When I had first thought about treating sound waves as particles (after learning wave-particle duality) I had named them 'Sonons' (after the word 'sonorous') then decided to call the type of particle 'Pseudoparticle' (meaning 'fake particle'). And now I learn this... which is so much better in fact.
3:25 The masses of the particles have to be known, since the motion is SHM. 7:30 Holes are extremely useful when we sturdy semiconductors. One type of material has holes which act as transport for electrons.
incredible video that states so simply and clearly the reasoning behind thinking about these things (without completely disregarding the mathematics). every physics textbook needs this video as a preamble.
It's so cool to see these videos! I am a current student and the topics of these videos are mostly straight from the lecture courses xD You are doing a much better job explaining them than the lecturers for sure!
The coolest physics PhD. I like the simplicity in your explanation. Although, these are very difficult topics, one can get the general concepts from your videos.
this is the best you tube channel i have ever found and i like it especially the Schrodinger equation videos although people assume i cant understand it because i am 12 ,but i like and understand it.
Hey Parth! Can you please discuss something about cooper pairs in superconductors in your next video? And this info on quasiparticles is great. It cleared my doubts. Thanks
Great episode! I love the idea that Light & Sound are both waves. And how the 'Quasi-partical' is misleading because they are just a quantum mechanical description of a type of oscillation.
Thank you very much to describe this quasiparticle phonon in such a nice way. I have read many papers about quantmecanic but not one about a phonon... Chapeau
Hi Partha. Great video as always! I am interested in the scenario when light can only be described as a particle. I believe there is a Nikola Tesla quote, that light must be a sound wave in the aether. I can only think of the photoelectric effect, when light is described as a particle, but I think even this scenario can be thought of as energy transfer from an EM wave discharging into an atom. Also electrons can be thought of as waves, and not particles, since they diffract, they tunnel, and electrical energy is transferred in a wire at the speed of light, and not at the drift velocity of said electron particle. I think that particle physics is just a model, (a good one) but doesn't fully explain the nature of the universe. Interested to know your thoughts on the matter. Pun intended! 😀
Thanks A lot for this. I am studying Metallurgical and Materials Engineering . There was an aspect on Thermal Vibrational Heat capacity! I really didn't understand what a phonon was until I watched this video
This video can be a little misleading. As a result of Quantum Mechanical nature of the atoms in a solid, the energies that lattice vibrations carry are quantized. That is, the energy that these vibrational modes will absorb or give out in a scattering process will be in discrete amounts, just like light waves do. So in analogy to the photon theory, the phonon theory was introduced. A phonon is defined as a quantum of energy carried by a lattice vibrational mode. So in my opinion, the energy quantization is the main reason behind the need to introduce the concept of the "sound quasiparticle" and I just feel like it should have been included in the video.
I understood that quasi particles behave mathematically the same as normal particles. You can even assign quantum properties to them like mass and spin. So... How can we tell that some particles are quasi and some are not? Could it be that particles, of what we think are fundamental, are actually also quasi particles? Could it be that fundamental particles actually don't exist?
we’ve learned over the past few decades that the most (current) fundamental descriptions of particles are excitation of quantum fields (QFT). But to actually answer your question there is no 100% way to guarantee that we’ve ever found the most fundamental particles. we can always conceive of smashing particles at greater and greater energies to see if they have more fundamental particles within them
Me who has been ignoring Parth's second channel, after watching from 0:06 Looks like that channel will be interesting too like this channel.😛 Amazing video again though
one dimensional autocorrelation of a binary string is alone complex as hell. you can have this way particles not only in 2d, 3d, 4d, but in fractional dimensions also if you manage to carve big fractals
So, correct me if I am wrong, we know that photons act as transverse waves and now phonons act as longitudinal waves because they are sound like waves?
