So what IS the Higgs boson?

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 10 гру 2024
  • Hank responds to viewer questions, and explains what the Higgs boson particle actually IS.
    Follow SciShow on Twitter: / scishow
    Like SciShow on Facebook: / scishow

КОМЕНТАРІ • 3,9 тис.

  • @punkybrewstar83
    @punkybrewstar83 10 років тому +1545

    The internet is so great, these videos are so great. If you wanted to learn about things like this before the internet, it was so much more difficult and expensive than it is now. I am so stoked that someone wants to explain something so complicated, so simply, and I can watch it for free. Thank you :)

    • @apawar280889
      @apawar280889 7 років тому +2

      Good thought.

    • @ChuckNorrisHernandezFraturnHDL
      @ChuckNorrisHernandezFraturnHDL 6 років тому +8

      You get free internet at the cost of your identity.

    • @stxfdt1240
      @stxfdt1240 6 років тому +8

      punkybrewstar83 By the way when are u westerners going to tell the truth that an Indian named S.N. Bose(Satyendranath Bose) discovered this particle.Why do u white people take credit for stuff we did in Science.

    • @YoungBlood507
      @YoungBlood507 6 років тому +4

      Your phone or PC wasn't free and neither was internet!

    • @sentrylevel
      @sentrylevel 5 років тому +2

      Yet professionals, doctors say you shouldn't get info from the internet

  • @notbhatnagar
    @notbhatnagar 8 років тому +801

    You know shit is about to get real when Hank is sitting down.

    • @VarunSharda7
      @VarunSharda7 8 років тому +21

      Devansh Bhatnagar wow........thats a hell of a observation.

    • @BrokenAbucus
      @BrokenAbucus 7 років тому +9

      i believe my good sir that that is a joke. very rare and illusive joke

    • @technomage6736
      @technomage6736 4 роки тому

      😆

    • @chericarter289
      @chericarter289 3 роки тому

      Lmfao- hilarious Man, but so true

    • @addy405
      @addy405 8 місяців тому

      he is not hsnk he is q

  • @ananyagiri262
    @ananyagiri262 3 роки тому +326

    this is interesting because the Higgs boson was discovered five months after this video was released!

    • @mr_sabado3628
      @mr_sabado3628 3 роки тому +8

      Just thougt about that

    • @facted9848
      @facted9848 3 роки тому +5

      No you are incorrect
      Because higs boson was duscovered 9 years ago but thefisrst 5 months and this video released the last 5 months

    • @Thetravelingmonke
      @Thetravelingmonke 3 роки тому +6

      He created it there

    • @literalantifaterrorist4673
      @literalantifaterrorist4673 2 роки тому +13

      @@facted9848 this video was released 9 years ago are you okay

    • @brandiminor1632
      @brandiminor1632 2 роки тому +1

      Obviously not.

  • @Phalhell
    @Phalhell 10 років тому +853

    This video is from 2012, the higgsparticle and field is confirmed

    • @razersky7487
      @razersky7487 10 років тому +96

      Yes, but apparently the mass of electrons doesn't come from them, only protons and neutrons. So there is some mystery left to discover

    • @IVAN3DX
      @IVAN3DX 9 років тому +8

      RazerSky Protons and neutrons or quarks in general? (I'm not very informed in this particle physics stuff)

    • @chilling_at_pontiff
      @chilling_at_pontiff 6 років тому +6

      IVAN3DX where moments from a nuclear winter ... noone cares anymore

    • @DerpMuse
      @DerpMuse 6 років тому +6

      +RazerSky no einstein proved E=mc^2 or also M=E/c^2 proves that injecting energy creates mass. and breaking nuclear bonds releases energy.... this is 100+ years old now.... thats how electrons have a measurable mass.

    • @RLomoterenge
      @RLomoterenge 6 років тому +11

      terbokli Where’s that nuclear winter at? I bough all these jackets to prepare for it

  • @jonathanlaus5784
    @jonathanlaus5784 8 років тому +361

    Why weren't you a professor Hank. I love listening to you explaining these thingys. Thank you for making my insomnia productive.

  • @UltraMojo13
    @UltraMojo13 8 років тому +388

    "Well,
    the Force is what gives a Jedi his power. It's an energy field created
    by all living things. It surrounds us and penetrates us; it binds the
    galaxy together."

    • @shruthi2027
      @shruthi2027 8 років тому +12

      That is the only force that I know .
      Well ,after all I am a Jedi warrior.

    • @izzad777
      @izzad777 8 років тому +21

      +DoYouEvenMagicBruh higgs-boson does sound like a star wars character

    • @UltraMojo13
      @UltraMojo13 8 років тому +5

      izzad ibrahim It better describes the force and how it works!

    • @djayjp
      @djayjp 8 років тому +3

      +DoYouEvenMagicBruh Sounds like the universal wavefunction in Pilot Wave theory.

    • @thirdcreed
      @thirdcreed 8 років тому +7

      Right. Right. And where do midi-chlorians fit in again?

  • @savagegardenrox
    @savagegardenrox 11 років тому +119

    they originally wanted to call it the Goddamn Particle to express its elusiveness.

    • @kashankhan6950
      @kashankhan6950 4 роки тому +3

      Hahahahhaha haven’t laughed at something on UA-cam this hard. Love the wit in this!

