#5minphysics

[@scientificnirvana1009]

Prof. Krauss's 5 minute lectures are longer than 5 minutes due to time dilation. Njoying them alot!

[@godessoffire08]

Finally a master teacher I can sit and enjoy learning from, thanks for taking the time to upload these! Great for quarantine!! Thank you Dr Lawrence Krauss!

[@lkrauss1]

thanks

[@voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang885]

@@lkrauss1 Do you think the "nega-particles" of Yakir Aharonov's weak measurement research group is fake science? thanks

[@HairyPotter2006]

Most simple and brilliant explanation of virtual particles ever.

[@theo.r.bitter]

"If we take a hydrogen atom - I know this looks like a cow - but ..." LOLOLOLOLOLOL

[@shepherd_of_art]

hahahaha I died on that!!!!!

[@mikeg8028]

I love how he says it so matter-of-factly and just moves on.

[@mosabama]

Lol

[@ayushagrawal8198]

this proves that he is a physicist

[@FinBoyXD]

Lmao, was just about to comment that.

[@blavla8232]

The best explanation of virtual particles I have found yet. Thank you!

[@indrajitbm5643]

I'm loving these 5 (10?) minute lectures! The format is very natural, and like you said in the first episode, it's low-tech enough to show it to someone else. Although I'm now doing my PhD in Biophysics, it's always fun to come back to these foundational concepts. Hoping we get to see more of these lectures even after the quarantine :)

[@lilybennear577]

Best description of virtual particles! So informational and mind-blowing. Thank you!

[@CommanderLVJ1]

CommanderLVJ1 +Lawrence Krauss I do not mean to be insulting but I have just got to say that you “dear sir” have fulfilled ever single cheesy mad scientist stereotype that I.can possibly conceive of!😃..!and I love it!..😍 Thank you (and everyone else who are trying to through various forms of media) for trying to teach and explain these sorts of things to everyone else: I just love whenever I see scientists such as yourself trying to reach out and engage with the general public; (obviously) not only is it mind bogglingly cool and amazing, it also gives people such as myself who are not professional scientists the chance to at the vary LEAST try and comprehend what the professional scientific community has learned; are learning; and understand, and I am deeply appreciative of and vary grateful for that.

[@_wreckage]

Thank you sir for making such great videos. Teachers like you are treasures. My love for physics is still alive because of you even though school tried to destroy it.

[@SuperRand13]

Only just reading "a universe from nothing" and got to the first mention of Virtual Particles and with excitement had to look them up further, very happy to find Lawrence Krauss himself making videos!! I can't wait to watch the whole channel!

[@sammyfromsydney]

Beautifully simple and clear explanation of how the simultaneity predictions of Relativity don't violate causality.

[@naturediary7651]

Fascinating! I'm really pleased to see that you now have over 3000 subscribers and rising which just goes to show how popular these videos are becoming. So thanks again Lawrence. Have a great weekend. Take care and stay safe.

[@mihaicristianmc]

Congrats Mr Krauss I really like your work. Keep it going. One of the best science communicators in the world, congratulations!

[@stephenjones796]

Thanks professor Krauss. Looking forward to the continuation of LEARNING !!

[@veli1495]

Great! I always wondered the popping in and out of existence and was not satisfied with any explanation, until now.

[@adithyakaravadi8170]

Thank you for the superb explanation!

[@33393339yo]

My new favourite youtube series ever :)

[@luisfelipe7351]

fantastic dr krauss

[@mingyangyu770]

Thank you Lawrence very nice to see you making videos during this hard times, great videos and stay safe :)

[@thanasisathanasiou6362]

