The Standard Model

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 26 гру 2024

КОМЕНТАРІ • 517

  • @piceofknowledge9296
    @piceofknowledge9296 6 років тому +962

    "What exactly is fire and what makes it glow?" *GREAT QUESTION TIMMY, LET'S LOOK AT THE STANDARD MODEL.*

  • @fermilab
    @fermilab  12 років тому +150

    Fermilab is NOT shut down. We shutdown one of our accelerators, the Tevatron, last fall but we are moving forward into the Intensity Frontier of particle physics. Come visit and see. We're close by!

    • @Paradigm2012Shift
      @Paradigm2012Shift 4 роки тому +1

      Very Informative. Thanks for sharing. Best wishes, Lord-Jesus-Christ com

    • @guffinator70
      @guffinator70 4 роки тому +1

      I've been there twice, once in 1980 and again in 82...I think. I didn't really understand it at the time, but thanks to videos like this I have a much stronger grasp. I'm a fan, keep up the great vids.

    • @anttumurikka8728
      @anttumurikka8728 4 роки тому

      must like this no matter what happen :D

    • @anttumurikka8728
      @anttumurikka8728 4 роки тому

      how close you are now?

    • @bruinflight
      @bruinflight 4 роки тому

      I LOVE FERMILAB!!!!

  • @robih2313
    @robih2313 5 років тому +46

    Thanks for existing, Fermilab

  • @ashar1122
    @ashar1122 4 роки тому +173

    me: ok today imma go to sleep early
    my brain at 3 AM: wanna learn about subatomic particle physics and the nature of the universe itself?

    • @Yukinasenpai
      @Yukinasenpai 4 роки тому +1

      Nice

    • @player-mx7mn
      @player-mx7mn 4 роки тому +1

      genius

    • @evalsoftserver
      @evalsoftserver 3 роки тому

      I believe the Standard model is incomplete and Pauli Exclusionary Principle can be violated because Superposition and Spooky Action at a Distance is real and it also must Violate E=mc2 and faster than light information communication, Fermi Dirac Distribution Fermi energies, Ultimately implies that the Wave function, Heininberg Uncertainty, Planck's Constant, And the Cosmological constant is incorrect

    • @enderwigin7976
      @enderwigin7976 3 роки тому

      My brain at 3am: let's check the fridge!

    • @camelot544
      @camelot544 3 роки тому

      Big same

  • @ertuqueque22
    @ertuqueque22 10 років тому +7

    After a good deal of trying to understand the Standard Model of quantum physics, this video has explained to me the final bits I needed to get my puzzle solved... This is probably the best (sort of dumbed-down) explanation of the Standard Model I've seen!

  • @delwoodbarker
    @delwoodbarker 12 років тому +9

    Thanks, Fermilab! I've been keeping up since I was a student reading Scientific American. Went there with my husband and his sister, they still talk about it after five years.

  • @roberthillier80
    @roberthillier80 9 років тому +108

    This should be required watching for all children when they start high-school or even earlier if the parents can explain it properly.

    • @sausagedankerschism
      @sausagedankerschism 8 років тому +2

      agreed!

    • @loganreidy7055
      @loganreidy7055 7 років тому +1

      Chloecybin I would of loved being taught this as a freshman.

    • @justcallmesteve9123
      @justcallmesteve9123 6 років тому +3

      Hey! Im 15, and i filled ~50 pages with the information from theese videos! Its interesting! You can learn theese! It's such a wonderful feeling to get a little bit closer to understand, what happens around us, and why does it happen. I especialy like relativity, but i have to rewatch several parts of the videos. But it works! Im learning!

    • @frostbite07
      @frostbite07 6 років тому

      I agree. I struggled with the basics of chemistry for a long time and this has actually solved most of my doubts about charge mass and behavior of different substances.

    • @pameladoov7427
      @pameladoov7427 5 років тому

      @@loganreidy7055 I doubt you would understand it. You write "would of", instead of would have. No offence, pal, but that's the act of a moron.

  • @alecouto
    @alecouto 2 роки тому +2

    Standard Model very well explained in 8 minutes.. This must be some kind of World Record. Thank you!