    • @paulhk2727
      @paulhk2727 3 роки тому +2

      That sounds strange, but it also kinda charms me
      Maybe we should really give some particles names like these *cough* *cough*

  • @johnobrien5464
    @johnobrien5464 9 років тому +65

    Sit around children its time to talk quantum mechanics.
    This is the first time I saw Hank sitting down for a regular Sishow. It must be some relay heavy stuff.

    • @ohshctrash1410
      @ohshctrash1410 8 років тому

      Relay heavy stuff. Yah it's so heavy we have to pass it off to another person.

    • @Mercure250
      @Mercure250 8 років тому +5

      +John O'Brien He's talking about mass, so of course it's heavy. Duh.

  • @DorangoBread
    @DorangoBread 9 років тому +199

    Still confused gonna watch it again...

    • @DorangoBread
      @DorangoBread 9 років тому +35

      Still confused gonna watch it again...

    • @DorangoBread
      @DorangoBread 9 років тому +37

      James Last Still confused gonna watch it again...

    • @DorangoBread
      @DorangoBread 9 років тому +41

      James Last ... ... Ohhhh I get it.

    • @Herzyyyy
      @Herzyyyy 9 років тому +1

      ^me

    • @zes3813
      @zes3813 5 років тому

      wrg

  • @TonyFDiego
    @TonyFDiego 4 роки тому +10

    You have come a long way since this video and never lost your charm and charisma in enlightning us. Kudos to you and your fabulous team for a job well done.

  • @riveraericn
    @riveraericn 11 років тому +6

    "I have no idea!" I lol'ed! Appreciate the modesty and honesty Hank!

  • @spideyland03
    @spideyland03 10 років тому +83

    Please answer this. So it sounds like the Higgs field is like an invisible 3-D fishing net that is cast throughout the universe waiting to interact with mass that is "caught" within the net. Large things like fish (mass) interact with the net more while small things like krill (electrons) or bacteria (photons) have almost no interaction with the net. And the higgs boson particle is one link in that fishing net. Am I close?

    • @Sterl500
      @Sterl500 10 років тому +25

      It's a decent analogy, one that I like very much. Thanks for the share.

    • @subinsumod2456
      @subinsumod2456 7 років тому

      You are close but what about nuetron stars, which can be 25km wide but weigh 500,000 times the Earth

    • @Vesselforpain
      @Vesselforpain 6 років тому +7

      a rock can be the size of a fish but be much heavier

    • @Lucerne9
      @Lucerne9 6 років тому +2

      Yeah this makes me wonder as well. Hank states that photons are massless, which they are considering their speed. Yet, they do interact with the Higgs Field with a different type of matter (black hole matter if you will) and it's able to attract photons. Using your analogy, a really dense net to where nothing can escape. For light "doesn't interact with the Higgs Field" but it does interact to a black hole. Which doesn't make sense but that's the way it is I assume

    • @GuitarGuruGaming
      @GuitarGuruGaming 5 років тому +6

      Tate H light actually doesn’t interact with gravity as such, the light is not curving towards the gravity because it is being pulled in, the space-time around the black hole is curved, the light travels a straight line through this curved space, when you straighten out this curved space or rather view it from an outside perspective the line it travels appears quite obviously curved.
      Any object which has mass would require an effectively infinite amount of energy to move at the speed of light and would also become denser the faster it moved, since photons aren’t essentially infinitely powerful black holes rocketing around at the speed of light it’s pretty safe to say they have no mass and will not interact with the Higgs field regardless of its density
      Tl;dr gravity doesn’t effect light because photons are massless, but light traveling through curved space time will appear to “curve” without having ever turned(from their perspective) hence why black holes “attract” light

  • @sulfo4229
    @sulfo4229 6 років тому +3

    It's 2018 (after Higgs era :-)), and as an engineer I still strugle to find a video that better explains the Higgs field. Thank you Hank!

  • @WhirlOmar
    @WhirlOmar 11 років тому +21

    You should do an update video on this since they say they have now been able to observe the field, hence discovered it.

  • @shirinchatterjee303
    @shirinchatterjee303 7 років тому +1

    Thanks guys. LOVE your channel.

  • @yoosuf29
    @yoosuf29 10 років тому +207

    So theoretically, if I were separate my entire body from the Higgs Boson, then I will become a mass-less object, which means I can travel at the speed of light or become some kind of wave basically?

    • @thepedrorriva
      @thepedrorriva 9 років тому +55

      Yes but that makes no sense. You can't separate your body from the higgs boson, because it's a property of mass. Althought we can dream right?

    • @skroot7975
      @skroot7975 9 років тому +65

      You get mass (ie: reason you don't fall apart :P) from the Higgs FIELD. This is because everything is "moving" all the time, or oscillating. This oscillation and it's interaction with the Higgs Field is why you're more or less massive. :) The more a particle is oscillating, the stronger it interacts and the more massive it is. The photon is oscillating very little, hence the speed. Mass is "sluggishness" you could say. x)

    • @yoosuf29
      @yoosuf29 9 років тому +10

      Knurte Farblekund I see. Excellent explanation! thank you so much! It makes perfect sense as well.
      Pedro Martins Thanks. And ikr.

    • @skroot7975
      @skroot7975 9 років тому +1

      yoosuf29
      Thanks! Happy to help! :)

    • @thepedrorriva
      @thepedrorriva 9 років тому

      Knurte Farblekund nice one

  • @abubardewa939
    @abubardewa939 10 років тому +35

    Me at the end..... SO WHAT IS HIGGS BOSONS PLEASE?........