So, in the case of the double slit experiment; where photons were sent individually through the slits, one might come to the conclusion that, since their trajectory was not being observed, their past or future self could be traveling backward/forward in time as virtual particles and interacting with the next and/or previous photon's virtual particles, emerging as it was sent down the slits before or after the said photon; causing the interference which leads to the distribution pattern on the pannel. However, since the earth is moving, the future/past virtual particles will, yes be at the same time, but in different space. Thus unable to interact with the probability wave emerging when a photon passes through the neighbouring slit. In order to reconsile these ideas to explain the interaction due to the distribution pattern observed, one must take into account that during the unobserved photon's trajectory, it exists in a state of probability, it does not belong to one universe, but instead coexists within the spectrum of the neighbouring multiverses, where this interaction is also happening, but, at the right relative space-time locations, which would enable it's virtual particles to essentially interact with itself or the neighbouring slit's virtual particles, which would consequently produce a photon again. Withought the idea of the multiverse existing until an observation is made, collapsing the spectrum into a given universe, relative to the observation, the waves of probability would not intersect, thus the peaks and troths of the mesh would not present the given distribution pattern. Therefore, the double slit experiment supports the idea of the multiverse.

[@youssefjaafar2484]

very interesting and amusing!

[@danielwilliamson275]

Brilliant explanation!

[@Bazzo61]

Really enjoying these videos. Amazed that you manage to explain what takes some physicists whole books in just a 10 minute video :-) Looking forward to next week's.

[@anthonycordova5697]

Thank you so much for your explanation sir.

[@veesoho93]

Thank you ! Great video!

[@sunshineconch5377]

Truly excellent! I loved this one. I almost always see the relationship between faster than light motion and time travel simply asserted, but rarely ever actually explained. You started touching on it here. If you could go more in depth about that, or give more examples in some future video, that would be great. Also, the relationship between uncertainty and virtual particles was a real "Ah ha!" moment for me while watching this. Fantastic!

[@DABLACKESTJEW]

Great vid Lawrence. Appreciate it

[@Petrov3434]

This was another mind bogglingly great lecture -- simply amazing in both content and delivery !!!

[@FreshBeatles]

Hey thanks for making this video man, I was trying to wrap my head around the photon being an exchange particle for the electromagnetic interaction. Viewing this made it much easier to understand what im trying to think about

[@xjuhox]

This one was very informative, thanks!

[@haimkohan9241]

It is beautiful and crazy

[@davidroach8277]

Fascinating and always keeps me intrigued...just wish I'd kept my head down in math's and physics in school...just to be able to understand better.👍 and maybe win a Nobel prize myself.

[@ShahbaazKhan]

Amazing, time slicing (of backwards moving electron) cleared the mystic air around my head. : D

[@yosirking]

Mind blown, love it

[@mobilemcsmarty1466]

thanks Professor Krauss! and especially for this one!! I'm not a pro, just a big fan of physics and science in general. I've read a bunch and saw a bunch of lectures in past years but this modest pen and paper you did here really gave me that "got it!" feeling :D I sure like cows too :p

[@kanabellhitoshi3143]

This was awesome!

[@lkrauss1]

I think the first one was.. and keep watching.. you never know!

[@kanabellhitoshi3143]

@Little Monk um...sorry for the misunderstanding. I was just trying to be funny. I'm a Krauss fan too. It won't happen again. 😔 Ok! Fixed it!

[@lkrauss1]

@Little Monk You know that is very close to something Einstein once said about relativity.

[@lkrauss1]

@@kanabellhitoshi3143 no worries.. It was a joke. it was fine.. :)

[@lkrauss1]

@Little Monk hi.. alas, I can't help... I just recommend that you keep working if you think it is worth it and try and publish things.. and if you can't publish in journals then your approach of online publishing is an option.

[@jaysonp9426]

Incredible explanation, thank you! 2 questions (for anyone who knows what they're talking about) 1) Am I understanding correctly that virtual particles exist because for extremely small amounts of time a particle is going faster than the speed of light? 2) Do virtual particles change the momentum of the original particle? Sorry if these are nub questions.

[@pritamroy3766]

Very precise and best explanation I ever have. My guide had tried to explain me this, but even he could not do better than you Sir. thank you .

