32 Subatomic Stories: Is supersymmetry real? 

That t-shirt was a super touch.

Don must be walking the thin line to be precise enough to not to upset fellow scientists, but say it in such a way so we could still understand the concept, good job!

"I don't believe in string theory, but I like it and hope is right". Oh if we could hear things like this from politicians...

Hi Doctor Lincoln. I just want to wish you a good day.

I discovered these videos yesterday and it's instantly one of my physics playlist mainstays. Dr. Don has an excellent calming way of wading through these complex concepts and always has a little dad joke for us. Thank you for sharing your knowledge!

Just realised this is the only youtube channel that I've watched every single episode within 24 hours of its release - (normally it's within a few minutes). Great stuff Dr Don. Many thanks

Wow! These episodes just keep getting better!

Keep these videos comming on Don! love your geek sense of humor 🤓👍

This episode was particularly good, and the questions were especially good one's. No kidding, that equation was scary. The "family tree" of the forces was the most useful depiction I've seen. I loved the reference to dark matter and dark energy to epicycles. Hadn't thought of that analogy specifically, but I felt the same way and have had ongoing debate with my son for the last six years on the subject. He has no issue with Dark Matter simply being an accepted "thing". But then again, he also thinks there are only 8 planets, and all of us adults know there are nine. Kids. Long live Pluto.

I appreciate that you keep an open mind even to those theories that do not appeal to you.

Theres one thing I don't understand. When Gravity is "not a force" but curvature of spacetime, why are scientist searching a Graviton particle?

The absolutely best thing about the new format is always spending half to two -thirds of your time answering the questions about last week’s lesson! ✊🤓💜

I knew that you were Superman, Don

Always look forward to & enjoy Dr. Don's weekly videos, even if, most of the time, I don't understand or comprehend the matter of the discussion! 👍👍😉😉

Don speaks with such clarity, he's a joy to learn from.

Thanks Doctor Lincoln, amusing and informative as usual. Keep up the good work.

Thanks for these cool videos!

Is it possible that the apparent 'weakness' of gravity is due to it not being a direct matter-matter interaction, but it being instead a matter-spacetime interaction? If so, the effect of matter on spacetime would be modulated by the 'stiffness' of the metric, and the apparent effect of matter-matter interactions would be due to the 'distortion shadow' of separated masses acting on other masses. If the fabric of spacetime is very stiff, the effect of aggregations of matter upon it become very small, since the force is drastically reduced by the intervening step.

" its possible, and we continue to look for it..." spoken like a true scientist despite personal feelings about a theory

Einstein : "go crazy" Accomplishments 100 years later :

Idea - If the candidate equation is large its an indication its a checksum in text in equation form. Vunrable things need proven checksums. Idea2 - You must classify the forces within its surroundings. Assume everything are functions with coefficients then it will sample it surroundings and adapt accordingly. That is, change its coeffs.

I love how much brow furrowing Dr. Don is doing in this video. His skepticism is written all over his forehead

Very good questions this episode

Thank you, Dr. Lincoln.

First, Dr. Lincoln, thanks for always having a smile at the intro to the show, the intro to the viewer questions, and the outro. I admit, it's contagious. Second, in follow-up to the question at 7:34 -- Wouldn't a group of flatlanders in a 3D world (let's call them "spherelanders") record a smaller intrinsic force than the spherelanders for any given force? If the flatlanders are somehow bound up in a plane and forbidden from being lifted out of that plane in a third-dimensional direction, it seems like they wouldn't experience any of the force moving in a three-dimensional way, i.e. if I'm a spherelander stationed above the Earth's equator, I'm being pulled on by the Earth at the equator, but also by the mass of the Earth located in North America and South America (I'm over the western hemisphere for this example). If anything, the force would only exert a pressure on the whole plane (or at least the local area), but it seems like that ought to be uniformly distributed over the flatlander's observable space and so cancels out. The mass of the continents above and below the equator doesn't exist as far as the flatlander is concerned, so wouldn't they record a smaller gravitational pull which would be consistent with a 1/r reduction in strength as the force propagates out from the source of the force?

Hi Don, I read that the information in a system is proportional to area rather than volume, and that this means the universe is holographic. Will you do an episode on this?