  • @MsMumei
    @MsMumei 3 роки тому +5

    Just gone back to studying physics and chemistry A-levels, after half a lifetime of art and philosophy:) Am loving it. It's a good change to have right or wrong answers, after so much subjectivity;) This guy has quickly become my 'go to' for great, personable explanations:) thankyou x

  • @davedave6650
    @davedave6650 4 роки тому +9

    Thanks Dr. Don.You have no idea how disarming your presentation is. You seem like one of the best spokepersons to explain why we need to keep funding this research. You've convinced me and (btw) I've always hated Theoretical Physics for it's lack of focus, inattention, and utter disregard to simply "building a better mouse trap".

  • @Eddy929292
    @Eddy929292 12 років тому +16

    I really like Don Lincoln's presentations. They informative and very coherently constructed. Keep up the good work fermilab, I'm a big fan :)

  • @rafakukua2784
    @rafakukua2784 7 років тому +35

    This is one of those videos where I scroll down a couple of times to make sure I pressed the like button

  • @stevestanley4518
    @stevestanley4518 6 років тому

    Very much appreciated . Not too dumber down not too difficulty for anyone willing to make an effort. Thank you

  • @btcam
    @btcam 6 років тому +28

    Such a useful video, I’m currently studying particle physics in high school and I was struggling to get my head around the whole idea. Thank you so much!

  • @xPolarGamingx
    @xPolarGamingx 12 років тому +3

    I never really knew the role of bosons, now I know they're the forces, every video or documentary I watch teaches me something knew or makes me think about something differently than I've done before, thank you fermilab

  • @luizhbr
    @luizhbr 7 років тому +1

    Thanks a lot for the subtitles in English, they make the google translator very easy for other languages.

  • @IKMCDANIEL
    @IKMCDANIEL 3 роки тому

    Dude, you rock! There are lots of people on UA-cam who crush it, but you take it to the next level. Thanks!!

  • @savcob6291
    @savcob6291 8 років тому +324

    ..so your children ask these questions ?
    the only questions is I hear is "Who took the xbox controller again " Why didnt you charge it ?"

    • @AumchanterPiLetsPlay
      @AumchanterPiLetsPlay 8 років тому +14

      What about "When can I have that DLC heavy triple A game for the price of a quiet night out Dad?"

  • @rosemondphil-othihiwa3647
    @rosemondphil-othihiwa3647 3 роки тому +1

    One minute in and I have subscribed. FYI I am a lawyer but my curiosity brought me here. Time well spent!

  • @okman9684
    @okman9684 Рік тому +2

    5:05
    Yeah I was confused about the weak force. Like always physicists brush this off by saying "the weak force is responsible for some type of radioactivity". But now I got it after the new video of fermilab about the weak force and going in details about it.

  • @VinayakaHalemane
    @VinayakaHalemane 4 роки тому

    Awesome job with the explanation. This is sci comm at its best. Doesn't dumb down anything, gives an honest look at the current situation and uses good analogies to make it easier to the lay viewer.

    • @TANTRASIUM
      @TANTRASIUM 2 роки тому

      ua-cam.com/video/CGxIDbqRsGY/v-deo.html
      The theory of everything | The standard model of particle physics
      Watch till the end ang share if found informative

  • @mrclean2022
    @mrclean2022 9 років тому +6

    Excellently and clearly simplified, thank you for making this video :)

  • @rifleman2c997
    @rifleman2c997 3 роки тому +2

    Amazing how much discovered and changed in the time of this video.

  • @markcianciolo9384
    @markcianciolo9384 6 років тому +2

    Thank you for a wonderfully explanatory video. I recall hearing you on the old Milt Rosenberg radio show. How great those programs were. I'm an old Liberal Arts guy who is rediscovering science. As I read and watch each day, I am continually surprised and astonished at the macro and the micro. With Einstein and Quantum Physics, who needs Science Fiction?

  • @pyroslasher
    @pyroslasher 7 місяців тому

    Good lord...I did Chem, Bio and Math for A levels and always regretted not doing Physics. Never understood the standard model and the reason why in this age of information is any video I watch starts off with a ten minute history lesson, then they mention the sub atomic particles and then go into quantum mechanics and confuse themselves and me just because they want to say "quantum mechanics". This video is the first I've seen that simply explains it beautifully... Thank you so much!

  • @hainejung
    @hainejung 4 роки тому +1

    This was explained so clearly! Happy to say that I now finally understand the standard model.