Hello, I was wondering if you could help me with a personal problem I am experiencing with ‘moving particles’ causing words to form in in my auridotry system
If sound is composed of its own particles then how do objects each have a specific sound frequency that the object responds to? Is this just a frequency of sound particles that the objects particles is most sensitive too or does the object itself actually have its own sound particles?
What?! I looked at the Wikipedia list of cuasi-particles and there is no "thalasson" yet? How can oceanographers be so backwards?! What about metereologists: do they have their own atmospheric quasi-particle?, how is it (or should be) named?
5:31 hahahahahaha i am from chile, and my english is not very good but you have and exelent pronunsation and i understand almost all.. Thank you very nuch.
A quasiparticle is more like an excitation that can be measured with lab tools, but a virtual particle is more like a mathematical object, which cannot be experimentally measured at an instant.
So it's basically the "quantification" part of "quantum physics" as in they are labelling a unit of energy so they can use those measurements in math. It's not necessarily a real thing, it's just kind of like Farenheit vs Kelvin. They not saying that sound is made of particles, they saying lets treat sound waves as a particle for the sake of the math equations.
I kept waiting for you to mention that the movement of the hole is what's called current, and that it's measuring this which gives us the base unit related to electricity in SI. You should maybe do a video exploring how poorly thought out the SI system really is (granted it's mostly due to historical convention established well before a deep understanding was available, so I'm not faulting the originators of the units and ideas that led to these issues, but it's somewhat troublesome to have this blatant issue at the heart of science when science is so proudly touted as allegedly differing from other human pursuits by virtue of changing when provided evidence that it should change). Might even need to be a series. You have things like the mole just being a number but called a unit. The fact that number (Avogadro's) was recently defined but has absolutely no pleasant properties, like you can't even divide it by 3 let alone most other common numbers, it's not a perfect square, nor a perfect cube, etc. The coulomb is not a physically realizable unit. mass and energy are the same, but the gram is not the base unit of either. etc.
Can I ask if you know anyone studying the noise of recreational pickleball and any physics based protocols for measuring or modeling the sounds?? Grateful for any suggestions.
When electricity was discovered electrons were unknown. So holes are how electricty is seen to flow i.e. positive holes aka conventional flow/conventional current. Actual electron flow how it really happens is the opposite. But in electronics we're stuck with conventional flow not electron flow.
Does an accelerating reference frame reduce the chance that a particle is going to be Derrida (genuine question)? - i.e does gravity break entanglement (even if maybe it creates entanglement in others ways)?
What do think about specific frenquecies vibration that can move or cut hard materials? Basically Tesla discoveries that everybody laugh at again today but seems pretty ledgit to me. Vibration that can reorganize our body particles at a deeper level.
gravitons (if are actually experimentally verified) are meant to be real particles. they are meant to be a quantified particle of the gravitational force, just like every other force. However we know that gravity is really a fictitious force and does not act the same as the other forces. All this to say: no, they are not quasiparticles
Imagining getting tested on this in an election for ipho representatives as a high school student.(findind the heat capacity of phonons and approximate that T~0 and get the T^3 law
He didn’t include it in the video, but normally in this context there is an external voltage applied to the system that make the electrons (or the hole) move from one end to the other, typically in the context of transistors
Also just due to random fluctuations at non-zero temperatures/even at 0 K. If an electron is allowed to be in a certain state, there is a finite chance it will jump to it. When another electron sat there it wasn't allowed due to Pauli exclusion, but once there's a gap, it has a probability of jumping to the location
If I understand particle sound, it can’t represent energy spreading as it propagate in a 3D space with an inverse squared law. Will particle energy dilute in 3D space as it propagate?
Today, I'm lucky to find this amazing channel!
Lucky girl😉
Yes true
Instablaster...
When I had first thought about treating sound waves as particles (after learning wave-particle duality) I had named them 'Sonons' (after the word 'sonorous') then decided to call the type of particle 'Pseudoparticle' (meaning 'fake particle'). And now I learn this... which is so much better in fact.