Thank you so much for another fantastic video. Really appreciate you giving some insight into the reason why extra dimensions are being considered for the unification of the forces. One thing that has always perplexed me about black holes. I have heard that if you could look backwards as you fall into a black hole, you will see time speed up behind you as you fall into the compressed time/space interface before the event horizon. If that is the case, wouldn't someone from the outside just see you slow down and then stop altogether before you fall in? How does a black hole actually move in space, if directly around it is a slither of space/time that has effected stopped in some kind of weird time stasis? Obviously I am mistaken but I cannot see the way out, it is like I am stuck in that field right now! OMG!

What leads to the prediction that the Higgs Boson should be much more massive than observed?

My Positron Collider wasn’t calibrated correctly and the manual didn’t help; to get it to work, I had to come up with a new equation. Here it is: Fermions and Bosons living together = Mass Higgsteria! I ain’t afraid of bad jokes.

I think someone should never take off his glasses or we may discover his secret identity. 😊

If Einstein is 100% correct about gravity and it's purely the curvature of Space Time, would this totally rule out gravitons and make a theory of everything even more improbable? I wish more people (outside my influence) would watch your videos. Listening to you saying we shouldn't dismiss something just because we don't like it (until proven or disproven of course) is a breath of fresh air.

Hi Don, love the show, keep up the good work! I have a question if I may? You mentioned in comment responses that gravity travels at the speed of light, but that makes me wonder, how does gravity from inside a black hole near the central singularity climb the gravity well to escape when light in the same position cannot? How can the space next to singularity tell the space further out "I'm more curved than you" when that information needs to travel faster than light to get there? Does that imply there a maximum amount space can be curved? Could black holes be smooth inside and look the same from the outside? I'm confused!

THANK YOU... PROFESSOR LINCOLN...!!!

Dr Don for me is Professor Don! It's time you promote ;-) Thank you for another interesting video! The Subatomic Stories are excellent.

Symmetry is like a spice. Useful in small quantities. Harmful in large quantities. Supersymmetry is all-spice-no-food. It's a "wouldn't it be cool if"-type of theory with little to no purpose or data behind it.

You pointed out that gravity waves and light arrived 1.7 seconds apart from an event that occurred 130 million light years apart. Do we have any idea why there was any difference at all between these events?

Sir, since space and energy (due to GTR) affect each other can they be same things like energy and mass. Are they same things with different manifestation because quantum fluctuations are everywhere in space???

12:05 iirc Copernicus's heliocentric model still utilized epicycles, so we didn't get rid of epicycles until we started to figure out ellipses in astronomy.

When are you going to discuss "Super Asymmetry?" Don't forget, Sheldon, with some minor help from Amy, won a Nobel Prize for that theory. In fact, it was so ground breaking that he won it less than a year after it was published.

Hi, after watching your video about the big bang recently. I cannot help but ask your opinion. It is my understanding that the Higgs fields density changes (although what causes it to change alludes me). As the fields density is (thankfully) currently at a level where it allows for complex matter to exist, could it be the case that the Higgs field changed at the time where big band occurred, allowing interactions between matter to occur?

11:47 "He was right...again!". 😄

why is that equation sooo big? i mean imagine someone actually understanding every part of it. thanks a lot for explaining it like that. it felt comprehensible.

More!!

Dr. Lincoln, Would you please speak about the frame dragging and what maybe happening in the realm of subatomic world? Can be frame dragging so extreme that exceeds the surrounding light speed? (e.g.: rotating black hole...) What happening inside a particles when they are accelerating? It seems particles are defining the local reality and gives reference to space... Without particles the 3 dimensional space could not be interpreted and probably it would collapse to singularity? This would be the decay of the void? The end of the universe would end not with the evaporation of the black holes but the collapse of the void between them?

Always fun in an absolute sense. Definitely more fun that watching bad football. Thanks, Dr. Don.

The more I watch this series, the more I like it :D

Hi Dr. Don!....In standard model of particle physics their are carrier particles for all the fundamental forces except gravity (graviton)...hypothetical...but my question is that how particles are responsible for any force to act...?? Like Electromagnetic force due to photon ?? How..?

Why does the strong force increase with distance? You explained earlier in the video how a force like gravity 'spreads out' over space and thus becomes weaker with distance.

I have a question that I have been wondering about for some time ... If, to calculate the corrections to the S matrix, we have to consider all possible Feynman diagrams, that is, we consider all SM interactions, even if we want to calculate the electron-electron interaction that does not have a color charge, we could calculate the same interaction without strong force and compare the results, this way we would get some information about strong force. So the question is: could we use this method to predict new forces, and if so, did such theories arise?

