The Shrinking Proton - Sixty Symbols

Подписаться 887 тыс.

Просмотров 196 тыс.

50% 1

The proton may be smaller than we thought. Our experts explain why this could be a really big deal for physics. More videos at www.sixtysymbol...
With Tony Padilla, Laurence Eaves and Ed Copeland
Follow us on Twitter at / periodicvideos
Or on Facebook at / 10150109085555564

Опубликовано:

4 окт 2024

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист

Посмотреть позже

Комментарии : 352

@At0mix 3 года назад

Update: Multiple new experiments using different methods found values of ~0.83 fm, with uncertainties around 0.01 fm. The majority of physicists now believe the lower value of ~0.83 to 0.84 fm to be the correct one. However, we don't yet know why the old value of ~0.87 was off by so much, but there's multiple promising theories that are being tested.

@mastershooter64 2 года назад

So the standard model does predict a slightly different proton size??

@lPlanetarizado 2 года назад

it seems there is something going on with muons? im talking about this experiments, and the recent ones

@PointyTailofSatan 9 лет назад

If you had looked more closely, you would have seen the "dry clean only" tag, and avoided this whole mess.

@expirydate2000 9 лет назад

+PointyTailofSatan For the win! :-)

@michaelsheffield6852 9 лет назад

It has been five years any updates on this topic.

@michaelsheffield6852 8 лет назад

Thank you

@scottlampe70 5 лет назад

@@michaelsheffield6852 it has been three years, any updates on this question?

@ozzyzee1770 5 лет назад

It has been one month, any developments in this area?

@888legends 5 лет назад

@@ozzyzee1770 well theres that vid where theyve detected how extremely round electrons are. not very photon related but it seems the boys at the lab really got a nice and tiny ruler thats doing its job. hopefully. still i hope some one updates this post in the following months or years.

@sillysausage4549 4 года назад

I'm 4% heavier than when this video was made.

@stumbling 9 лет назад

If Mt. Everest shrank by 4% it would lose 354 m.

@frankharr9466 7 лет назад

354 m= 1,160 ft. or 397 yd. or 17.2 ch. or 17 ch. 13 yd., 194 ftm., 5.53 out-thaba or 5 out-thaba 19 lan, 8.85 sen or 8 sen 68 sok, 953 chek, 1,170 chhioh and 3.25 cho or 3 cho 15 ken/hiro. I just enjoy doing that. But you're right. I'm surprise that it it wasn't caught during filming.

@frankcowan6625 7 лет назад

If you know it's obviously not a totally though out question in reference to the size difference in 4% of a thing...... Stfu

@harishjain2612 6 лет назад

and it would be the 5th tallest mountain then

@PersimmonHurmo 6 лет назад

But it did not... Atoms did not shrink

@miriamgonczarska613 5 лет назад

I was thinking about it too, but even shrinking or mistake of 354 m. would be easier to explain then this difference.

@Inertia888 6 лет назад

I'm tryiing so hard to understand the standard model and I wish you wouldn't say that the proton "got smaller", when I am sure that is has been the same relative size to everything else as is has been all along. I think instead we should make sure to say that the proton is not the size that we "thought it was" ... either way, these videos are great and I do enjoy. This does help me to understand my world. There are many people like me who have not been to university and are building an understanding of the world in our minds. Thank you.

@Arycke Год назад

When the professors says "it shrunk " or "got smaller in size ," contextually they do not literally mean that the proton actually isn't getting smaller. The news articles, and title of the video, are just for click bait.

@sixtysymbols 14 лет назад

@jonz94 Hi there... I'm assuming you didn't keep watching to 3:24 then, when he makes that exact point!?

10 лет назад

3:21 not sure why but I couldn't keep myself from laughing after he said quantum mechannus

@penguinellis 9 лет назад

It would be nice if they could keep a tau lepton around long enough to see if it would still get 4%... love the videos!

@andrewbeck7763 8 лет назад

have scientists tried to include the gravitational force between the muon and proton in their equations? I know gravity is normally insignificant in chemistry, but these masses seem to be much larger than normal

@LukePalmer 9 лет назад

So, I'm curious/confused -- if the energy levels of a hydrogen atom depend on the size of the proton, why did we need to use a muon to detect it? Wouldn't the regular hydrogen atom with its regular electron already have showed this discrepancy?