  • @tresajessygeorge210
    @tresajessygeorge210 2 роки тому

    THANK YOU PROFESSOR LINCOLN...!!!
    It was like a review for me ...since I have learned first from you and then from others too...!!!
    Still keep on reviewing to make sure ...and remind myself of the terminology...!!!

  • @abrahamjohn1655
    @abrahamjohn1655 3 роки тому

    This channel is a gem

  • @bitm5245
    @bitm5245 5 років тому +1

    Your videos help me start on topics I dont know where to start with.

  • @israelasala1351
    @israelasala1351 4 роки тому

    the best video found that tackles of fundamental particles. Looking forward for more videos

  • @bruinflight
    @bruinflight 8 років тому +91

    How did you get fire in your hand like that without getting burned?

  • @varunnrao3276
    @varunnrao3276 6 років тому +16

    I really don't understand force by particle exchange.
    1. How does attraction work
    2. Wouldn't the particle get exhausted by emitting exchange particles, even when the receiving particle is not there, if it only emits the exchange particle when the other particle is there, then how does is come to know about it.

    • @procerator
      @procerator 6 років тому +4

      Those are called virtual particles and they are just mathematical abstraction.

    • @AbdulWahid-jl4ut
      @AbdulWahid-jl4ut 6 років тому

      Hi.....

    • @WestOfEarth
      @WestOfEarth 5 років тому +2

      So here's my best explanation. I think it's more helpful to think of the 'particle' as a wave packet. Take the gluon for example. The gluon has a mass/energy nearly as large as a single atom of gold. But when a gluon is bound within a system of quarks, it creates a wave 'trough' or potential energy well. The quarks attract each other because they lie at the lowest energy point of this gluon well. For the quarks to be split apart requires sufficient energy to overcome this gluon potential energy well. And as I mentioned, that energy is huge - comparable to the mass / energy of single gold atom.

    • @evalsoftserver
      @evalsoftserver 3 роки тому

      It's not force boson fermions or Particle exchange , but Rather all Force particle exsist as a Unifiable Field and it's Fields Vibration or spin is what's we called Force and, It's Orientation is what we call Quarks ,Electron ,proton Photon or basic particle matter building blocks

  • @andreferreira2693
    @andreferreira2693 4 роки тому

    That's actually one of the best videos about this subject, I don't have a deep knowledge on physics although I have lot o curiosity and interest on it, even with my little knowledge I could understand the main idea behind the concepts and want to learn even more about it!

  • @HongXiuYing
    @HongXiuYing 12 років тому +8

    I love videos like this. Filled with information and very well made. Thank you! (But I am greedy... I want more!) ;)

  • @troyc382
    @troyc382 12 років тому +1

    Excellent illustration & explanation of the standard model, thanks

  • @hkbnlb
    @hkbnlb 5 років тому +9

    Yes I finally understand the Standard Model! I subscribed 👍

    • @evalsoftserver
      @evalsoftserver 3 роки тому

      I believe the Standard model is incomplete and Pauli Exclusionary Principle can be violated because Superposition and Spooky Action at a Distance is real and it also must Violate E=mc2 and faster than light information communication, Fermi Dirac Distribution Fermi energies, Ultimately implies that the Wave function, Heininberg Uncertainty, Planck's Constant, And the Cosmological constant is incorrect

  • @boblowney
    @boblowney 5 років тому +4

    if your kids ask those types of questions, you are a great dad!

  • @Nuke_Skywalker
    @Nuke_Skywalker 6 років тому +1

    thank you, i finally get the standard model thanks to your explanation.

  • @RenuVerma-mo6xc
    @RenuVerma-mo6xc Рік тому

    This is the vedio I was looking since long time thankyou so much for uploading this 🥺🥺😢

  • @ganymede242
    @ganymede242 7 років тому +58

    Upvote for proper pronunciation of 'quark'.

    • @Voivode.of.Hirsir
      @Voivode.of.Hirsir 5 років тому +4

      Kwark

    • @Jehannum2000
      @Jehannum2000 4 роки тому +1

      It rhymes with Mark. End of story (Finnegan's Wake).

    • @hellegennes
      @hellegennes 4 роки тому

      @@Jehannum2000 There's no apostrophe in Finnegans Wake.