The news media loves theoretical physics news. Is there a reliable place to find news on experimental findings?

Your views on Conformal Cyclic Cosmology, please!

Early helocentric models, including Copernicus's, actually still needed epicycles. They weren't proven unnceccesary until Kepler showed that the orbits of the planets are ellipses, not circles as everyone before him had assumed.

Some have proposed that a proton can decay. How could that happen and how might we detect it?

Hi Dr.Lincoln , can u explain why only certain physical quantities exhibit symmetry and conservation and not all? Does the fundamental forces play vital role in it?

Could you explain more on super unification please sorry about all of questions?

1:50 😱

Doc Don's favorite music genre QEDM i know its bad.. but i tried anyway 😶

Suppose we found that frequency affected the speed of light. Would that mean that the speed of gamma rays would be relative like other velocities? Would they have a rest frame? And would they have mass?

Hi, Don, I have a question. The tl;dr of it is "Is there any principled difference between matter and anti-matter?" but I'll try to make it more precise. I'll start by recalling some stuff you know just so we're on the same page: When you represent a particle under the standard model, you often represent it as an irrep that is operated on by matrices etc. If you transpose that irrep, swapping rows and columns, you get a representation of the corresponding antiparticle. Is there any basis for saying that the conventionally normal particles (electrons, quarks etc) are the One True Set of column-wise particles while conventional antiparticles are the natural row-wise ones? If for some reason I represented a mixed bunch (say positrons and quarks) all column-wise, would any difficulties arise?

I have a question about the answer to a question: If the higgs field dissapears at higher energy, is there another particular field it unifies with at that point like the weak and electromagnetic fields do at high temperatures?

"A theory that was crazy popular a little over a decade ago" makes it sound so long ago and yet I feel like all the hype was just last week.

it would have been neat if after 9:00 it showed an example of e.g. with 1 large dimension and one small dimension, and showed how the apparent force varied with distance in that case. If the whole thing is like a tube where the circumference around it is l, and the distance from the thing is R, the set of points with distance R away, for large enough R, should be 4R arcsine(l/(2R)) I think. Which, for R larger compared to l , should be approximately constant, just like in the 1 dimensional case. (and so dividing by it should also be approximately constant, just like the 1 dimensional case). I don't know if the "the measure of the region a given distance away" thing still works out quite the same with the small dimensions though? Uh, I guess the question is whether the flux through the boundary, uh, if the field strength is perpendicular to the boundary everywhere on the boundary? and, I guess, it probably would be? Ok yeah, I think that makes sense? And so, as R goes to infinity, this would result in the apparent force approaching (intrinsic force)/(2l) I think? I'm not sure though. Can someone who knows what they're talking about confirm?

I like and respect the frank talk this teacher have.

Does the Scharnhorst Effect explain why gravity waves arrived slightly before gamma rays?

Why are galaxies with little dark matter always small and super diffuse? Or are they diffuse because they have little dark matter? How do you know which is the chicken and which is the egg?

3;38 What are the issues with the Higgs boson?

Good

Hi, Don!! great episode as usual!! You say that dark matter could be or not the explanation for extra gravity measurements, but it seems dark energy is real. But we allways see energy going through space, gravity bends space, and expansion has to do with stretching or creation of space, because galaxies don´t move, it´s space in beetween which increases, so, what does dark energy do? create space ? or stretch an existing space? where does that energy come from? if there´s no space before exist new space, or if stretches space, is creating distance, so it´s new space, but if it´s not an energy that pushes matter like the others, is like another kind of energy never seen? Have been observed any kind of particle in the vacum or space that can create or stretch space? can we call it energy something that creates space? It´s the same which created space for the first time? Space is Expanding from the begging of universe, why dark energy only in this stage? Don: total thanks!!!

Hi Dr. Lincoln, Do you mind to please explain why putting a high potential electric field across a cloud chamber produces more visible particle tracks than without the field? There are differing explanations floating around for this, but nothing very clear and certainly no consensus. Thanks.

First, a joke from the late eighties: "Yes, they have found a fifth force. However, there's a sixth forced that exactly cancels it out." Why should we expect gravity to unify with the other forces? Gravitons are spin-2, while the others (except the Higgs) are spin-1. Surely that doesn't change at any energy scale. Or is everything just supposed to be linked by supersymmetry, like in the old supergravity theories?