@acronis011 9 лет назад

+Luke Palmer I thought the same, but i think as the muon is heavier it needs much more energy to be brought up to the next energy level, so when it emitts its energy you can detect the difference more accurately, because it will be a bigger amount as before with the electrons. Sp I think you could do the same with electrons, but you dont have the devices to measure the diffferences of so small values.

@unbreakablefootage 11 лет назад

Very relaxing video. I really liked the sunny background.

@ArtForSwans 14 лет назад

You know you're a total geek when you stay up until 4:30 in the morning watching these videos I am such a person. :D I'm also really tired.

@zwz.zdenek 10 лет назад

6:40 - The crane in the back or the lamp is tilted. Perhaps both.

@teppo9585 6 лет назад

Also, the stairs behind the dude are white. Perhaps greyish.

@ObjectsInMotion 6 лет назад

The earth is curved! Darned flat earthers with their conspiracy theories, not everything is tilted!

@sixtysymbols 14 лет назад

@Xoder83 Good point - but if I'd thought of that on the spur of the moment no-one would ever believe my questions weren't scripted! :)

@Stokie09123 11 лет назад

To be honest with you, I think the point of the analogy was to prove to viewers that this is a rather substantial change, not one that should be ignored or discounted. Brady's a knowledgeable chap, and I'm sure it was made with the best of intentions to perhaps put the issue into context with something more "worldly".

@Abnormalized 14 лет назад

Cool topic! I would have liked to hear more theories about what could be responsible for the difference.

@rickrose5377 5 лет назад

What is not explained here is what the implications of this result are if it is true. What difference does it make if the proton is 4% smaller? Is this just a more precise measurement, or does it have theoretical implications?

@docsharp00 13 лет назад

I'm really a fan of your videos!!! when I start watching them, I can't stop!!!

@trajtemberg 9 лет назад

Any update on this?

@3LLT33 9 лет назад

Wait, I want to hear more about this hydrogen atom made with a muon.

@nmarbletoe8210 7 лет назад

too bad the muon isn't stable or we could have muonic hydrogen, muonic starch, muonic gatorade...

@Gungus-v1g 6 лет назад

@@nmarbletoe8210 What about a *_MUONIC MOON!!!_* :O

@stephencampbell2735 3 года назад

I wanna know more too lol

@trefod 9 лет назад

I am left with a question. If the experiment couldn't be made with an electron, but had to be made with a Muon instead. Couldn't the result be from a lack of understanding of the Muon rather than the Proton? It seems from what we hear that the measurements were made on the interaction of the Muon, so why assume that the Muon is a completely defined yardstick and all measured variables must be in the Proton?

@Nehmo 8 лет назад

+trefod -- They really didn't explain why the quantum jump indicates the size of a proton either. I'm letting them slide because I think a truly detailed explanation would require the listener understanding some basic material that I'm ignorant of.

@ObjectsInMotion 6 лет назад

The energy levels in an atom are determined by solving the Shrodinger Equation for a given potential field. The size of the proton (which generates this field), slightly effects the distribution of charge and thus the potential field.

@PANZER7910 9 лет назад

It is super misleading to say the proton shrink. Whay dont just say, " it is smaller that we thought"?

@Zzzip13Strike 9 лет назад

Lol is this really a concern

@PANZER7910 9 лет назад

Science is about accuracy, and we dont play around with vague term. By the way, there're a lot of (including me) scientist who play around with these bombastic term to impress/scare people, they are actually not that great...

@Zzzip13Strike 9 лет назад

Yeah but this RU-vid vid is not a scientific report. I dont think I need to explain probably why this vid is named "The Shrinking Proton" (Although the subject matter is rather bland so the only people who would watch past 10 sec are scientists)

@matheusdardenne 9 лет назад

No, it is not. The proton actually shrinks, both measurements are accurate, the only difference between them is that the new one is made measuring the lamb shift of a muonic hydrogen instead of electron scatering. I wrote a paper with a personal theory about it, I believe the charge radius is proportional to the proton's wavelenght, therefore it is inversely proportional to it's momentum. Using my equation, (r = 2lambda/pi) the difference in the charge radius is about the rest mass of the muon, which is the only difference between them. Not sure how to test it, tho...