  • @donvargo614
    @donvargo614 5 років тому +7

    Why is the down quark considered fundamental when, during beta decay, it breaks down to an up quark, an electron, and a neutrino?

    • @jakewilson487
      @jakewilson487 5 років тому +3

      Break down isnt really the right way of putting it. The weak force can essentially change the flavour (type) of particle, and if it changes from a high energy particle to a lower energy particle then other particles will be created using the left over energy

  • @abhishekkumar-mz5px
    @abhishekkumar-mz5px 3 роки тому

    Next level simplification is…thank you Sir.

    • @TANTRASIUM
      @TANTRASIUM 2 роки тому

      ua-cam.com/video/CGxIDbqRsGY/v-deo.html
      The theory of everything | The standard model of particle physics
      Watch till the end ang share if found informative

  • @lancelot1953
    @lancelot1953 7 років тому

    Excellent presentation! I am reassured that there still some "secrets" to be discovered and questions to be answered (for my grand-children that is). Thank you, Ciao, L

  • @prabinbhandari578
    @prabinbhandari578 2 роки тому +1

    Thanks for the extraordinary explanation.

  • @andrewstrausbaugh4517
    @andrewstrausbaugh4517 8 років тому +1

    how does this only have 100K views? I think everyone should be required to watch this.

  • @the_main_dane
    @the_main_dane 7 років тому

    Well done. Your analogies are top notch!!!

  • @adriancoronel5119
    @adriancoronel5119 5 років тому +1

    Very good explanation,thanks very much,greetings from México.

  • @pratiknath2532
    @pratiknath2532 4 роки тому

    You are a scientist but yet you deliver lecture from Such point of view that even who hasn't studied it will get it😍😇

    • @TANTRASIUM
      @TANTRASIUM 2 роки тому

      ua-cam.com/video/CGxIDbqRsGY/v-deo.html
      The theory of everything | The standard model of particle physics
      Watch till the end ang share if found informative

  • @ThomasJr
    @ThomasJr Рік тому

    I loved the blooper. Dr Don rocks!

  • @19750bob
    @19750bob 7 років тому

    Fantastic vid. I knew the model by heart, but this really explains it nicely. Wish I had this when I learnt it, brilliant.

  • @izea816
    @izea816 5 років тому

    You are really good at what you do. Thanks for the refresher

  • @beachboardfan9544
    @beachboardfan9544 6 років тому

    Holy hell I wish this channel existed when I was in school

  • @FlipCereal
    @FlipCereal 10 років тому

    Don is great at explaining and teaching!

  • @chemistryuntold
    @chemistryuntold 4 роки тому

    That was an Amazing Explanation Sir

  • @saragct1
    @saragct1 9 років тому

    That is one of the amazing videos. Thanks.

  • @mrmadmaxalot
    @mrmadmaxalot 6 років тому

    I love the fact that gravity waves have now been detected. It shows the continual change and progress of science. :)

  • @GabriellaMickel
    @GabriellaMickel 12 років тому

    I can't wait until I'm far enough into my education to learn and understand the math and experimentation behind subatomic particle physics :D I'M SO EXCITED (and impatient) ...just thought I'd mention that because this video reminded me to be curious and ask questions :)

    • @youssh4975
      @youssh4975 5 років тому

      So, after 6 years, is your passion still burning? Just curious

  • @ASLUHLUHC3
    @ASLUHLUHC3 4 роки тому +2

    Is the Higgs boson officially now part of the Standard Model?

  • @johnmcevoy1840
    @johnmcevoy1840 9 років тому +13

    Thanks for the video - it helped answer some of my queries on the atomic make up....which has puzzled me during the O.U. course I am doing.
    Its a good job gravity force is so small - otherwise I would be much heavier - its bad enough now trying to loose weight.

    • @ehlimanehliman
      @ehlimanehliman 6 років тому +1

      But your mass still would be same, assuming the universe would still exist.

  • @nini1957
    @nini1957 5 років тому +4

    I have a few questions 😁 Does gravity affect all sizes of particles? Even Higgs Boson?
    Am I the only person who believes that there is no end to how “small” or “elemental” something can be?