[@AurelienCarnoy]

Are vitrual particles the answer to quantum gravity? Instead of recombining to itself they can recombin to other virtual particles. This generats a wave and flow.

[@kylebowles9820]

Thanks for posting on Facebook; I didn't know you were on KZbin!

[@lureseff9787]

Once again, THANK you

[@Jsmith32t]

Very fascinating, this is the first time I've understood what virtual particles are doing. If I am understanding correctly, @10:55 the virtual particles change the charge distribution in the atom and give rise to Schrodinger's wave equations for electron orbitals. Then, if we look at Iron (FE) for example, there are 26 electrons and a number of different electron orbitals (1𝑠^2,2𝑠^2,2𝑝^6,3𝑠^2,3𝑝^6,3𝑑^6,4𝑠^2) that sum together to give rise to a net magnetic dipole. Therefore, could we say that virtual particles are the cause of magnetism in some sense?

[@roxy9837]

Please explain the apparatus to measure the spectrum of a hydrogen atom.

[@vijay1700]

From where did the ability or property of producing virtual particles come to Empty Space?

[@Chemist9662]

This was a very good video

[@calebamore]

Couldn't we derive the same formulas from a phenomenon that exhibits the same or similar properties of particles? Since we cannot see them, couldn't it be something else? It seem to me to be unscientific to assume that it's a "virtual particle" since science is observed.

[@stavrosmaiden]

Hi Professor Krauss and thank you for another great video! I have a question regarding the Heisenberg principal. If we use E=mc^2 can't we go from ΔxΔp > h to ΔΕΔt > h? Or in that case it doesn't work like that because the two theories are not exactly compatible? Thank you!!

[@lkrauss1]

they are compatible, and one could do this.. in practice the relations are derived in the non relativistic theory, but they work in the relativistic version too.

[@stavrosmaiden]

@@lkrauss1 thanks! I do possess an academic book on relativistic quantum mechanics but I haven't read it yet. I will give it a go (although I would need to remember a lot of higher mathematics from my undergraduate degree....). Once again thank you so much!!

[@rhythm4science]

This is awesome!

[@constpegasus]

How can you not love this?

[@ashlynnundlall]

Is the Heisenberg uncertainty principle a postulate or is their a mathematical derivation for it ?

[@Shdnfncidjen]

Thank you this is amazing!!!

[@felixfunhouse1414]

Thank you for the great video. Doesn’t this completely derail E=mc2?

[@DimEst19xx]

PositronDynamics actually try to create a propulsion system from these antiparticles. I don't know though how can you create so much energy from something that you don't completely understand or observe, but it's a start I guess. I mean, it will happen eventually from somebody, sometime. My fear is that with great power, you have to be really cautious. Because it can definately been used for another weapon of mass destruction, apart from just a propulsion system. What are your thoughts on that Dr Krauss?

[@lkrauss1]

don't worry.. there are not enough antiparticles created on earth in a million years to power a lightbulb :) see my book, The Physics of Star Trek

[@bobaldo2339]

As space is accelerating its expansion, are there not more and more virtual particles appearing and disappearing as "quantum foam"? Even if the virtual particles exist for only say a trillionth of a second, there are more of them existing now than there were even an instant ago, etc. So, how do we get our heads around that relative to the distribution of energy in the universe? I have heard it said that because virtual particles are actually just fluctuations in quantum fields, they do not really exist. But, does not quantum field theory say that everything is composed of fluctuations in quantum fields - including worlds, people, etc. ? If so, how are virtual particles existentially different? Or if, as some have said, virtual particles are just a convenient mathematical contrivance, do they really "exist" at all in any physical sense?

[@cellerism]

Where do the gamma rays go after they are created from a electron and positron pair.

[@yashyadav1716]

sir i have a doubt ,even though electron can do crazy things for that short interval, the shape of the graph could be anything, why only that inverted shape was considered which predicted the particle anti particle pair. waiting for your answer, n thanks a ton for such a great content .