@surferdude0711 11 лет назад

The point I think he's trying to get at is the fact that the inaccuracies of the physicists' measurements are more significant and unexplainable unlike the Mt. Everest analogy. If we measured it 354m higher than it appears, faulty equipment or a slight change in the mountain itself could be the reason, but the fact that the methods of testing the radius of protons were so certain for years, to challenge that concept now and change a basic fundamental part of physics by 4% is a huge, scary thing.

@Brewbug 3 года назад

Life can't be easy if you looked like Rudy Giulliani 10 years ago let alone what starts to happen at 2:00

@dragooner4 12 лет назад

Is it that they developed a new measuring technique that gives this new result giving a smaller length of the proton, or did the proton actually get smaller?

@usernamesrlamo 11 лет назад

Couldn't help but think grandpa was about to drop his britches and start singing Old Fair Maid Ain't What She Used To Be at 1:59

@dirm12 6 лет назад

Ah yes, professor cricket balls. We meet again.

@Itslvle 14 лет назад

@Sharkness77 I think the idea behind using a muon is that because the muon has a lot more mass than an electron there is a bigger energy difference between the orbits. With this, they get a much larger release of energy and this will be easier to measure accurately.

@smbhax 14 лет назад

I would have liked to have heard more explanation of: a) why muons were used instead of electrons, and b) how the electron/muon energy level distance leads to the measurement of the proton's size.

@JavSusLar 8 лет назад

I don't intend to find a "solid wall" defining the surface of the proton... What is the physical variable that changes at the surface that defines the size of the proton? How abruptly that variable changes?

@cawfeedawg 6 лет назад

The Muon is two hundred times the mass of an electron. the greater mass of the muon skewed the result as it restrained the protons fuzziness.

@johnclavis 14 лет назад

What a fascinating video. Think about how excited Sagan or Feynman would have been to hear about this! In a way, I hope it's true, because it would stir such tumult! Either way, though, thank you so much for such thought-provoking stuff!

@DANGJOS 11 лет назад

I guess if you wanted to treat the proton as a sphere, you could say that (using P for percentage), by volume, the proton's percent decrease would be P=(1-4/100)^3 whatever that number is.

@WayneJohnsonZastil 12 лет назад

This is what I love about science. If the size is wrong than we first thought what makes any science statistic accurate!

@woaibingjilin 11 лет назад

i giggled pretty hard at this conversation/argument

@twostringguitar 14 лет назад

I believe that earlier in the series, or later, I'm not sure, the fact was explained that the allignment of electron orbits creates a magnetic filed. If the electrons are replaced with Muons, can they generate a magnetic field as well? Does that change the strength?

@borderm3 14 лет назад

I think its worth mentioning that when looking at the cricket ball example, what you learn in Chemistry (Classical Electron Radius) would suggest the cricket ball and ball bearing should be swapped. Although the newer quantum mechanical representation is accurate to the example in the video. This threw me for a loop since I have not taken quantum yet. Did I get this right?

@iliasasdf 12 лет назад

I would really like it if you guys where giving us the link for the papers etc.

@ZipplyZane 11 лет назад

It's been over 3 years. Any updates on this? Have they figured out there was an experimental error? Have any new forces been posited to explain this? Did someone figure out that the experiment was flawed in some way?

@ArtForSwans 14 лет назад

@Jalenxx You know, that's a pretty silly response, since I was talking about the fourth spacial dimension, not space-time. You know, as in 2D has x and y, 3D has x, y, and z, and 4D has x, y, z, and w. Look up "hypercube" on your search engine of choice. Also while you're at it, look up the definition of "ignorant."

@Stabacs 11 лет назад

Does a bigger proton also mean bigger atoms? And they also have to re-meassure neutrons as the predictions for them may be wrong, too, right?

@rubenmerenfeld9118 11 лет назад

also, i love the channel. and in my previous posts i was unable to punctuate correctly to save characters.

@unicyclepeon 14 лет назад

This video makes me wonder if the scientists who released the information about their experiment found this as a side result of researching something else, or if instead some other idea or behavior triggered them to make the experiment to test this very thing. In other words: what was the motivation/goal of the original experiment?

