Quarks: Inside the Atom

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 27 гру 2024

КОМЕНТАРІ • 598

  • @mcsephiroth1312
    @mcsephiroth1312 9 років тому +39

    WHAT IF we can never find the smallest constituents of matter because it gets infinitely smaller and infinitely larger?

    • @DrWoodyII
      @DrWoodyII 7 років тому +4

      Yaakov: The Plank Length represents the smallest size that a particle can be in this universe. That is roughly equal to 1.6 x 10 to the power of -35 m or about 10-20 times [smaller than] the size of a proton.

    • @aeriss1725
      @aeriss1725 5 років тому +1

      Bener juga...
      & yg paling membingungkan itu ada apa di ujung luar angkasa sana? Apakah ada ujungnya / tidak ada ujungnya?

    • @linusschmutz3985
      @linusschmutz3985 2 роки тому

      @@aeriss1725 well if they on the outside of our universe decide to make a nuclear bomb out of the matter in which our universe is it will all blow up.

  • @lemongrenade6135
    @lemongrenade6135 11 років тому +43

    Just a question....what are quarks made of

    • @azs5547
      @azs5547 8 років тому +4

      Scott Simpson no one knows yet, but i highly doubt it

    • @DrWoodyII
      @DrWoodyII 7 років тому +15

      The Entity: Many physicists believe quarks to be the smallest indivisible particle. Under string theory, this would mean that quarks are nothing more than points of vibrating energy held together, usually in threes, by gluons. "Gluons," in turn, "are the exchange particles for the color force between quarks, analogous to the exchange of photons in the electromagnetic force between two charged particles. The gluon can be considered to be the fundamental exchange particle underlying the strong interaction between protons and neutrons in a nucleus."

    • @jaridwilliams739
      @jaridwilliams739 6 років тому +3

      vibrations

    • @martaatram4231
      @martaatram4231 6 років тому +2

      pure energy

    • @martaatram4231
      @martaatram4231 6 років тому +3

      we are the energy

  • @Sirmenonottwo
    @Sirmenonottwo 12 років тому +1

    That real picture of the quarks blew my mind, it gave me goose bumps on the top of my head.

  • @kelekokerupuk
    @kelekokerupuk 13 років тому

    Your Video Is Very Useful Sharing Matter is all the stuff that we see, feel, and smell around us. By definition, matter has mass and takes up space

  • @tufaznail
    @tufaznail 12 років тому +1

    Is everything made up of strings and spheres? Kind of like 1's and 0's?

  • @5355vbxjbj76rvn
    @5355vbxjbj76rvn 14 років тому

    If all physics were explained that well, a lot of it would be a lot clearer. Thanks for posting the video

  • @stevenhalliday7297
    @stevenhalliday7297 10 років тому +1

    What I would like to know is, where do they get the atoms from and how do they put them into the machine? And what's the tube that they put em in made of?

    • @jerryseinfield
      @jerryseinfield 9 років тому +1

      steven halliday At 1.25 you can see a gas bottle that supply's hydrogen gas into the ionizer which strips the electrons off of the hydrogen atoms and injects the protons into the acceleration ring.

  • @Rubmaster
    @Rubmaster 7 років тому +1

    If you can splitt atoms. Isn't there a way to collect the quarks and do the same with those in a quark accelerator?

  • @therealdrbyte
    @therealdrbyte 17 років тому

    thats right darc, so widely recognized that its generally accepted to use the term "orbital" to describe the area in which the electron "tends" to appear.

  • @systemX50
    @systemX50 14 років тому

    man, the more these damn scientists learn, the harder they make school for us.

  • @1Airsprint1
    @1Airsprint1 15 років тому +1

    Thanks for that info. Could this "cloud" be considered a magnetic field?

  • @EinkOLED
    @EinkOLED 16 років тому

    The early Universe was composed of quarks, gluons. This is how matter and the simplest atoms were composed.
    Very interesting stuff!

  • @ArcaneInquisitor
    @ArcaneInquisitor 14 років тому

    @SASNIGHTCRAWLER Hmm, seems like an interesting idea but I am not exactly clear on what you are saying. Do you have this summarized in any kind of formal paper? I would love to read about this theory in greater detail.