[@imhotepwpc2]

Huge fan for many years now, thanks a lot ... in this format, I just wish you could be more comfortable with the paper, probably set it up on a stand.

[@lkrauss1]

will work with a smaller pad perhaps. :)

[@voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang885]

@@lkrauss1 what do you think of the Hameroff and Penrose work? Is that mysticism? thanks

[@woody7652]

Thank you so much, these videos are wonderful! ps: have a great weekend yourself..

[@kimchibbq5242]

Thank you prof!♥

[@cmarqz1]

Brilliant!

[@raphaelsangiorgi1977]

so like, do we know almost for sure that there are particles that move backwords in time?

[@eoghancullen]

Thanks again!

[@Eztoez]

Shouldn't delta x delta p be more accurately labelled as standard deviations?

[@gcingia]

Professor Krauss, Love your "5" minutes Physics. Anyway, I see that you _love_ that HUGE Notebook and you kind of all the time move it, and try to make sure that the camera "sees" it in a good angle, etc. Maybe you have a small whiteboard somewhere in your #StayAtHOME !? So you can just place is somewhere, make sure it is in focus, and do your graphical explanations and lovely high school math... This one, MAGNIFICENT talk! All the beast from locked down NZ.

[@lkrauss1]

thanks.. too sophisticated.. and also don't have one. :)

[@filipefaraon7350]

so what if every negative particle we see is traveling back in time? or / and every positive, also is actualy negative but backwards too? we just cant tell. the effect of it would be impressive: absolutely none.

[@tomasnemec5680]

Could you explain how we assert the FTL travel of these electrons? Did you conclude that the virtual particles exist from the spectral measurement and then assumed that the particles must be travelling faster than light for a short time?

[@lkrauss1]

No.. we measure antiparticles, and realize that they are not traveling faster than light, but that they are mathematically equivalent to electrons that are.

[@renaissance17]

Lawrence Krauss now if only i understood how antiparticles are measured lol

[@voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang885]

@@lkrauss1 what about the Herbert J. Bernstein Effect with neutrons? The spin is not dependent on charge.

[@summerofplums]

Is that red wrist bracelet to protect you from antiparticles?

[@ShadowZZZ]

Greetings from Germany. Delighting video, I wouldn't mind if these videos were even hours long, like lecture, or would include deeper maths. I have one question: What is your view of quantum gravity? Or a UFT? Will you do a video on that? I love your work, I've seen many videos and lectures, also with Richard. You guys are the motivation of my fascination for natural science and why I want to study physics at the university of bielefeld. Funnily some of the greatest physicists and mathematicians were germans: Einstein, Planck, Schrödinger, Heisenberg, Hertz, Gauss, Euler, Riemann, Leibnitz, HIlbert.. All the pop starts of 20th century scientists ;)

[@llll-qz9kr]

quickthought: based simple ez app, using the videos, and then if you click an area of the screen at a certain time.. fx u click the equation area, you get some option to expand for more information, more equations, more more.. and more.. if you click krauss face perhaps a transcript from the last 5-10 maybe 20 seconds would pop up and the text then clickable for more information and expanderinos..... anyway.. find a nerd if it is.. :v glhf

[@TheCosmic_Chronicles]

Interesting!

[@k.ommander]

Hey there, I don't know anything of physics as we don't have it at school yet, but this is so fk interesting!

[@Arulrajprince]

Where did those Virtual Particles come from, if there is nothing?

[@Bdix1256]

What I don’t understand is why this doesn’t lead to more matter being created. If matter is favored over antimatter by some mechanism in our universe - why wouldn’t that apply to virtual particles?

[@stevesastrohowardkings2245]

If their are different dimension Which one is quantum which one Is general relativity how many universe Will take to combined them. A trick question

[@JoeHynes284]

doesn't a taceon beam help to find cloaked ships?