  • @aweausta2814
    @aweausta2814 9 років тому +164

    i like to imagine two scientist working on a particle accelerator, then the Higgs Particle is made...
    "Shit! look, look, look at that!"
    "Woh o-o"

    • @GhausterBuilder
      @GhausterBuilder 9 років тому +2

      +Michael Plays It's only created for a very short amount of time, and I don't think the particle accelerator is made of glass so yeah

    • @aweausta2814
      @aweausta2814 9 років тому +15

      Gauster Van Deventer okay....I did say "Imagine" and i kinda meant it as a joke...

    • @GhausterBuilder
      @GhausterBuilder 9 років тому +10

      just like Lennon

    • @EminorReal
      @EminorReal 9 років тому +2

      +Michael Plays Even if the Higgs boson has been observed I find the standard model to be a messy temporary solution.

    • @msgcheckout
      @msgcheckout 8 років тому

      Yes i can imagine one scientist exclaiming to the other "WTF was that! and the other goes fuck do if I know! and a third one standing near by, exclaims Jesus Christ! that was unbelievable! and fourth scientist shouts Oh my God! let us get the hell out of here! This is how they discovered Higgs Boson!

  • @kevinpatzer4678
    @kevinpatzer4678 7 років тому +3

    Im taking QM right now thanks Hank(and the Sci Show team) this is making my laborious nights of math seem useful.

  • @kivakarmen8628
    @kivakarmen8628 8 років тому +41

    1:37 "WIBBLY" Wobbly Timey Whimey ~The 11th Doctor

    • @kivakarmen8628
      @kivakarmen8628 8 років тому

      David Tenant right!

    • @marksayler7575
      @marksayler7575 8 років тому +1

      yeah,first weeping angel episode.then he denies saying that in day of the doctor.Its hilarious,:P

    • @kivakarmen8628
      @kivakarmen8628 8 років тому

      😂😂😋

    • @MrMaggidaggi
      @MrMaggidaggi 7 років тому +1

      well, technically correct, since the war doctor could be considered the 9th doctor

    • @adityagupta8697
      @adityagupta8697 7 років тому

      Kiva Karmen I

  • @morgianehamadou6034
    @morgianehamadou6034 3 роки тому

    The fast pace and the cuts in this educational video is very counterproductive. I feel like I'm listening to a researcher who reluctantly has to give lectures to its students.

  • @superhenkable
    @superhenkable Рік тому +3

    Its not the higgs boson that gives mass, its the field itself. The boson was only important because its evidence of the field. Also the majority of the mass of an atom isn't from the higgs field, only about 1%. Most comes from the binding energy of the strong force inside the nucleus. (E=mc2).

  • @laurasayshello
    @laurasayshello 7 років тому +3

    Wow this is amazing. Thank you for explaining something so complex and actually making sense.

  • @seemavarghese
    @seemavarghese 5 років тому +157

    Who's listening in 2019

    • @nestcamo1181
      @nestcamo1181 5 років тому

      Not me

    • @Keallei
      @Keallei 5 років тому

      Seema Varghese gang gang

    • @Denyy
      @Denyy 5 років тому

      Me but the universe has be moved to an alternate reality because of CERNS particle accelerator the world is going into madness everyday and time had gone faster

    • @tyxorion3608
      @tyxorion3608 5 років тому

      Yep

    • @qasm1158
      @qasm1158 5 років тому +1

      Me

  • @rogerdotlee
    @rogerdotlee 11 років тому +25

    (Stating the obvious, because I can)
    Speaking to you from the end of 2013, I can tell you that they narrowed down the energy range by July 2012, verified same in March 2013, and awarded the Nobel Prize for it in 10/2013.

  • @sharkboy28298
    @sharkboy28298 11 років тому +4

    I've always wanted to understand the particles that make up the standard model. Like what a quark is and what the leptons are and what their purpose is. Can you please do a video on that??

  • @ejk4555
    @ejk4555 5 років тому +2

    is it not throwing anyone else off that hank is sitting in a chair for this video?!
    he stands in almost literally every single other video, and I can't ignore the chair-sittingness in this one 😅

    • @GodBidoof
      @GodBidoof 4 роки тому +1

      Edward John Knish III IKR!

  • @Amlna
    @Amlna 4 роки тому +3

    I refuse to believe that 2012 was 8 years ago

  • @djayjp
    @djayjp 8 років тому +5

    The Higgs field only 'gives' particles, which contain *rest* mass, only about 1% of their total mass. ~99% of the mass of a proton or neutron actually comes from the gluon field and its energy.

    • @GuitarGuruGaming
      @GuitarGuruGaming 5 років тому +1

      djayjp I’ve seen this statement multiple times in this comment section, would you be willing to explain how this works? I’d honestly like to know more

  • @ericharkleroad7716
    @ericharkleroad7716 7 років тому

    Thanks, while I've seen a number of other videos explaining the Higgs Boson but this kind of helped it all gel together

  • @Dyslexic-Artist-Theory-on-Time
    @Dyslexic-Artist-Theory-on-Time 10 років тому +4

    Could it be an interactive process? We put energy in and we get a particle out!