  • @joppadoni
    @joppadoni 8 років тому +9

    If gravity is a space time bending then at the lowest, smallest measurements, then surely you would understand the direction of the force would be negligible against a space time curve and hence it wouldn't apply. Its like resistance of something massive with huge momentum ignoring gravity. Imagine a bending ruler, then focus in on the centre. The closer you get to it the straighter the edges look. Eventually everything travels in a straight line, always.

    • @msidhard
      @msidhard 8 років тому

      like it

    • @justinemaerefuerzo9425
      @justinemaerefuerzo9425 8 років тому

      nice

    • @mookiestewart3776
      @mookiestewart3776 8 років тому

      joppadoni this is a cool thought but it's based on the premise of a center existing in the first place. space time does not have a center , so the idea of a direction of the force of gravity doesn't exactly exist.

    • @joppadoni
      @joppadoni 8 років тому

      indeed, the deeper you go in to a mass the flatter space time becomes, hence no central point, thats why gravity reduces the further you dig a deep, deep, deep hole in to, say the earth. but i dont think that matters, the distances become so tiny. only in black holes would that curvature become a feature, or rather an effect. i think it is here that the answers will be found to link the two.

  • @joto4294
    @joto4294 3 роки тому

    Excellent, lucid, understandable lecture

  • @rockanderson1823
    @rockanderson1823 7 років тому +2

    Good stuff !! You explain complicated subjects in a simple way. I "wish" you would do a video on Electromagnetism. I understand the words, "a photon" has two fields, electric field and magnetic field; but I think you could make the concept more intuitive.

  • @jovaransguplar3019
    @jovaransguplar3019 4 роки тому +2

    I have an important question that's been bugging me.
    When he explains how bosons serve has particles that bounce between two other particles, the image of the guys playing catch on the shore shows that it pushes them further apart.
    But it's supposed to be what keeps particles together? I'm trying to wrap my head around how that works

    • @iridium8562
      @iridium8562 4 роки тому +3

      Jovarans Guplar i believe it’s way way more complicated than that, it’s just an overly simplified example, I urge you not to overthink overly simplified examples as it won’t really help

    • @shauncarriere779
      @shauncarriere779 4 роки тому

      He's only stating that the bozons apply a force when they move. The example is just to understand the idea. It doesn't mean they move apart

  • @MaxwellDoesStuff
    @MaxwellDoesStuff 4 роки тому

    Imma be honest this was way better than Wikipedia for someone like me who has no idea what their doing thx

  • @KevinJC1991
    @KevinJC1991 11 років тому +1

    so the higgs boson gives particles mass, but isn't that what gravity does? could higgs and gravitons be the same thing?
    I've always seen gravity demonstrated as a bowling ball on a mattress causing marbles to fall into its depression, so is the mattress in that example representing the higgs field?

  • @spandandhungana5199
    @spandandhungana5199 6 років тому

    Its the first video i have watched from this channel n i subscribed ...😃😀

  • @berniv7375
    @berniv7375 Рік тому

    Thank you for an excellent video.🔬

  • @laficks
    @laficks 3 роки тому +1

    I think Don’s fingertips have the strong force. They keep connecting. Could he speak if he did not touch them together?

  • @lawrencedoliveiro9104
    @lawrencedoliveiro9104 7 років тому

    1:18 The trouble with terms like “element” and “atom” is that, almost as soon as we give them to something, we discover that that thing is not so “elementary” or “atomic” after all, and can be broken down into smaller pieces ...

  • @echoesofsilence22
    @echoesofsilence22 4 роки тому +2

    my brain at 2 am: **What exactly is fire and why does it glow**

  • @sureshdhabsa5634
    @sureshdhabsa5634 4 роки тому +1

    Sir I have a question.i think gravity is weakest force because it may be using other particles to emit gravity or gravitational waves just like conductor or inductor concept is it possible?

  • @biomerl
    @biomerl 12 років тому

    I imagine a world where we slowly learn to manipulate and control smaller realms of matter. From chemistry and nano-tech today which harnesses and arranges atoms, to perhaps one day being able to control and manipulate these quarks and other particles, to whatever is inside/hidden under them when we learn to manipulate them.
    I hope the trail never ends... or stops getting smaller.

  • @elliellama5629
    @elliellama5629 7 років тому

    I love your way to explain. Thanks for the videos

  • @moriendus
    @moriendus 8 років тому +2

    Great video. Thank you very much.