@nicholasleclerc1583 6 лет назад

7:13 2 videos ago, I was looking at 60 Symbols’ video on George Green (The namesake of the Library of Science & Engineering behind this guy)

@TurnerXI 12 лет назад

Its Bohrs atom theory that works best on a hydrogen atom (doesnt work very well on poli-electron atoms but its the same principal). Its basicly because the electron itself jumps from one energy level to another. If it absorbs energy it jumps on a higher level while when emitting energy it jumps on lower levels. Another factor is that the electron itself isnt really a orbiting ball but has wave properties as well so u cant actually determine the exact location of the electron itself.

@SyphistPrime 11 лет назад

Putting the muon in place of the electron makes me think if other modifications like that to an atom would be stable and make other variants. I'm not sure if this is possible though, but it is a cool idea to think about?

@heavymetaldeath4life 12 лет назад

That's because the electrons are not tiny balls orbiting the nucleus! This classical view was long discarded after the discovery of quantum physics. Electrons can act as a 'fog' around the nucleus, or they can behave as standing waves. Here's the deal: we don't actually know what an atom looks like since all proposed models of the atom have some flaws. The 'standing wave' and 'fog' model can explain a variety of phenomena, but even that fails to explain things like super fluidity.

@doceigen 10 лет назад

My 'from the hip reaction' to the first few words here, was of a Quantum Contraction, in opposition to the continued Universal Inflation. So think of it as a kind of recoil effect, on the density of the very small due to the continued dynamics effecting the very large, so yeah... that would be a new force... but I'll think about it.

@wolfganggangwolfe 14 лет назад

there's something that i didn't quite understood from this, did the proton shrink or the previous measurements were wrong?

@illwill2453 7 лет назад

Wouldn't an alternate explanation be that the muon is more massive than previously thought - wouldn't this keep the proton the same?

@guillaumep.6534 10 лет назад

Could the size of a proton be different if one measured the energy released by an other particule as it goes back down to its previous orbit? And why is the measure done with a muon more accurate than the one done with an electron?

@ThePcm81 11 лет назад

So, what would happen if muon experiment came first and then the radius of proton using an electron decay energy was determined to be 4% larger? May be the proton is simply more intimidated by the larger muon than it was by a smaller electron?

@Skandalos 12 лет назад

How would the LHC not work if just a few Protons would overshoot and some fall short? Maybe their weight is normal distributed? Do we really know enough about them and are we really able to measure their properties sufficiently accurate to support such a blunt theory like them all having exactly the same mass?

@bruinflight 6 лет назад

Are there any updates on this?

@nagualdesign 14 лет назад

@CaptainCrumple You're right, the diameter of a sphere IS twice the radius, but if you reduce it's size by 4% you make ALL of it's linear dimensions 4% smaller, not 8%. Even the circumference would be 4% smaller. However, a sphere may be non-Euclidean, as is the case with massive objects in 'curved' spacetime, which is what I was saying. Sorry for poking fun at a schoolboy error - I div'nt realize you were a mathemagician :|

@davidwilkie9551 6 лет назад

Quantum Field (stregth, density, intensity?) Mechanism of relative values according to the Gauge?, implied by the associated particle, not "empty" space?

@amerhanna8088 10 лет назад

Why are the researchers are sure that the difference is due to the proton size not the muon size/mass? Isn't the propability of error in proton radius is the same propability of error in the muon radius?

@dhvsheabdh 6 лет назад

Amer Hanna I'm sure there are some consequences of the mass changing other than the ones regarding this result.

@LadyTink 11 лет назад

The wavefunction involves probability of being at a given position... As in a photons wave function dictates it's likelihood of being in a given position. However, as this "probability field" of sorts can vary in scale... The probability field isn't how you would obtain the "size" of the particle if it had a size. I'm not trying to say I know... but I'm just exploring the idea.

@ricardoabh3242 9 лет назад

This is still interesting any new development since the past few years?

@safibn1 14 лет назад

Just when people thought that things were falling into place, the proton has to spoil the fun.

@shri314 12 лет назад

Would repeating the same experiment with Tau instead of a Muon give a newer value to the proton's size?

@k_tell 12 лет назад

"Maybe ... normally distributed" Of course that's possible. Physics is all about defining the limits of what we don't known rather than stating with certainty what we do. But the uncertainty in the rest mass of the proton is now down in the 10th decimal place ( see Wikipedia). I'm not sure if that comes from theory (QED) or observation, or both. But I am sure that any Normal distribution would have to be a very very sharp peak or someone would notice.