    • @pavelZhd
      @pavelZhd 10 років тому +10

      Shivani Mishra Imagine this "Probability field" of "virtual particles" as a... rippling water surface. You have a dynamic pattern of moving spikes and pits. And that is all good.
      Now imagine a layer of fabric streached several millimeter above this rippling water. And look from above the fabric.
      If you have enough energy in this ripples, at some point you might get a spike big enought to actually reach the fabric and put a water drop there. You will see this place from above, even if you don't see the ripples. And it changes the propertiea of fabric in the place of contact. That is obout what happens with particles presenting themselves.
      So the "Field" if your water, and Energy is the intensity of ripples you have you have under the fabric. Spikes not reaching the fabric are virtual particles, and wet spots on the fabric are real particles...
      Hope that helps your imagination.

  • @isodoublet
    @isodoublet 10 років тому +6

    I'm not sure if you read these but I would like to point out that the value of the field at a point cannot be directly interpreted as a number density in the way you propose. An easy way to see that this is true is to note that you can add any constant to the field and still get a theory that you can work with, if a little abstruse. If you want the number density, calculate the expectation value of the number operator. That is a semi complicated expression involving the field and its momentum density.
    In particular, it is emphatically *not* true that the ground state of the electroweak theory has a constant density of Higgs bosons constantly flying around. Higgs particles (the leftovers from electroweak symmetry breaking that we saw at the LHC) are real (not complex) scalars, which means that their number is not a conserved quantity. The Higgs vacuum is a true vacuum: act on it with an annihilation operator and you get zero. Act on it with a creation operator and you'll create a Higgs boson. . The fact that the field has a nonzero value cannot readily be interpreted as long as one still clings to the notion that fields are just convenient ways of describing particles: fields *are* really the degrees of freedom in nature; quantum mechanics *does* allow for continuousness. Further, it imposes it.
    Another point which is more of a curiosity since it's incidental to this video: it is not, in fact, electromagnetism that keeps you from falling through your chair. It was shown by Freeman Dyson that the stability of matter is mostly due to Pauli's exclusion principle. It's less important that your electrons are electrically charged than it is that they are fermions which cannot occupy the same quantum state.

    • @Cosmalano
      @Cosmalano 10 років тому

      I have a question, why is it called electroweak? Is it because of the fact that a W boson can have a positive or negative charge?

    • @isodoublet
      @isodoublet 10 років тому

      electrocat1 It's because this model "unifies" electromagnetism and the weak force. That the W bosons are charged is a consequence of this unification.
      The "true" symmetries of the theory don't predict photons or W and Z bosons. The forces are carried by particles called the B, W^+, W^-, and W^0, all massless. The B is like a photon, while the Ws are like gluons.
      Then the Higgs mechanism kicks in and the symmetries of this theory break. As a result, the bosons acquire mass and the W^0 "mixes" with the B. There are two possible ways to do this mixing. One of them results in the photon, which turns out massless, and the other results in the Z^0, which is slightly heavier than the Ws.
      That's a very rough snapshot. The model itself is complicated and full of moving parts that are hard to keep track of. Surprisingly enough though, all the math you need to have a basic understanding is at the high school level.

    • @Cosmalano
      @Cosmalano 10 років тому

      Oh wow, thanks! What kind of math are we talking about?

    • @isodoublet
      @isodoublet 10 років тому

      electrocat1 The framework everything rests on requires some pretty hefty mathematical machinery to understand, like functional integration and group theory, but to understand it like a mechanic all you need is basic stuff like elementary algebra and matrix multiplication.

    • @Cosmalano
      @Cosmalano 10 років тому

      Oh okay, well that's pretty easy. No partial derivatives or things like that?

  • @mads4it555
    @mads4it555 Рік тому

    I'm going to be rewatching this many times, I think.
    Because you have made a sort of easy type of explanation for very complicated concept, that I can sort of understand bits of, but not all at once yet.
    I an no particle physicist and have very early onset of short term memory problems, so I can only learn now from repetition. So repeat it, I will!
    Thanks SciShow... you are totally brilliant at explaining everything so that non-scientific people can get to grips with just about anything!
    Keep it up, I love learning new science stuff when I can, it's so fascinating! 11/10 A+

  • @letsplayit6467
    @letsplayit6467 4 роки тому +3

    when he said "understanding those things is really complicated" he sounded like eminem

  • @replicaacliper
    @replicaacliper 8 років тому +11

    how could any particle have a perfectly even distribution throughout the universe

    • @scientificakosmos6340
      @scientificakosmos6340 8 років тому +1

      Well the only thing that has equal distribution (that I know of) throughout the universe is the space time continuum. Its complicated.

    • @scientificakosmos6340
      @scientificakosmos6340 8 років тому

      Fedor Scheglov Спасибо!

    • @scientificakosmos6340
      @scientificakosmos6340 8 років тому +3

      Fedor Scheglov I was trying to be helpful.

    • @scientificakosmos6340
      @scientificakosmos6340 8 років тому +1

      Fedor Scheglov Its okay. :)

    • @leanmindworks
      @leanmindworks 8 років тому +1

      This is exactly why for many years physicists have struggled with the Standard Model. "It's too perfect. Too simple an explanation." Nature always surprises us by making things much more complicated. This is also why the discovery of the Higgs has them scratching their heads, and it's been compared to a pencil standing on its pointy tip. However unlikely it may seem that this field exists, it's becoming more and more evident that it does and is exactly what was predicted.

  • @Towandakit
    @Towandakit 11 років тому

    I literally spaced out and started thinking about what I have to do tomorrow - maybe watching these vids right before bed as I'm half asleep anyway isn't the most conducive way to learn things with SciShow...