  • @pranayg6270
    @pranayg6270 5 років тому +1

    Can you do another video of the standard model with the recent discoveries?

  • @jebiniahthistle4929
    @jebiniahthistle4929 5 років тому

    just found this channel. awesome.

  • @WARHAMMER625
    @WARHAMMER625 4 роки тому

    Amazing video just inspired me to keep studying physics

    • @fabinjoshua2304
      @fabinjoshua2304 3 роки тому

      same

    • @pavel9652
      @pavel9652 3 роки тому

      Since you have already started, now it is more like a hostage situation ;)

  • @Agoodguy1122
    @Agoodguy1122 5 років тому

    Edit
    Don Lincoln (born 1964) is an American physicist, author, host of the UA-cam channel Fermilab, and science communicator. He conducts research in particle physics at Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory and is an adjunct professor of physics at the University of Notre Dame.[1] He received a Ph.D. in experimental particle physics from Rice University in 1994. In 1995, he was a codiscoverer of the top quark.[2] He has coauthored hundreds of research papers and, more recently, was a member of the team that discovered the Higgs boson in 2012.[3.....from wikipedia......(sir,, take my salute)

  • @AjayKumar-fx2yj
    @AjayKumar-fx2yj 3 роки тому

    Thank god u Made a video sir otherwise I was in confusion

  • @kotsabas4tw
    @kotsabas4tw 11 років тому

    He is seriously good. Just sublime.

    • @AxelBliss
      @AxelBliss 10 років тому

      Fermilab scientists know what gravity is.
      It is a partial entanglement phenomenon.
      It so rare and weak because it is rare entanglements and partial entanglemets
      to break, well it happens but at very lower rates.
      partial entanglements are easily to DEGRADE than pure entanglements among only two particles.
      A partial entanglement of many particles has a lower degrading threshold level,
      and even the quantum noise level of the void affects it.
      If we heat something it becomes heavier because we allow
      partial entanglements degrade at faster rates, but not way faster
      except in neutron stars, compressed plasma black hole accretion disk etc.
      Each new partial entanglement degrades at a more stable quantum state,
      but not all energy is transformed into motion, some is spread out as heat.
      Of course we have statistically some few pure entanglements, but even them may
      degrade, but in that case not with an interaction with a field as partially entangled particels
      or with random low quantum noise of the void, but with moving partially entangled particles
      or purely entangle particles that crush on the purely entangled one.
      I want to that Fermilab for explaining what gravity really is!!!
      these guys have relly TOP iq !!!
      ok, the Fermigravity or Entanglogravity is one option,
      we also have chromogravity [MIT about chomatic information shared partially to other particles
      and not only inside one] but some scientists claim
      that both theories are the same mathematically
      entanglogravity is way simpler though [just a different flavour as many claim]

  • @PhysicsHigh
    @PhysicsHigh 6 років тому

    great explanation

  • @MorrisBenton48
    @MorrisBenton48 11 днів тому

    Question: Einstein, with general relativity, replaced "action at a distance" with space curvature defined by massive objects like the sun. What about charge (electric force) or the nuclear force? Is there an equivalent space curvature model for these? Or do we handle these fundamentally different?

  • @flavianomanfis
    @flavianomanfis 5 років тому

    Dear Don Lincoln, could you, please, elaborate on how particle exchange can explain the action of forces? For example, it is easy to see the repulsion as it was demonstrated in this video, but how about the attractive forces, how do we explain with particle exchange? Would the boat have to through a sack away from person on the shore? How does particle conservation apply to this context?

  • @dq405
    @dq405 10 років тому

    Thank you for posting this video.

  • @TirtaLeonardi
    @TirtaLeonardi 3 роки тому

    I have a question, since all things are made of proton neutron electron, and now we know it are based on smaller building blocks explained by the standard model, where do all this particles come from? Can we build these particles, thus we can somewhat create something out of nothing?

  • @Fabian-mu3hq
    @Fabian-mu3hq 5 років тому +1

    And how does antimatter fit in with the Standart modell?

    • @mauriziocobalto5770
      @mauriziocobalto5770 5 років тому +1

      Actually he didnt really make an exhaustive description of the model. On a quick note, each particle has an anti-particle. So we have antiquarks, antielectron (positron) etc etc. Also virtual particles exist as binary + and - particles.