3:25 The masses of the particles have to be known, since the motion is SHM.
7:30 Holes are extremely useful when we sturdy semiconductors. One type of material has holes which act as transport for electrons.
incredible video that states so simply and clearly the reasoning behind thinking about these things (without completely disregarding the mathematics). every physics textbook needs this video as a preamble.
It's so cool to see these videos! I am a current student and the topics of these videos are mostly straight from the lecture courses xD You are doing a much better job explaining them than the lecturers for sure!
What a fantastic video. I have joined research team looking into phonons and this helped a ton. Thanks so much, Parth!
A very smart guy and very well explained! I will show this to my students!
The coolest physics PhD. I like the simplicity in your explanation. Although, these are very difficult topics, one can get the general concepts from your videos.
I thought he had a masters not phd
this is the best you tube channel i have ever found and i like it especially the Schrodinger equation videos although people assume i cant understand it because i am 12 ,but i like and understand it.
Well I really don’t understand what you just said
Hey Parth! Can you please discuss something about cooper pairs in superconductors in your next video?
And this info on quasiparticles is great. It cleared my doubts.
Thanks
Such a simplified manner of explanation makes me feel doubtful, when people claim that Physics is hard. Well done 👍
Dude, you seriously deserve more subscribers. Your channel is awesome and I wish I had found it earlier
Im not even interested in physics but your voice is so calming and engaging.
Que vídeo fantástico!!! Sua didática é INCRÍVEL! Abriu um horizonte inteiro na minha mente
Man you seriously deserve millions of subscriber...
You are way good at what you do.
Great episode! I love the idea that Light & Sound are both waves. And how the 'Quasi-partical' is misleading because they are just a quantum mechanical description of a type of oscillation.
Thank you very much to describe this quasiparticle phonon in such a nice way. I have read many papers about quantmecanic but not one about a phonon... Chapeau
Great Video, finally someone whos honest about physicists making up alot of stuff they canot explain, but still being very informative and funny. Thx
This video is amazing and helped me after hours of searching the internet and finding nothing clear. thank you so much!
Wow I literally did a whole course on solid state physics in year 2 uni and didn't fully understand it until now! TYSM Parth my G
I always wondered what are phonons while studying BCS theory of superconductivity.... Now I understood 🤩
Please make a video on Dirac equation please plz please please.🙏🏻
That's a good idea
Agree!!!!!!!!
Yes I also want
Yes and Drake equation too..
Please Please Please Please Please Discord server
That will be very useful
It's a really great video, thank you for the simplification!
I just realized Parth released this video on my birthday haha. Cool!
Hi Partha. Great video as always! I am interested in the scenario when light can only be described as a particle. I believe there is a Nikola Tesla quote, that light must be a sound wave in the aether. I can only think of the photoelectric effect, when light is described as a particle, but I think even this scenario can be thought of as energy transfer from an EM wave discharging into an atom. Also electrons can be thought of as waves, and not particles, since they diffract, they tunnel, and electrical energy is transferred in a wire at the speed of light, and not at the drift velocity of said electron particle. I think that particle physics is just a model, (a good one) but doesn't fully explain the nature of the universe. Interested to know your thoughts on the matter. Pun intended! 😀
Dude, so good, u make it "sound" so easy, gonna share before getting into more complicated mathematics wiith my children:)
Sir your videos are very cool, thank u for such simplified pictures of physics. Ardent fan 💪
Great video man! Very informative
Thanks A lot for this. I am studying Metallurgical and Materials Engineering . There was an aspect on Thermal Vibrational Heat capacity! I really didn't understand what a phonon was until I watched this video
This video can be a little misleading. As a result of Quantum Mechanical nature of the atoms in a solid, the energies that lattice vibrations carry are quantized. That is, the energy that these vibrational modes will absorb or give out in a scattering process will be in discrete amounts, just like light waves do. So in analogy to the photon theory, the phonon theory was introduced. A phonon is defined as a quantum of energy carried by a lattice vibrational mode.