  • @pillowbugg
    @pillowbugg 9 років тому +7

    So. "Basically", we are energy beings?

    • @lilhotepjesusgrift6669
      @lilhotepjesusgrift6669 8 років тому +5

      You are nothing more than a sims character my friend.

    • @sjmilla9009
      @sjmilla9009 8 років тому

      That's sad and strangely true

    • @JNZZN
      @JNZZN 8 років тому +1

      Quarks are Hydrogen particles I think.we are hacking our own software. At long last.so we can enjoy the real game we are in from day one

    • @mordecaiesther3591
      @mordecaiesther3591 5 років тому +2

      Your forgetting you have a soul and consciousness . This is interwoven into the body of molecules.. atoms and quarks . Once your dead... the physical vibrating dies... but your eternal soul and consciousness does not. It lives on for eternity .

  • @thomasmillar4083
    @thomasmillar4083 11 років тому

    Hi my name is Tom and i'm 12, thank you for this video it has helped me extremely in the understanding of quarks.

  • @PoeticJustice05
    @PoeticJustice05 17 років тому

    it appears random because, essentially, it is. as particles exist in waves when you're not looking, when you stop an electron, you stop it in a random place on that wave.

  • @shenzomcbobo
    @shenzomcbobo 15 років тому

    if matter approaches the speed of light isnt its mass supposed to approach infinity? Does this not apply to atoms or does the mass increase but is not sufficient to be observable

  • @ObjectsInMotion
    @ObjectsInMotion 12 років тому

    Yes you only approach zero because a graph can't reach infinity, but for all intents and purposes, as you will see with infinnite limits in calculus, 1/0 might just as well equal infinity (or negative infinity).
    And string theory does not state that strings are smaller than quarks, all it states is that instead of a Quark being a point, it is a loop. So in string theory there is one string for every quark. And the strings themselves are the smallest size possible for any object in the universe.

  • @99centstore
    @99centstore 15 років тому

    If two particles collide at nearly the speed of light, does that mean that they have a combined speed of greater than the speed of light? Or since the speed of light is constant, would combined speeds be irrelivant?

  • @ishingo69
    @ishingo69 13 років тому

    @roont I like to see that there are some cool, helpful people out here that are interested in these topics. Thanks for the advice. I gonna do some of the online lectures and lessons and go from there.

  • @Chewy427
    @Chewy427 15 років тому +1

    ...what physics qualifications do you have?
    the speed of light is always constant, its time that is not constant

    • @amansahani2001
      @amansahani2001 5 років тому

      Speed of light isn't constant, it's varies in mediums

  • @SadShade
    @SadShade 14 років тому

    @mutabrev How can you know which particle is the smallest? In other words which particle loses it's locality. You could say that molecules can lose it, right? Even humans can or planets also cause there are bigger 'particles' out there. I don't know what I'm talking about exactly.

  • @dudefrombelgium
    @dudefrombelgium 14 років тому +1

    the smallest particle of matter does not excist
    it goes smaler and smaler for ever

  • @myuselessopinion
    @myuselessopinion 14 років тому

    how far can you look into something, or indeed look away from?? could it be infinite at both ends?

  • @conoba
    @conoba 17 років тому

    You put one sentence into the world that has a lot of interesting words in it. Both Pauli and Heisenberg had more to say about the subject than one sentence. Electrons do orbit as shown, but their position is always unknown. You can only asign an aera they would probably be found in, given they have a 'certain' energy. If you stop the electron at any point in time and measure it's position, it will apear random. That does not mean the electron moves in a random fashion.

  • @theinfiniteawe
    @theinfiniteawe 15 років тому

    I don't know much about atoms etc, but I have a question:
    If atoms aren't solid, how can you physically collide the constituents of the atom?
    Obviously I'm not understanding something. Can someone elighten me?

  • @MrPersonwithaface
    @MrPersonwithaface 13 років тому

    What are protons and neutrons made of and what do we know about quarks?

  • @borkoboyanov
    @borkoboyanov 12 років тому

    Physical energy means interaction, activity, work. Comes from the greek words for "working, doing (something)". The measurement (joules) signifies the amount of a given type of interaction between "things" (particles). There four types of interactions ("energies"): gravitational, electromagnetic, weak and strong forces.