  • @LightDiodeNeal
    @LightDiodeNeal 3 роки тому

    Wow always great to revisit, wow is it that long.
    Thanks Dr Don and the Fermilab-YT-Team, every video is an honour to see, educational and entertaining.
    Will a Lepto-Quark be found ever? :-)
    NEAL

  • @omsingharjit
    @omsingharjit 5 років тому

    where cane I find all 100s types of found sub partials name other then 6 quacks and leptons ???

  • @erickgarcia6494
    @erickgarcia6494 6 років тому

    Where do subatomic particles get the energy to exchange force particles?

  • @jonathanclark5240
    @jonathanclark5240 7 років тому

    Great video! Any recommendations on a good textbook to delve into this more?

  • @akylasali9393
    @akylasali9393 4 роки тому

    Dr. Why Some particles interact higgs field and why others not ?

  • @DavidPhi88
    @DavidPhi88 7 років тому

    Should the quarks, leptons, boson and forces be considered as making up all there is? As in, should they be considered as exhaustively being the building blocks of all reality?

  • @torgranstedt5935
    @torgranstedt5935 4 роки тому +2

    why is no one talking about how Don just firebended on video? What really is going on at fermilab?

  • @scottalbers2518
    @scottalbers2518 7 років тому

    Hi, and I would like to ask: I would like to take a shot at some of the problems presented, but to whom would I send my approach?

  • @MrErneyj
    @MrErneyj 10 років тому

    The example at 6:28 lets me to understand repulsive forces but it doesn't explain attractive forces. Electromagnetism is repulsive for a pair of charges where both are positive or where both are negative, but is an atractive force for a pair os charges where one is positive and the other is negative. Where can I find an example to understand atractive forces?

    • @ZenMasterChip
      @ZenMasterChip 10 років тому

      Interference patterns can create the appearance of movement such that constructive or destructive interference shift the location of the particle by destructive (lower energy) or interfering and cancelling the trailing end of the waves that make up the particle, while simultaneously constructively interfering to create the new front that makes up the particle thus attractive. or by the conjugate of that a repulsive. It's always an interference pattern, waves interacting with waves, whether attractive or repulsive depends upon how the waves combine to create the destructive interference or constructive interference, in relation to the non force particles and forces in play.
      Destructive on the first wave front and Constructive immediately after the falling back edge is repulsive; Constructive ahead of the leading wave front, and destructive on the falling back edge is attractive.
      We only get the real interesting stuff when dealing with higher energy state forces closer to nuclei like in quarks. That's a whole other ball of wax but basically forces have local privileges based on proximity where they are stronger than other forces and what constitutes a higher or lower energy state..
      So, the first paragraph was for one dimension, for another, dealing with conjugate pairs of vectors... we find.
      Positive or negative is also a phase force vector function, with (1 particle being + & the other -) the forces being destructive phase amplitude cancelling conjugates creating an energy well (and thus particles move toward each other, toward the lower energy state), whereas + & + or - & - are phase constructive amplitude additive energy states (and thus particles move away from each other, or toward anywhere but the higher energy states between them. So basically, opposites are real and complex sum of squares conjugates and energy cancelling states, whereas same sign are same space 'real' and 'real' sum of squares complementary energy additive states and particles always seek lowest local energy states anywhere but where the energy is doubled. Plus the first paragraph, with both, a very complex constructive and destructive interference package. Add enough particles, and computers even give up the ghost. :-)

    • @sausagedankerschism
      @sausagedankerschism 8 років тому

      +Chip Cooper thanks, now I have something to study (:

  • @scottnathens6377
    @scottnathens6377 4 роки тому

    Concise. Is the planetary model thingy an appropriate time to mention Rutherford and Bohrs' conceptions (prior knowledge)? At least until 1987?, undergraduate chemistry, physics courses did not mention the SM; and it, of course, made it into no hs texts. Why not?

  • @patmat.
    @patmat. 3 роки тому

    Very clean presentation

  • @adnanbadwan3000
    @adnanbadwan3000 6 років тому

    Only great minds able to simplify

  • @thezenlife65
    @thezenlife65 8 років тому +2

    Cut, lets try that again, That was very funny it made me laugh,
    Nice video as are all your videos, thanks for doing these,
    i really enjoy them.