Don, i'm super sorry to sound dumb with this question, but, which "type" of energy that you talk about in the case of the lhc? Is it kinectic energy? If it is, is that the same type of energy that is used to plot the (energy x force strength) on gut and toe?

If there are extra dimensions that a force can project into, then for that force spacetime takes on the characteristics of a _sponge,_ that soaks up some of that force. Or you could compare the effect of the extra dimensions as a kind of viscosity that applies to a force's magnitude.

Oh wow! It wasn't my comment that was answered, but I had that same question about gravity's strength re other forces

Is the group of possible supyersymmetry permutations finite?

Yes, I do like this series. Even though I understand about 20% of it.

Could you explain more on susy doesn't explain why Higgs boson mass is so low please ?

Is it possible that the Higgs field could have multiple "frequencies?" that seperate matter from interacting or is this simply what could be called another universe in the same space ( not sure how to ask what I'm thinking )

please explain what is the Higgs branch and Coulomb branch and what are their significances. thanks

As the lightest predicted supersymmetric particles failed to materialize so far, there is some talk about building scaled up colliders to hunt them down. Sabine Hossenfelder mentioned in one of her commentaries, that the Standard Model does not predict any new particles for the next 15 or so orders of magnitude, and thus it is quite doubtful if it pays to build colliders with even higher energies than the LHC. Could you elaborate on that?

I heard in some models of string theory where universe decays; susy is not needed. Is that right.

At least this time! I already asked question wether the space time expansion and space time falling into singularity has same reason because both singularity and regions outside universe don't have space time?

Question, in Multiverse theory’s - what are the multiverse in (higher dimension) called - Hyperspace or something else.

I recommend everyone read Rovelli’s books. Theyre fantastic

You answered a question if dark matter might be epicycles. What about the Standard Model of particle physics?

Hi Don, how often do you questions Einstein’s theories?

Is there any way to know or quantify if a phonton(light) has passed you

Transparent matter, wouldn't be a better name for dark matter (since it doesn't interact via electromagnetism)?

Question: New evidence of Sir Roger Penrose hypothesis of reciprocating universe. Would this answer a lot of the questions about an eternal Universe?

Gravity manifests as a pseudoforce within the context of GR. It would be funny if it turned out, eventually, that all forces, when unified are pseudoforces. It appears very much like an electron in an orbital is just following a geodesic of a different kind.

Q: If the W and Z bosons are the result of a neutron decaying process, why and how are they more massive than an iron nucleus? Where the energy for their mass come from?

Hi Don.. think u said in the previous video that the temperatures in the collision of the LHC are so high that it mimics the instant right after the big bang.. how come we might need even higher energy to discover new things? I'd say that if we are at the big bang level we reached the pinnacle, no? 😁

Can you talk about grand unified theories? Quantum gravity is a tough problem, so is there even evidence or just good indication that the strong and electroweak can unify?

Dr. Don, what would a universe without antimatter look like? Would there be more planets and stars?

I am now contemplating how long it will take me to learn what I need to know to understand how that ginormous formula works.

How does the strong force keep hadrons together and what would the colors be of a hadron with more than 3 quarks?

When black hole is feeding it's gravity speeds up particles to immense speeds thus giving them energy what will become extreme thermal energy when this matter colide with singularity, so if at higher temperatures forces are uniting gravity, strong, week and electromagnetic they should all became a single force at that time what binds singularity together despite its almost infinite temperature.

Sir the weak force is limited because it’s force carriers have mass does this means that the the strong force must also have mass

Well, if I had to choose a more fitting analogy for the way Dark Matter is going down in physics' history it'd be the way of Luminiferous Aether rather than the one of the Epicycle...But then again, both of them got shaved away by Occam's Razor.

All I can say about SUSY is this - no "selectron" has ever been found. The LHC can produce center-of-mass energies in the TeV range - millions of times the electron's rest-mass energy of 0.511 MeV, yet no selectrons.....

If we have measured the force of gravity to drop at a ratio of 1/r2, this may imply that there are only 3 dimensions, but could this just be a limit of our measuring? Could it be that the force drops at a ratio of 1/r3 but that we just can't measure the impact of the additional factor?