  • @1959Vento
    @1959Vento 6 років тому

    I'm still trying to find out what the space between the Quarks is called?

  • @KeithPhillips
    @KeithPhillips 16 років тому

    discountzone: Valence electrons (the outer electron shell) play a role in conductivity, generally speaking. Copper for example, has 1 electron in the valence shell, and it moves (and receives another) freely from atom to atom. The other electrons are held tighter and closer to the nucleus.

  • @nvutube7
    @nvutube7 15 років тому

    Its an intentional engineered mutation filtered by not only natural selection, but maybe even some mechanism that knows that permutations have already been tried unsuccessfully. Its not a random walk. Its more like the intentional competition that we see in technology, business and culture.

  • @bbstilson
    @bbstilson 16 років тому

    The uncertainty principle does not state that knowing the location of an electron is a game of chance. It says that knowing the place AND momentum of the electron is impossible. The electrons are still in orbit, however there is no way of knowing where it is AND how fast it is moving.

  • @UkyYanni
    @UkyYanni 12 років тому

    they do spin/rotate around their own axis ( up/down ), and they orbit the nucleus. so, in some way, they do rotate around the nucleus.

  • @MallyVision
    @MallyVision 17 років тому

    anyone know where to get pics of the particle accelerator results? what are those swirly pictures called?

  • @myelectroncloud
    @myelectroncloud 12 років тому

    Semantics aside, they don't have orbits, but orbitals. An electron cannot be pinpointed to a specific location, so where it will be next, and therefore its direction. There is a mathematical theorem that calculates the probable speed of an electron about its nucleus, (using hydrogen for simplicity,) to about 5 million mph, but this would be about 100 times slower than its limit. This means it can be in any one of six billion locations per second about its sphere of mobility-the electron cloud.

  • @bndkllr2
    @bndkllr2 12 років тому

    I think at the deepest level, matter particles are just whirls of energy dancing in patterns that attract or repel each other. When you add up trillions of these dances, you get the experience of physical objects. But at the deepest level, there is no "material" the way we think of it.

  • @bennet005
    @bennet005 5 років тому

    What's the name of the lab again?

  • @jeremey4321
    @jeremey4321 11 років тому

    Can someone explain how the hadron collider differs to this please

  • @nvutube7
    @nvutube7 15 років тому

    DNA is a fantastically sophisticated and elegant communication protocol. It has error correction, redundancy, self-healing characteristics, repair mechanisms, and an amazing, adaptive, evolutionary algorithm.
    Adaptation through cellular internal genetic engineering as described by McClintock and Shapiro
    James Shapiro notes that when a protozoa splices its own DNA into over 100,000 pieces and re-arranges them, this is not a random or haphazard process, this is a highly engineered process.

  • @StormTheSquid
    @StormTheSquid 12 років тому

    such as green and yellow are both primary colors in two different types of colors? i kinda feel out of place posting a comment in a science video but it seems like this one fits...

  • @sicktoaster
    @sicktoaster 11 років тому

    But do quarks stay put or do they move between different hadrons?

  • @ORACLE063
    @ORACLE063 16 років тому

    What we deem "solid" is nothing more than a denser field of electrons. Hence why we can put our hand through water our field is denser. A desk or a rock has a stronger field or "electron shield" Than our hands do, so they stop when coming in contact. The point of contact is the electron field.
    Is that what your asking?

  • @njimko23
    @njimko23 14 років тому

    At the end of the video they show a very nice picture of particles moving in spirals, which occurs because any charge that moves off of a straight path radiates energy. Too bad at the beginning of the video they have pictures of electrons orbiting the nucleus.

  • @Bleabot
    @Bleabot 14 років тому

    @Elliottslingsby I KNEW IT. I'm not the only nerdfighter who spends his/her spare time looking up this stuff. You, sir or madame, certainly remembered to be awesome.
    God, I love Nerdfighteria. DFTBA.

  • @ORACLE063
    @ORACLE063 16 років тому

    I dont know enough about them to answer with any certainty but one thing is for certain. They are just another layer of existence at the quantum level. Quarks are found within atoms, with this in mind and using logic we can assume they are its BASIC interior structure. Much like our bones.