@sporkafife 14 лет назад

We were just doing energy levels in atoms and photon emission and all that stuff for our summer AS Physics exam =P

@Skandalos 12 лет назад

Sounds reasonable, thanks for your insight.

@krysylys 14 лет назад

@kevinhr1 They understand the relationship between "the size of the tires" and "the speedometer". I guessing what you are trying to illustrate is not understanding this relationship between the changes you make and the instruments you use to measure those changes? The point is, that using a more massive particle ("Bigger Tyres?") gave results that were not expected. This gives new information about the Proton AND the Muon. And possibly, a new force.

@CamTechBricks 6 лет назад

Muonic Hydrogen. Is it used for anything? Other than measuring protons? Is there any other Muonic matter? And... If a proton is three quarks - three wave functions, how do they behave in terms of shape? Is the proton sperical?

@jhyland87 5 лет назад

Brilliant! Love this channel

@rainmain 11 лет назад

No, as you've said Diameter = r2 = r^2 .... So I showed you a step-by-step, dumbed down version on how to calculate the Diameter.

@razhorblahd 13 лет назад

@Infocollective22 Yes, I get that. My confusion arose from the fact that electrons aren't actually orbiting. But I think I get it now. The electron's probability density cloud changes.

@fugehdehyou 14 лет назад

@jonz94 he did say that.... if you listened properly and you have to consider the fact that their kinda of dumbing it down for people like us to understand since well their professors....

@HeyHeyHarmonicaLuke 12 лет назад

@Skandalos Protons should all have identical mass because they are identical in all other features, like their quark constituents (I think)

@MrMilliemight 12 лет назад

It is a massive difference because it relates to the gravity and electromagnetic force of atomic particles whereas the atom bomb is huge, so small differences don't matter as much. The atom bomb was also measured from a video of it happening, so it's a lot harder to calculate accurately.

@BernardoBordalo 11 лет назад

Could it be that the radius of the proton changes due to the mass and proximity of the muon? I mean, the proton itself should move due to the electron/muon around it, though that motion is normally a small correction on the hydrogen Hamiltonian, so its wave function (and thus the measurable width) should change depending on what is around it. Probably I'm being naive to think the authors didn't thought of that.

@rubenmerenfeld9118 11 лет назад

maybe it is the electron that is getting either larger or more powerful so atoms repel each other more and then that is what we sometimes refer to as dark matter?

@PacRimJim 10 лет назад

Does the proton's density increase as a result?

@shouryuuken100 14 лет назад

@jonz94 You are of course correct.... but you clearly deleted from your mind the word 'somewhat' which was used before the analogy.

@peterstiles1 10 лет назад

Accepting that I don't know what I'm talking about, isn't it more a matter of the strength of the charges of the proton and it's electron or muon, rather than the proton's size, it's diameter?

@peterstiles1 9 лет назад

Shawn Thompson thanks : )

@TomMarAlem1987 13 лет назад

@sixtysymbols QUESTION: WHAT IS ACTUALLY HAPPENING WHEN AN ELECTRON MOVES FROM ONE ORBIT TO ANOTHER. IF AN ELECTRON MOVES FROM P TO S ORBIT AND EMITS LIGHT, IS IT SHEDDING A PARTICLE? EXPLAIN THE MATTER PLEASE. THANK YOU.

@jessstuart7495 7 лет назад

Are we sure we understand energy levels in muon orbitals? Could we be confusing the change in proton size with some other effect related to muons?

@MateBabic 11 лет назад

I relise that it is arrogant to propose anything but I have a question and I hope it someone adresses it... Could it be that 200 bigger mass of a muon "orbiting" proton can steel momentum from proton, and since proton is made of quarks and is not a single particle, those quarks jiggle certain amount less, making overall proton smaller? Can it be that proton changes size depending on what is circling around it?

@DekarNL 9 лет назад

Anyone in particle physics who knows if they found there was some of error? Or has this difference been explained since?

@bedeone 14 лет назад

@Xoder83 Even though the size of the atom is now smaller, the density of atoms is not. The mount everest is still as high as it has always been.