  • @redstonegenius2609
    @redstonegenius2609 8 років тому +3

    If we figured out how to turn off a Higgs boson, hello anti gravity boots.

    • @TheZenytram
      @TheZenytram 7 років тому

      the mass of a proton that made you does not came from the higg field even less from higg's boson.

  • @ihorkarpiuk4102
    @ihorkarpiuk4102 5 років тому +18

    Who else is watching it in 2019???

    • @Holtkid13
      @Holtkid13 5 років тому

      Who is still posting this comment?

    • @yusrisaadun5497
      @yusrisaadun5497 5 років тому

      I watching this after playing death stranding game

  • @lisal712
    @lisal712 7 років тому

    This channel really IS the only reason I get most of the quantum mechanics stuff I need to know for school.

  • @frumpy
    @frumpy 11 років тому +3

    I guess I sort of understand the Higgs field. But if the Higgs field is pretty much everywhere in an even distribution which would lead us to believe that our mass is the same everywhere in the universe then my question is why does our mass increase the closer we get to the speed of light. What is happening with the interaction of our particles to the Higgs field that is making us more massive.

  • @revenger211
    @revenger211 3 роки тому +4

    It's crazy to think that around this time the higgs boson was still this new mysterious particle that we were only starting to understand

  • @narudh
    @narudh 9 років тому +2

    This is quite amazing. There is HD on UA-cam before the Higgs boson is discovered. Wow.

  • @stevoplex
    @stevoplex 5 років тому +3

    I've got Higgs Bosons in my pocket right now! Like it ain't no big thing. Hardly even impresses the ladies any more.

    • @Marinesniprx
      @Marinesniprx 3 роки тому

      Some particles masses are bigger than others ..lol

  • @edbrando3466
    @edbrando3466 5 років тому +4

    I learned about higgs field in 1921.....

  • @colinmusik
    @colinmusik 11 років тому

    I'm not a physicist, but I'm always interested in learning about this stuff whether it's from Hank or another reliable source. And I think it's fair to say that when you get to this level of physics words and basic language can't really do it justice. On this this level, the concept of "existence" has a much more complex meaning. Metaphors can also be misleading because they can still make sense without data to back them up. I still really appreciate videos like this. Keep it up Hank!!

  • @KorianHUN
    @KorianHUN 9 років тому +21

    Either this guy explains it really well, or i'm really one of those people who can understand complicated things, but can't understand basic shit because of bad teaching methods in school... I knew how a nuclear reactor worked at the age of 7... now i can't understand 12th grade match...

    • @nishankchaudhary
      @nishankchaudhary 9 років тому +1

      〈--- Literally FAST food oh so you know how a nuclear reactor works mind telling me the intricate details of it including all the calculations, Let me tell you what you think you understand is just the basic idea anyone with a descent brain can understand that but the problems arise in the fine details when contradictions start piling up.

    • @KorianHUN
      @KorianHUN 9 років тому +2

      nishank chaudhary Noooope. The chicago pile worked. I DID NOT SAID "I WOULD BE ABLE TO MAKE POWER WITH A NUCLEAR REACTOR I MAKE". I said i knew how it WORKS. What is your problem? What, you say i was stupid as a kid because i did not knew enough or what?

    • @nishankchaudhary
      @nishankchaudhary 9 років тому +8

      I am just saying that understanding the principle of a nuclear reactor or a video like this which doesn't go into detail is simple enough and you shouldn't blame the education institution for your own fault of not practicing enough or in case you don't understand something taking your right to ask the teacher and clearing your doubts.

    • @KorianHUN
      @KorianHUN 9 років тому +8

      nishank chaudhary Dude, i learned atom physics from youtube videos and some people in class who are actually smart can't understand it. I just said we HAVE TO learn the basics too, and these videos do it better. If you build a good base, you can build a tower.

    • @Fenriswaffle
      @Fenriswaffle 9 років тому +4

      +James D Between you and nishank I am incredibly disappointed, rather than commenting with anything constructive you kids just attack his statement.

  • @iamscoutstfu
    @iamscoutstfu 9 років тому +10

    Sooo... if light has no mass, how is affected by gravity?

    • @Knowledge-jp6oz
      @Knowledge-jp6oz 9 років тому +3

      Kyle SimonGravity is affected by momentum and energy not mass, and light has momentum and energy thus affected by gravity.

    • @saimnaeem9
      @saimnaeem9 9 років тому

      Since light is going so fast, it has energy, which has mass

    • @iamscoutstfu
      @iamscoutstfu 9 років тому +4

      Hey debunked that. Energy does not have mass.

    • @vitezslavduda5224
      @vitezslavduda5224 9 років тому

      ***** Yep!

    • @saimnaeem9
      @saimnaeem9 9 років тому

      ***** Also, light has a force when moving. If it did not have a mass, that would mean light does not have a force as f=m/a

  • @sammyrichards3485
    @sammyrichards3485 10 років тому +1

    ive been having so much trouble with my astronomy class but you make it so simple for me to understamd. bless u

  • @frankeinowalters8800
    @frankeinowalters8800 10 років тому +5

    omg..they did it they broke the first law of thermodynamics..where have I been?

    • @thepedrorriva
      @thepedrorriva 9 років тому +1

      No they didn't. First: It would be no surprise that a law could be broken, they just explain something we can measure. But owaht is happening is that when a particle like that come to existence, a particle of negative mass also comes. That's waht we call black mattter.