  • @bakayurei
    @bakayurei 12 років тому

    like feynman said, either it's an infinite onion that keeps revealing more layers below the ones that we've already stripped away, or there's a point of perfect simplicity at the bottom of it all.. but either way, we can't jump to conclusions until nature's revealed herself to us

  • @hartistry1957
    @hartistry1957 13 років тому

    @kohversohver Thanks for assisting my rebuttal; live long and prosper!

  • @ObjectsInMotion
    @ObjectsInMotion 12 років тому

    It can be shown Mathematically that there is a limit to how small things in this universe can get, based upon the laws of physics such as the speed of light and the strength of gravity. Quarks must be point particles for them to act the way they do, and experiments show that they indeed are fundamental in size and nature.

  • @ByRecentDesign
    @ByRecentDesign 13 років тому

    @dinoflagz the proton is supposedly comprised of one "up" and two "down" quarks, while the anti-proton is composed of one down and two ups.

  • @coldarc
    @coldarc 14 років тому

    how can you use high voltage electricity to split protons from neutrons at cern but in a cold fusion high voltage electricity experiment you can not split them?
    if you can use high voltage to split atoms you can also fuse atoms. why does the tokamak need a symphony of frequencies called high temperatures to fuse helium to hydrogen when cern can do it with high voltage electricity if they wanted to?
    its almost like different disciplines live in seperate realities.

  • @kben0
    @kben0 11 років тому

    Where do they get the antiprotons from?

  • @dinoflagz
    @dinoflagz 13 років тому

    Where do they get the anti - protons from.

  • @topturkey2
    @topturkey2 15 років тому

    This is very true about quarks. I was referring to them as, as you said, point particles. But they are the particles of light.
    And yes, photons are given mass through their kinetic energy but not moving, they are mass less. =)

  • @konman001
    @konman001 15 років тому

    In the future scientists are going to change the story again -
    They will say that superstrings (or branes) are made of even smaller constituents and that there are phenomenon that travel faster than light.

  • @coldarc
    @coldarc 14 років тому

    @dooooooer if you have one property revealing itself on two scales it is very likely that it exist on all scales. what i meant was that quarks might not exist at all or have a property identical to an electron but exist for a much shorter time. think of its like a sea of wirlpools of different size, some combine into bigger ones some divide into smaler ones. that you have a geometry like a circle but at infinte scales combining and dividing like a changeing pattern.

  • @22apl36
    @22apl36 11 років тому

    what makes up the sound vibrations?

  • @angeloCOZ
    @angeloCOZ 13 років тому

    @ScopedPewPew pretty sure its the large hadron collider or LHE

  • @sugargrandpa
    @sugargrandpa 16 років тому

    then what makes up the quarks and electrons?

  • @kohversohver
    @kohversohver 13 років тому

    @JMCZA Space is the foundation in which matter can even exist and that is why it's referred to space-time,rather than matter-time. And these two(that create a third) major forces, that pretty much express in everything throughout this universe, are forces that the whole universe must abide to. They may be expressed in different forms such as light/dark birth/death past/future up quark/down quark proton/electron male/female. People have many names for it, but it's all the same. Yin-Yang.

  • @Dyslexic-Artist-Theory-on-Time
    @Dyslexic-Artist-Theory-on-Time 12 років тому

    Interesting video!
    This is an invitation to see an artist theory on the physics of light and time!
    This theory is based on just two postulates
    1. Is that the quantum wave particle function Ψ or probability function represents the forward passage of time itself
    2. Is that Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle ∆×∆p×≥h/4π that is formed by the w-function is the same uncertainty we have with any future event within our own ref-frame that we can interact with turning the possible into the actual!

  • @professorjack2099
    @professorjack2099 10 років тому +17

    Oh no not another one of those elementary low-fund low-bitrate clipped-voice videos...

  • @JohnnyDupuis
    @JohnnyDupuis 10 років тому +2

    Because every thing is light.

  • @deyomash
    @deyomash 13 років тому

    @indiage would be boring to see them, the theory after all makes it so exciting in my opinion!

  • @19EJ91
    @19EJ91 11 років тому

    @22APL sounds are compressed wave of the stuff it travel through. (usually air)

  • @1911m1a1ellis
    @1911m1a1ellis 9 років тому +1

    Atoms are highly sophisticated and...........SENTIENT.