@MalcolmAkner 12 лет назад

Ah, that makes sense. But why isn't the electron slowing down then? Where does the force to keep the electron "circling" the nucleus come from? It almost seems like the atom is a perpetuum mobile.

@k_tell 12 лет назад

We know because it affects the curves the make in magnetic fields. For example, the LHC would not work because the heavy protons would fly off outside and the light ones would fall inside. Also it would change the physics of stars. Perhaps there wouldn't be any stars.

@nagualdesign 14 лет назад

...I suppose I'm assuming there that it's the circumference that's now 4% shorter.

@rithem412 14 лет назад

Are we making an assumption when we think of a proton as a tiny spherical ball? Protons probably have volume because they have magnetic moments, but how do we know its shape?

@MateBabic 11 лет назад

did they try to attach tau to proton or is tau too heavy? would this make proton even smaller?

@gcirc 12 лет назад

@sixtysymbols love this stuff more videos be nice.

@bustedrav 7 лет назад

Dark Energy isn't causing the universe to expand, we are just shrinking! Jk

@sarshoy 7 лет назад

To get to the conclusion that the proton is 4% smaller than previously calculated, the physicists replaced the orbit of an electron around the nucleus with the orbit of a muon. By calculating the amount of energy released when the muon decayed into a lower energy orbit, they were able to determine the size of the proton. Why would this calculation be any more valid than previous calculations that relied on the energy released when an electron decayed to a lower energy orbit? I have a very limited understanding of this topic in general so perhaps my thinking is fundamentally flawed...

@texasdeeslinglead2401 7 лет назад

A 4% whoops , well now , let's miss a steller object by 4% . boy would that be 'Hubble need glasses ' grade funny.

@honkatatonka 11 лет назад

Why does this popup again on "news" sites in 2013 again? Was there another experiment done?

@lynchmobb2000 14 лет назад

@rithem412 We don't really know the proton's shape. No one has ever, or likely will ever, see a proton. But it is helpful for most people (including me) to visualize a proton and most particles for that matter, as spherical. The human mind is an analogy machine and the whole solar system comparison is often used. Being composed of exactly 3 quarks and some gluons, protons could be triangular or even pyramidal. Perhaps something even more mysterious. Cheers

@Skandalos 12 лет назад

@Skulldaman How can you be sure that they all are of identical weight?

@mmestari 9 лет назад

There's a thought mistake here, that's implied a few times. For example when talking about mount Everest and the other guys belt. Different size of protons wouldn't affect the overall size of the object. There would also be difference in the "empty space" between them. If we compared this to the old dotted print images, the size of the protons compare to the size of the small dots, difference in them would not change the size of the overall image.

@XPimKossibleX 9 лет назад

+Wild Hunt Trumpeter ill explain; this had nothing to do with the unt everest example, that was a comparison. and the guy;s belt one was saying that that ISNT how it works, they mentioned that this idea that you said is wrong is wrong.

@mmestari 9 лет назад

michael benzur Nope. When they are talking about proton being smaller. What they are talking about how it's not, is different thing than what I pointed out the thought mistake to be. I'm guessing they have received some really boorish questions about it from the press, in the line of:"So everything is smaller now? I don't see things becoming smaller TROLOLOLO". Which they are now trying to correct in a simple manner. But the apparent size of an object like belt or mountain isn't determined by the sizes of it's components, but by their distribution, unless we are talking about a really compressed object, like a black hole.

@XPimKossibleX 9 лет назад

rereasd what i said and watch the vid again bro

@mmestari 9 лет назад

michael benzur You just don't get it.

@mmestari 9 лет назад

michael benzur lol, you still don't get it. And that's exactly the thought mistake, they shouldn't be talking about the sizes of Mount Everest or a belt at all. You really should learn first to read and write English, before addressing issues on this level. Here's the difference. You can compress that belt to become smaller. That doesn't change the size of the protons. If you try to "compress" the protons so that their size would change, things go BOOM-BOOM instead. Do you understand the difference now?

@MalcolmAkner 12 лет назад

This might be a really stupid question or just one of my brain-farts, but why doesn't the electron smash into the proton? They have oposing charges so eventually the electron should collide and "bond" with the proton. But as far as I can remember the atom is 99.9999% vacuum because, relativisticly, it's a huge distance between the proton and the electron. Why is this? Please answer seriously! :)