    • @frankeinowalters8800
      @frankeinowalters8800 9 років тому

      oh I see I see

    • @TomdeArgentina
      @TomdeArgentina 9 років тому

      Pedro Martins Excuse me please, did they detect black matter particles?

    • @thepedrorriva
      @thepedrorriva 9 років тому

      TomdeArgentina directly, they didn't. And you know that. It's impossible to see, how would they?

    • @madmonkey9143
      @madmonkey9143 9 років тому +2

      TomdeArgentina I think 'black matter particles' and Higgs-Boson particles are the same thing, they just couldn't figure out how to figure it out before.

  • @Bongchitis
    @Bongchitis 8 років тому +5

    Sooo...If we manipulated the Higgs field.....We could have a real version of mass effect?

  • @UnleClowntouch
    @UnleClowntouch 10 років тому

    Very concise Hank, other videos described the Higgs field in a way that made it sound much more abstract

  • @jenbeatty8067
    @jenbeatty8067 8 років тому +4

    "By faith we understand that the universe was created by the word of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things that are visible." .....Hebrews 11:3

    • @TheZenytram
      @TheZenytram 7 років тому

      ok go to your church and let the grown ups do the science.

    • @jayjee735
      @jayjee735 7 років тому

      Science is governed by evidence, spiritual belief by faith. The foundations of each are mutually exclusive but their meaning to humanity is not

  • @halvorhansen
    @halvorhansen 8 років тому +3

    125 GeV/c²

  • @ROCROCROC1
    @ROCROCROC1 18 днів тому

    In some ways this little 5.26 minute video is the best I have ever seen to describe the Higgs boson. This should be the first video you see before you see the scientific version. When you see the scientific version, they should begin the video with a basic explanation of terms starting with field, particle, mass, energy, interaction, etc. The particle physicist and others in the field don't need the explanation but those without this expertise do. Once you grasp the core understanding everything else false into place.

  • @CJ-ob2kv
    @CJ-ob2kv 8 років тому +4

    how can anything that exists not have mass?

    • @SC-zq6cu
      @SC-zq6cu 8 років тому

      Why can't something exist that does not have mass ?

    • @CJ-ob2kv
      @CJ-ob2kv 8 років тому

      If it exists, it well.... Exists!! It is a physical thing, so I just wanna know how it can exist, yet not have mass.

    • @SC-zq6cu
      @SC-zq6cu 8 років тому

      C Rexxar "A exists in B" is a logical statement that says that the object A has property(ies) defined in set B by virtue of which it is necessarily possible that A changes and/or is able to change the state(s) associated to at least one of the properties(y) of at least one object (other than A) whose property(ies) is(are) defined in B assuming that the other object exists in B.
      While "A has mass" is a logical statement that says that among other properties A necessarily posseses velocity lesser than c(vel. of light). As evident by what it means to exist, to change any state of anything else that exists something need not have velocities lesser than c. Also to have mass means that A has its own gravitational field which is also not a necessity for affecting any other object.
      example of something that exists without any mass is photon, although I guess you already know this which makes me wonder why you asked this question in the first place.

    • @CJ-ob2kv
      @CJ-ob2kv 8 років тому

      So what your saying is,( correct me if I'm wrong), light does have mass since it, well... exists. But within the set rules of our universe, it is so miniscule that it practically doesn't.

    • @SC-zq6cu
      @SC-zq6cu 8 років тому +1

      C Rexxar Nope. What I meant was:
      Existence is a conclusion reached for an object based on certain observations conducted on its effects on other objects that exist. It is not necessary that those effects have to be because of mass of that object. Thus having mass is not a necessary criteria for existence. And no, light actually has zero mass. It practically as well as theoritically has zero mass and there is no approximation or negligibly small numbers. It has zero mass. Plain, simple, pure, absolute, exact ZERO MASS.

  • @salmi_azrinparentsonly863
    @salmi_azrinparentsonly863 Рік тому +5

    This makes me believe in god more!

  • @pavelZhd
    @pavelZhd 10 років тому +1

    I have some ideas on how Higgs field makes particles have mass.
    1) All particles are actually moving at the speed of light all the time.
    2) Interacting with Higgs field causes a particle to change it's direction of movement.
    3) Intensity of interacting with Higgs field shows how far can a particle travel before Higgs field causes it to change direction again.
    So basically a particle that has strong interaction with Higgs field (a Mass) is basically wobbling around some place, unable to move far in any direction. (Unless something "forces" this particle to choose one direction often, in which case it can slowly travel in this direction).

    • @isodoublet
      @isodoublet 10 років тому

      That minutephysics video is completely wrong. The interactions of the electroweak theory are such that the particles *really* become massive. It's not just a kinematic illusion.
      It kindasorta almost sounds reasonable because when you do the actual calculation you see diagrams that look like they're describing this sort of process: there's a line representing a particle moving along, then it interacts with the Higgs field, then it keeps going, then it might interact again, etc. There is, however, no momentum being exchanged in these interactions, which means there's no "bouncing" off in the same way that a tennis ball can be bounced off a wall.