  • @Vern3666
    @Vern3666 12 років тому

    If we consider electron size to be a circumference equal to its energy-equivalent wave length, it would be the largest particle and so would engulf the atom. I have come to suspect this to be the case.

  • @ArcaneInquisitor
    @ArcaneInquisitor 14 років тому

    @killlagger468 Actually, they are doing both those things. A lot of the early observations of high energy particles were from comic rays hitting our atmosphere. Also, at my university they are working to make "ultra-cold" neutrons which they hope will prove very useful in studying things like gravity.

  • @Areweonfiya
    @Areweonfiya 15 років тому

    so what are quarks made of?

  • @jasonguyperson
    @jasonguyperson 13 років тому

    @fowzie777 I wasn't implying an actual occurrence of infinity; only the progression towards it. If you can comprehend subtracting one from any number, then you can comprehend an infinite progression.

  • @JonHinric
    @JonHinric 16 років тому

    Matter = a matter that has Volume + Mass (ex. three states , solid, gas, and liquid)

  • @Zyn88
    @Zyn88 15 років тому

    @SamUKest89 electrons can only exist at certain energy levels. the energy of the electron depends on how far it is from the nucleus. These levels are finite, and very exact, as electrons cannot have energies between these levels. Because object can move freely between planets, it can be said that planets and other celestial objects are not electrons

  • @nost78
    @nost78 16 років тому

    lhc doesnt use heavy atoms, it uses a few billion protons, most of which miss. a nuke converst matter to energy (about a coffe jars worth)whereas the lhc uses a ridiculous amount of energy to break down matter to smaller bits of matter. there is energy released also but only as a by product of the process

  • @saultube44
    @saultube44 11 років тому

    What do you think electricity is? And you think thi explanation be the reason why we feel love and hate? as a macro expression of DNA generated being? Maybe hate is the absence of love or a opposite force, so love might just be a lot of attracting energy over another being, at will, orienting energy in favor or against somebody/something... just a few thoughts.

  • @danielcoll6566
    @danielcoll6566 11 років тому

    are atoms made of energy vibrations?

  • @herbiepop
    @herbiepop 15 років тому

    In its own reference frame each particle 'sees' the other as approaching the speed of light but never reaching it. At velocities close to that of light energy used to accelerate a particle serves only to increase its inertial mass relative to other reference frames and hence the energy of collision. A particle with mass cannot be accelerated to the speed of light, one of the consequences of special relativity.

  • @discountzone
    @discountzone 16 років тому

    why some matter are conducting to electricity and some are not ?

  • @ObjectsInMotion
    @ObjectsInMotion 12 років тому

    Mathematics and science in general is objective, i.e. beyond human flaws. Simply because humans are imperfect that doesn't mean the pure sciences like mathematics and physics are as well. Mathematics does not break down at the subatomic level, and it is only our incomplete standard model that breaks down at singularites, not just any small size. Humanity's biggest flaw is assuming we can't know everything and that nothing is to be trusted. Very cynical of you if you think that way.

  • @laserfloyd
    @laserfloyd 15 років тому

    Well, gravity governs things on the larger scale, such as planetary systems and galaxies. The mechanisms at work in an atom are nuclear forces. They're extremely strong on a tiny scale whereas gravity is weaker reaches vastly further. Gravity alone would result in an atom that couldn't really stay in one piece and we wouldn't exist.
    It's fun to think about at least. :)

  • @mailyasmar6895
    @mailyasmar6895 12 років тому

    That's debatable, it is possible that it could be explained with mathematical equations that may or may not be generations ahead of us.
    One thing causes another thing to happen. Maybe it could circle? A causes B and B causes C then maybe, somehow C could cause A and make a loop.
    I myself am not a Quantum Physicist so I apologies if there was some law or proven evidence that makes my logic a complete fail.

  • @jqs1943
    @jqs1943 13 років тому

    Black energy is the most destructive level of the frequency spectrum.These frequencies range way above the ultraviolet to a hyper level. Their wave lengths are so short that they can pervade even the tightest weaves of matter. These hyper frequencies are constituents of all matter to some degree.Fire radfioactivity, gamma rays,are some examples of energies that are dcirectly associated to black energy.If we are to consider that there is such a thing as anti matter consider black energy instead

  • @leoceanburst9195
    @leoceanburst9195 3 роки тому +2

    Alright so I'm the only one watching this after 13 years

  • @BoozyBeggar
    @BoozyBeggar 17 років тому

    How old is this? I'm not a physicist, nor claim to completely understand modern theories, but it seems slightly outdated. I thought there were seven 'flavors'. Was I totally wrong?

