking, how she became fascinated with the universe’s ultimate fate, and why she is so passionate about sharing her love of science with the world.
Conversations at the Perimeter is co-hosted by quantum physicist and lecturer Lauren Hayward and journalist-turned-science communicator Colin Hunter. In each episode, they chat with a guest scientist about their research, their motivations, the challenges they encounter, and the drive that keeps them searching for answers.
The podcast is produced by the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics, a not-for-profit, charitable organization supported by a unique public-private model, including the Governments of Ontario and Canada. Perimeter’s educational outreach initiatives, including Conversations at the Perimeter, are made possible in part by the support of donors like you. Be part of the equation: perimeterinstitute.ca/donate
conversationsattheperimeter.p...
/ perimeter
/ perimeter-institute
/ perimeterinstitute
/ pioutreach - Наука та технологія
So, I read "A Brief History of Time" to my daughter when she was 6! She's brilliant, just like you!
The institute fortunate to have the right person tailored to fit the job benefiting the public and I witnessed it first hand on her lecture on dark matter which, Infact, brightens up the audience.
Thanks again Dr. Mack and keep up the good work.
"a bubble of doom". My new chat handle I think. Thank you Dr Mack!
Great interview, Perimeter is getting a true gem
Great chat. Thanks.
She's an absolute boss. 💯
Wonderful interview.
so glad im subscribed to this channel although i didnt find this in my subscriptions, i had to get to the channel itself and i saw new video!
Great conversation.
i put like the 1st second I had the notification knowing very well that I'm going to love it
I wish this was longer
Astrokatie (great nickname btw) have you read excellent book "Until the End of Time" by Brian Greene, professor of physics and mathematics at Columbia University? He is also co-founder of the World Science Festival which is always great to watch.
This is a wonderful conversation. Why did you wait over four months to post it?
(Katie expressed her hopes for the successful launch of JWST, which launched Dec.25th, 2021)
I would love to see a presentation covering the structure/outline of the computational model that has become central to cosmological science.
A charming scientist. One does not often hear those words in the same sentence…
Hello Dr. Mack, very interesting. I have been working on a very radical alternative hypothesis, directly challenging the standard model of the composition of the atom, which follows through to the area that you have been working in.
It may seem presumptuous, but I believe my hypothesis can explain comprehensively, with logic, ' Dark Matter ', ' Dark Energy ', the missing mass of the universe, how electromagnetic radiation is able to travel through space, how matter is formed, why the speed of light is what it is and why nothing can go faster than this speed, gravity, and more.
I believe that the reason that we still have not got the answers to Quantum mechanics after over 100 years of looking, is that the standard model of the composition of the atom is fundamentally flawed, and there has been somthing missing to make it work. I will pose just four questions that I believes proves the standard model flawed.
a). How is it possible for a single electron as in the case of the hydrogen atom, to form an ' Electron Cloud ', that fills the whole area between the nucleus and the outer boundary of the atom, at every moment in time, when this area is over 100,000, 000 times that of the electron?
b). If the electron does act as desribed in the standard model, by whizzing around the nucleus, changing trajectory many thousands of timmes a second, where does it get its energy from to initiate and maintain its momentum?
c). Following on from b). this momentum and changing trajectory, would require energy to be expended, and thus dissipating heat. Therefore every atom and thus all matter would be emitting heat, which plainly it is not?
d). How is it possible for the electron to have the same charge holdig capacity as the proton, which is around 2,000 times its size. It would be like a tiny watch battery having the same charge holding capacity as a very large tractor battery?
I would be happy if anyone could answer these.
The cornerstone of my hypothesis, is that the electron, as described in the standard model, is not a fundamental solid particle, but a much cluster of much smaller negatively charged monopole particles called ' Harveytrons '. These particles fill every available empty space within the boundary of the atom in a cloud, and also every available empty space throughout the whole universe. This is ' Dark Matter ', the negative force they exert is ' Dark Energy ', and is also one constituent of gravity, which I will show is a force of both attraction and repulsion.
I further hypothesize that everything that exists in the universe is made up of just two fundamental particles, the negatively charged monopole particle the ' Harveytron ', forming the ' Harveytron Cloud ', and the corresponding positively charged monopole particle called the ' Dannytron '. I propose that these particles are the infinately smallest particles that exist in the universe.
All nuclea matter is a combination of these particles, evrything else is the ' Dark Matter ' negatively charged ' Harveytron cloud '. I am refining my hypothesis all the time, but I am happy to answer any questions on any aspect. Kind regards, Tony Marsh.
I
Does anyone else hear the bird chirping when Katie talks on this interview? Close your eyes and listen…🐥
So 312.67 MeV per cm^3 in space-time on average.
I WOULD LOVE TO BE YOU"RE STUDENT, BUT EVERY PERSON IN U.S. FACTUALLY FORBIDS IT. AND
I MUST OBEY U.S.❤
In 100 billion years, we won't be able to see other galaxies? Whew!!! For a minute, I thought she'd said 100 million years ...
Katie has a familiar face according to me
My sense is that "science education" is largely correlated with blow-back. Causal? My guess is yes. No one really wants their plumbing, dentistry, airplane, etc explained. But, science needs public funding so.... To me, it's supply driven and not demand driven and likely harms the work, e.g., covid, heroin epidemic, etc...
Two different kinds of vacuum! Who could've imagine how far self delusion would progress in such a short time.
The scientific part of the conversation is not only not serious, it's detrimental as well.
"Photon Drag" was proven with fiberoptics. As light travels through and past electrons and protons energy is absorbed from the photon, and it ends with a shorter frequency. This is to say that the redshift can be explained by other forces than the expansion of the universe.
Doubtful. QM would not allow what you describe. When was "photon drag" proven? By whom?
@@deltalima6703 "photon drag" was proven by no-one. It was proven """to""" me by fiberoptics and the fact that the expansion model don't quite work. This is U-tube and no I don't have the tape recording of the Corning rep that came to ASU physics department in 1984 or the link to the one article I read with the off comment of "lasers loose some wavelength at the end of the optic line".
Lose is the word you are looking for. Loose is the opposite of tight. It is no secret that light travels less than c through a medium and thus its wavelength is redder. Light returns to c the moment it reenters a vacuum, so. The net effect is nothing, aside from some losses due to scratches, excessive bending, and splices in the fiber. If I am wrong I am wrong, but I see no evidence in what you have presented.
Batter you stop giggling
Who knows what is taking about, if so much in theoretical physics remains unknown?
HAHAHAHA Steven Hawkins version of turrets.
Lauren, I find your sitting pose perplexing. Are you dissing Katie or all of us. 🌱🥀🌻
Not getting your reference. She seemed engaged and present throughout the interview.
I agree, she looks very engaged and ‘Comfy’!
This is a soft soft soft interview. Need harder questions and more detail.
it's an interview, not a thesis defense
Perimeter does some good stuff. Cohl furey is impressive. This? Not so much.