  • @jonandewey5367
    @jonandewey5367 5 років тому +3

    You remind me of my Asian friend

  • @DroidFreak36
    @DroidFreak36 10 років тому +13

    Your particle physics is a bit off, which is understandable, but as someone associated with Fermilab (the US's main particle physics lab) I can assure you that fields DO exist, and in fact all particles are in fact a property of fields. This is why photons behave like particles, because all particles are really waves on fields. So every field has an associated particle (or several) and every particle has an associated field. That is why force carrier particles exist and seem to pop in and out of existence randomly, because they are just a property of the field which is being disturbed there. I hope that clears things up all though I understand that sounds completely insane to normal people, which is why physicists prefer to explain it to mere mortals in terms of particles.

    • @makiimedia
      @makiimedia 10 років тому +1

      jwi-jma because you just have an explanation and not the actual theory. ever been to school? try to understand economics. everyone knows that supply and demand are correlated and that demand is higher when prices are lower but how exactly it works is a fucking tedious science that I m studying right now and wouldnt recommend you doing :)

    • @DroidFreak36
      @DroidFreak36 10 років тому +3

      Yimin Lu The Higgs DOES have mass. 135 times as much as a Proton or Neutron, to be exact. And they didn't detect it by its interactions with other particles, they detected it by smashing protons together at almost the speed of light and actually creating it (momentarily), then observing that it was there by the debris it left behind. The then did that a million times (or some other huge number) until they knew without a shadow of a doubt that there was in fact a 135 AMU particle in existence and it wasn't just random noise.

    • @SnugglesTheSnuggle
      @SnugglesTheSnuggle 10 років тому

      DroidFreak36 Maybe you can explain this to me then - he says in the video that he would have the same mass anywhere in the Universe. My understanding is that i.e. on planets with a lower gravity than Earth, he'd weigh less and, on planets with a greater gravity he'd be heavier. Am I right, or is he?

    • @DroidFreak36
      @DroidFreak36 10 років тому +2

      verbw002
      Both are right. Mass is how much stuff you are made of. Weight is the amount of force gravity pushes you down by. In math terms, Weight = Mass * g, where g is the acceleration of gravity at your location. You have just as much mass on the moon, but you weigh less because gravity is weaker.

    • @SnugglesTheSnuggle
      @SnugglesTheSnuggle 10 років тому

      Ahh, k I get it. I know where I went wrong now haha thanks for that! :-)

  • @driving4answers
    @driving4answers 5 років тому

    This is the best video on the Higgs field I've seen so far.

  • @patrickkinnear8625
    @patrickkinnear8625 10 років тому +12

    Damn. Scientists are wizards. Magic is real.

  • @Thatanonguyintheback
    @Thatanonguyintheback 6 років тому

    thanks hank, your series on the fundemental forces saved my ass with my g12 project

  • @augustacorns
    @augustacorns 4 роки тому

    Thank you for saying you don’t know why any of these things exist. It is a refreshing change from hearing that there is no reason these things exist.

  • @toddmerriss
    @toddmerriss 6 років тому

    Dude, that was awesome. The best explanation that I've heard yet.

  • @Aryola_GG
    @Aryola_GG 4 роки тому +1

    when I first saw him i thought he was John Green, but it was Hank Green, the brother. very nice

  • @tonik1222
    @tonik1222 Рік тому +1

    Trouble is Higgs only explains less than 2% of the mass we're familiar with.
    I mean atoms, electrons and quarks which make all the massive particles in an atom have intrinsic mass of less than 2% of the total atom mass.
    The rest is apparently the energy locked in the gluons field inside protons & neutrons. Ant that locked energy is equivalent to the missing mass thru Einstein's E=mcc.
    But so far I haven't seen any explanation of how such locked energy can cause the effects we associate with mass. Inertia, gravitational attraction or curving of spacetime (whichever way you prefer).

  • @lizslilcorneroftheinstitution
    @lizslilcorneroftheinstitution 5 років тому +2

    First off... Great job! Many people tend to shy away from attempting to explain complicated topics to the masses!
    I can say with no hesitation I deem myself to be an intelligent woman, someone who has an unending curiosity about science based topics... yet part of my brain keeps tapping me on the shoulder and asking if hank is speaking Latin! Regardless of how much flew over my head, I can’t help but smile and laugh as I watch the almost painful expressions hank has as he explains this... knowing in his mind he’s just opened a big ol’ can of “huh?!” that I’m sure flooded the comment section! Yet he made the video any way. I have to applaud SciShow for it!☺️

  • @raquelgarcia6190
    @raquelgarcia6190 4 роки тому +1

    Wow! This video was made in January 2012 and the Higgs Boson was discovered in July of 2012.

  • @leebartoo613
    @leebartoo613 Рік тому

    Neat way to say we found a real small particle good job

  • @10skullkid01
    @10skullkid01 11 років тому

    Thx man. I keep hunting and pecking at string theory, and you've shaped more of the puzzle in my minds eye.

  • @ryanwebb9979
    @ryanwebb9979 10 років тому

    This is the first time I've ever seen a good introduction to Quantum Field Theory, thank you!!!

  • @clippedwings225
    @clippedwings225 3 місяці тому

    I just googled it and it's nuts to learn that they did actually discover the particle that year

  • @malachilong7851
    @malachilong7851 8 років тому

    I had to watch this video over several times but I think that I get it now roughly, and it actually seems pretty simple, but hard to explain.

  • @bradleyberdahl6148
    @bradleyberdahl6148 6 років тому

    I just love this channel!!! Wish it would have been around when I was coming up!?