So in my opinion, the energy quantization is the main reason behind the need to introduce the concept of the "sound quasiparticle" and I just feel like it should have been included in the video.
hey you are doing great , love your videos
Well explained. Thank you.
Nice and Clear Exposé 👍👌👏👏
Awesome Sir, Stay Blessed
Nice video Parth keep doing that
What's the "background" in simple terms ?
More videos about quasiparticles 🙏🏼, there are few videos about them and I found them astonishing
very clear, thank you!
Thanks so much for the video and info.
Have a great Day All Good People
All good excellent explanatiom. Kudos! But phonon vre ornio, comes from the Greek word “Phoni” that means voice. Micro-phone, tele-phone, etc.
You should have 1 billion subs
Very interesting stuff with well explanation 👌👌
really enjoyed your video 😌
I got to admit, i watched that intro dance of yours like 10 times before finishing the video
Yo. Can you make a video on Antimatter? Btw very nice video full of very good information.
From 0:7 seconds to 0:14 seconds was something cool...
Plus point to my prior knowledge, so much new realisation
I understood that quasi particles behave mathematically the same as normal particles. You can even assign quantum properties to them like mass and spin.
So... How can we tell that some particles are quasi and some are not? Could it be that particles, of what we think are fundamental, are actually also quasi particles? Could it be that fundamental particles actually don't exist?
we’ve learned over the past few decades that the most (current) fundamental descriptions of particles are excitation of quantum fields (QFT).
But to actually answer your question there is no 100% way to guarantee that we’ve ever found the most fundamental particles. we can always conceive of smashing particles at greater and greater energies to see if they have more fundamental particles within them
Me who has been ignoring Parth's second channel, after watching from 0:06
Looks like that channel will be interesting too like this channel.😛
Amazing video again though
one dimensional autocorrelation of a binary string is alone complex as hell. you can have this way particles not only in 2d, 3d, 4d, but in fractional dimensions also if you manage to carve big fractals
amazing, i don't study physics and i liked this a lot
hello... I wonder if phonons affect the polarity of the nanoparticles? do you have any data about this?
So, correct me if I am wrong, we know that photons act as transverse waves and now phonons act as longitudinal waves because they are sound like waves?
Nice. I personally maintain that photons are quasiparticles and still hold a Newtonian approach. But that's another topic.
Hello, I was wondering if you could help me with a personal problem I am experiencing with ‘moving particles’ causing words to form in in my auridotry system
Really very good!
Came to this after reading the Physics World mini article on Quantum Computing phonons.
Thanks man , it really helped me
If sound is composed of its own particles then how do objects each have a specific sound frequency that the object responds to? Is this just a frequency of sound particles that the objects particles is most sensitive too or does the object itself actually have its own sound particles?
What?! I looked at the Wikipedia list of cuasi-particles and there is no "thalasson" yet? How can oceanographers be so backwards?!
What about metereologists: do they have their own atmospheric quasi-particle?, how is it (or should be) named?
5:31 hahahahahaha i am from chile, and my english is not very good but you have and exelent pronunsation and i understand almost all.. Thank you very nuch.
What is the difference between quasi-particles and virtual particles?
A quasiparticle is more like an excitation that can be measured with lab tools, but a virtual particle is more like a mathematical object, which cannot be experimentally measured at an instant.
man... that was a solid explanation... no pun intended...
So it's basically the "quantification" part of "quantum physics" as in they are labelling a unit of energy so they can use those measurements in math. It's not necessarily a real thing, it's just kind of like Farenheit vs Kelvin. They not saying that sound is made of particles, they saying lets treat sound waves as a particle for the sake of the math equations.
Amazing, do you tell name of software u use for making presentation
I kept waiting for you to mention that the movement of the hole is what's called current, and that it's measuring this which gives us the base unit related to electricity in SI.