  • @BradBrassman
    @BradBrassman 14 років тому

    And what are Quarks made of? And what is the matter that makes up a Quark made of ?

  • @TheWertonius
    @TheWertonius 12 років тому

    Quarks can't be isolated because of colour confinement, and the fact that the energy needed to break the colour interaction is strong enough to create antiquarks for each quark

  • @HandheldFlashlight
    @HandheldFlashlight 15 років тому

    I agree with your theory to some extent.
    However I believe it ends when everything is the same
    for example, if -all- quarks are made out of the exact same thing, but maybe some different combinations there and here, then there's really no point of a smaller unit since it's all the same.

  • @netabolt6546
    @netabolt6546 11 років тому +1

    the reason i think that is kinda strange but i sense that there are more universes. And the definition Multiverse is seen in the Quarks.. have a nice plezant day.

  • @hartistry1957
    @hartistry1957 15 років тому

    My guess is that they can only achieve these speeds to about 1/3 of the speed of light ; and therefore, the head-on speed artificially approaches near-light speed.

  • @nost78
    @nost78 16 років тому

    its not stictly a black hole, they are refered to as "stranglets" they would behave as black holes but would in theory provide evidence of extra dimensions. this is HIGHLY unlikely as then one starts approaching the realms of string theory. the size of the accelerator to find string would apparently be roughly the size of our galxy and require energies beyond anything we could harness.

  • @meloearth
    @meloearth 15 років тому

    So, do you think that there's an order, that could be called or seen as "intelligence" (but not as "god") that governs all of this? Like the Gaia theory or Pantheism? I'm not sure that spirituality and science need to be separated, but lots of what science cannot yet reproduce or explain are still there and we can't discount. BTW, I'm not religious.

  • @anotherrose5424
    @anotherrose5424 8 років тому +8

    Does all this even matter? ;)

  • @beclamide
    @beclamide 17 років тому

    As far as I remember (I could be wrong) there's Top, Bottom, Up, Down, Charm, and Strange.

  • @tnguyen318
    @tnguyen318 13 років тому

    Is it the building blocks of Matter or the Building Blocks of an Atom. Because if there is such thing as anti-matter, doesn't that debunk the study of the Atom as the smallest particle that can exist?

  • @kohversohver
    @kohversohver 13 років тому

    @JMCZA I do believe i understand the entire universe. In fact, i'm as old as this universe including you and everything else that's contained within it. My simple answer is this, there is no right or wrong in our universe. Why? Because everything evolves, including matter. The connections that these particles create result in the reality that we process and define with our logic. 13.75 ± 0.11 billion years ago it all begun. There were no molecules, no humans, no perception. Now there is.

  • @runytry
    @runytry 13 років тому

    Every thing around you are the result of the balanced within our universe

  • @111olorin
    @111olorin 15 років тому

    the particle accelerator accelerates small particles with very little mass. Only suns, with their very large amounts of mass can go supernova because eventually gravity wins the battle against nuclear power (because the hydrogen is used up). Protons can, however create black holes, but they will be so small, that they will evaporate.

  • @MoreParksLessParking
    @MoreParksLessParking 12 років тому

    bglasier@ I believe that at one point, matter reaches a size and particle that is extreme simplicity. Like just a simple sphere. And also, hears something to think about. if something for example, just keeps on shrinking and shrinking, like 3.33333333333333333..... wouldn't it eventually pop out of existence? And where would it go? This is where the idea of a parallel spacetime come to my mind. Like negative integers after you pass 0 on the number line.

  • @Daemien21
    @Daemien21 15 років тому

    @claudgin What makes a string?

  • @fernandizo
    @fernandizo 14 років тому

    @hipstarchild Bravo.. The rabbit hole is deep as the universe is large

  • @1moosefan
    @1moosefan 12 років тому +1

    aparently quarks are made of sound

  • @Richy15251
    @Richy15251 15 років тому

    We know the speed of light with a very high degree of precision