  • @L3giT_Hax
    @L3giT_Hax 3 роки тому

    Thus helped so much after watching like 3 other vids on the Higgs field

  • @LefMods
    @LefMods 11 років тому

    It is not PERFECT as you say because it doesn't explain EVERYTHING. It is perfect for describing what we have now. If there are some things missing it is not perfect. That is why it is our best fit; because it works with what we have, but we don't have everything.

  • @manjarymuralee
    @manjarymuralee 9 років тому

    Excellent explanation- Simplified way.

  • @TheGCoast
    @TheGCoast 11 років тому

    To clarify, the body itself is not getting heavier. It's apparent mass is the one increasing, as you can see by the m=m0.y equation, where y = 1/sqrt [1 -(v²/c²), so, for a body that has a mass value over 0, if v² = c², you're going to end up dividing by 0, and so the body gets and indefinily big amount of mass, which makes it impossible to give in enough energy for such body.

  • @Iluvbabaganush123
    @Iluvbabaganush123 4 роки тому +1

    You are my favourite green brother !!!

  • @janepiepes2243
    @janepiepes2243 7 років тому

    Is this fellow's name Hank ?
    I like the way he explains things.
    He's smart and charismatic.

  • @CaptainDarren82
    @CaptainDarren82 10 років тому

    This is fascinating. I do understand the way it works, and I hope this is the way the universe works, as we would be one step closer to truly understanding mass and quantum mechanics.

  • @LLO227
    @LLO227 4 роки тому +1

    Wow, 2012 to 2020 is overwhelmingly Fascinating!!! No wonder this video seems so perplexing now. It used to make sense but now it doesn't. Not with all the new technological advances.

  • @Brownkyl
    @Brownkyl 10 років тому

    Best explanation of the Higgs Boson particle for an amateur science nerd like me.

  • @bbJav
    @bbJav 7 років тому

    it's very difficult to discern mass for what is not, very well explained sir.

  • @RXTRUX1
    @RXTRUX1 4 роки тому

    This is a really useful explanation!

  • @oussamagodbane3473
    @oussamagodbane3473 5 років тому +1

    these videos are so great and your method of explaining things is simple beautiful and easy to digest thanks for the effort

  • @liamkneeson8866
    @liamkneeson8866 4 роки тому

    I didnt realize until after I watched the video that this video was published just few months before CERN actually discovered the Higgs particle. I remember I was in Physics 1 at my community college the day that the particle was discovered and i had absolutely no idea what anyone was talking about.

  • @SiliconBassist
    @SiliconBassist 11 років тому +1

    More particle physics and quantum mechanics related videos would be AWESOME!

  • @cmatrix4761
    @cmatrix4761 11 років тому

    It may be prudent to point out that the way SciShow (Hank) describes this phenomena is the standard nuclear physics interpretation, not the standard quantum mechanical interpretation. Continuous fields can (and must) exist under quantum mechanics but it's an exotic phenomenon that's analogous to probability distribution.

  • @ag20085
    @ag20085 4 роки тому

    Best channel about science !

  • @KenZShadower
    @KenZShadower 5 років тому

    Great explaination!

  • @Daszkal
    @Daszkal 8 років тому +1

    Hank! I totally get it!
    Explain more stuff to me, because I'm so fired up now I had to google the most recent CERN news and wikipedia the higgs boson for further reading.
    What I'm saying is this show makes me want to science. a lot.

    • @crab_computer
      @crab_computer 6 років тому +1

      The 'Organization' has made their move. They're recruiting people by uploading a video on UA-cam and checking the comment section. El Psy Kongroo

    • @tenyaida9895
      @tenyaida9895 Рік тому

      El Psy kongroo

  • @hubes69
    @hubes69 11 років тому

    Come on guys, some inferential discussion would be cool to read in the comments, why is it always trolls.... on another note. Hank, I like the extra detail and depth in this video. keep up the good work!

  • @enhaxed7839
    @enhaxed7839 8 років тому

    I read a short story once set in the "Berserker" universe in which there was a kind of generation ship composed mostly of 'fake' matter. The humans in it had learned a way to hack space/time to create whole sections of the ship to have all the properties of real matter without having mass or other properties depending on the application.

  • @yeshwanthvejendla8385
    @yeshwanthvejendla8385 9 років тому

    you guys are excellent

  • @ewwahheternus6885
    @ewwahheternus6885 6 років тому

    You guys are the best!
    Koodos to all the writers and all contributors!!!
    Most intellectually dense show ive ever seen in an easy to understand manner!!!BY FAR!!.... and i watch alot of tv and internet...
    You guys may or may not or have already recieved rewards...
    But your work speaks for itself.
    I'll never forget every episode i watch... and rewatch...
    Tho mostly i rewatch cause hank is just entertaining!
    But i hope... one day...
    He will drink pepsi.
    Shame on u coke fienddddds

  • @just2knowthetruth
    @just2knowthetruth 8 років тому +1

    Where is the update? It's 2016! I subscribed! I need more knowledge! Thank YOU!

  • @erroneum
    @erroneum 8 років тому

    For those interested in a deeper explanation I personally like the one on the Fermilab channel, look for the Highs mechanism.

  • @saddernn
    @saddernn 4 роки тому +1

    So the Higgs field are Higgs particles which are the same density throughout the universe, some thing interact with it like electrons and neurons but other things like fontons do no, when they do this interaction with the Higgs field, it gives them matter.

  • @angelicwolf909
    @angelicwolf909 5 років тому +1

    Things just pop into and out of existence. I just popped in ... popping .... out .... in three, two, ... POOF!!!