You should maybe do a video exploring how poorly thought out the SI system really is (granted it's mostly due to historical convention established well before a deep understanding was available, so I'm not faulting the originators of the units and ideas that led to these issues, but it's somewhat troublesome to have this blatant issue at the heart of science when science is so proudly touted as allegedly differing from other human pursuits by virtue of changing when provided evidence that it should change). Might even need to be a series. You have things like the mole just being a number but called a unit. The fact that number (Avogadro's) was recently defined but has absolutely no pleasant properties, like you can't even divide it by 3 let alone most other common numbers, it's not a perfect square, nor a perfect cube, etc. The coulomb is not a physically realizable unit. mass and energy are the same, but the gram is not the base unit of either. etc.
A Parth. A quasivideo. A simplification of complex videos.
Great and simple explanation! Which are some good references to study phonons? (I'm quite familiar with the wave background - Bloch's theorem, etc.)
nice explanation. ty
Is electric current a quasielectron movement or actual electron movement? :)
Can I ask if you know anyone studying the noise of recreational pickleball and any physics based protocols for measuring or modeling the sounds?? Grateful for any suggestions.
More on this please!
This is a good one.
Didn't see that coming!
6:31- The real physics.
your explication about holes remind-me of classes on pmos devices xD
amazing video
When electricity was discovered electrons were unknown. So holes are how electricty is seen to flow i.e. positive holes aka conventional flow/conventional current. Actual electron flow how it really happens is the opposite. But in electronics we're stuck with conventional flow not electron flow.
Does an accelerating reference frame reduce the chance that a particle is going to be Derrida (genuine question)? - i.e does gravity break entanglement (even if maybe it creates entanglement in others ways)?
Fantastic explanation. So clear!
PS- It just dawned on me. Could light waves be quasi-waves? Just a thought.
Honestly, Parth, ten years from now you will be a mainstream figure like Professor Brian Cox.
Yep can't wait.
please make a video
About General relativity vs quantum physicd
What is the name of the song in the background?
With which particles fragrance is made or fragrance is wave
Rhinons!
What do think about specific frenquecies vibration that can move or cut hard materials? Basically Tesla discoveries that everybody laugh at again today but seems pretty ledgit to me.
Vibration that can reorganize our body particles at a deeper level.
Really nice content
Are gravitons quasiparticles as well?
gravitons (if are actually experimentally verified) are meant to be real particles. they are meant to be a quantified particle of the gravitational force, just like every other force. However we know that gravity is really a fictitious force and does not act the same as the other forces. All this to say: no, they are not quasiparticles
Thanks for sharing such knowledge. Actually I want to know which editing app. Or software you use in your videos. I like it ....
So Good
Is the photon a quasiparticle ?
big up and do contineu to share:)
Plz make video on Dirac equation Feynman diagrams and Einstein feild equations
which app do you use for video production?
Interesting.
Imagining getting tested on this in an election for ipho representatives as a high school student.(findind the heat capacity of phonons and approximate that T~0 and get the T^3 law
Why does an electron from nearby atom needs to fill it's nearby vacancy?
He didn’t include it in the video, but normally in this context there is an external voltage applied to the system that make the electrons (or the hole) move from one end to the other, typically in the context of transistors
Also just due to random fluctuations at non-zero temperatures/even at 0 K. If an electron is allowed to be in a certain state, there is a finite chance it will jump to it. When another electron sat there it wasn't allowed due to Pauli exclusion, but once there's a gap, it has a probability of jumping to the location
If I understand particle sound, it can’t represent energy spreading as it propagate in a 3D space with an inverse squared law. Will particle energy dilute in 3D space as it propagate?
You could think of it as multiple particles that get less dense as they spread out and get further away.
Plesse make a video about space time
I love physics. You get to think of everything in particles. Go into biology and say that we’re just particles and people panic
please make a video on how to become a mathematical physicist pls pls pls pls
1. Practice maths
2. Practice physics
3. Profit