[@akshatverma8683]

If event 1 causes event 2, then 2 distinct observers can only disagree about the chronology of these events, if the time difference between the events, is equivalent to or more than, the light travel time between the physical events.

[@llll-qz9kr]

I dont wanna be like "that guy" but when ur on the second part of the time and space V check mark thing, and you add the 4 horizontal lines.. you're saying there's an electron going forward in time? - Shouldn't it go up the t thing? I dunno.. cheers

[@lkrauss1]

I think it does... when it goes down the 't thing' it is going backward, and then it goes forward again

[@ShadowZZZ]

On the last note: Will do you a video on the derivation of bohrs atomic model and quantized energy levels?

[@lkrauss1]

maybe...will see if it can be done in 5-10 min

[@wissamelirani3368]

Superb explanation! But doesn't this violate the first law of thermodynamics?

[@tossajalumen401]

Cosmic Catch22 - sounds like good band

[@christopleefulp5256]

What if virtual particals connected the events.

[@herschelpatel7115]

I should have watched this video before seeing Tenet!

[@supratim17roy]

Negative charge flowing backward in time = positive charge flowing forward in time? What a bizzare theory.

[@nellvincervantes3223]

Et = (-E)(-t) prooves it.

[@supratim17roy]

@@nellvincervantes3223 So by that analogy i could tell -E = -m × -c^2

[@stephenkamenar]

5 minutes physics ᵃᵗ ₂.₅ₓ ˢᵖᵉᵉᵈ

[@robtomx]

Wow amazing!! Do you have any advice on getting into graduate programs? I have my bs now and want to apply QM to the brain to derive a physical theory of consciousness. Do you know anyone working on something similar? Love the vids and can’t wait for the next one! Stay safe!

[@lkrauss1]

thanks.. just apply widely.. look on sites and see what people are working on.

[@robtomx]

Lawrence Krauss awesome thank you so much!

[@justinkuemmerle2061]

Get this man an eisel.

[@theultimatereductionist7592]

I normally never accuse physicists of poorly explaining concepts when the burden of responsibility is upon me to put in the work to learn by doing homework exercises. However, virtual particles is the exception. If physicists just said virtual particles are real, abstract mathematical tools/concepts that are necessary for other things to work, then I could accept them. However, not being clear about whether virtual particles are physical or not leaves me confused.

[@janpomianowski4208]

Cause that's total BS.

[@spikedesignworks]

Mind = Blown/wow

[@omorganlabs]

Thx

[@stephenjones796]

👍🏼👍🏼

[@syamkrishnan7349]

Professor please purchase a whiteboard.

[@mylittleelectron6606]

If you ever get around to the comments... I wrote a novel with a character that is a cross between you and Christopher hitchens. Dealing with science and religion. I would love to send it to you if there is a place I can send it. I really enjoy the videos.

[@lkrauss1]

nice.. email at [e-mail]

[@mylittleelectron6606]

@@lkrauss1 great I just got the response... I will be emailing the PDF...

[@mylittleelectron6606]

I have Lawrence krauss as my personal physics teacher... I guess coronavirus is good for something!

[@Privacityuser]

Virtual particles: Every time someone shine their intended, being based on fear or love, this intent spreads over large amounts of people, and sometimes CONTORCING or enhancing THE REAL SENSE OF REALITY!

[@priyabratadash381]

Don't you think that when the particle move back in time, it too move back in space ??? something realted to time and space evolution....

[@Killer_Kovacs]

Is it possible for time to literally act like a fluid with a vortices

[@Garyskinner2422]

I was lost when he picked up the pad of paper

[@sk66ly84]

thanks for the lecture. next time try to write on a whiteboard. its hard to hold a paper and write with the other hand

[@akshatverma8683]

If virtual particles do come into physical existence, as may be confirmed by fluctuating light frequencies, then maybe technically they aren't virtual, but transient particles.

[@sistajoseph]

Lawrence has had a strange effect on me, strangely inspiring. I listened to these kinds of explanation before but now I'm convinced it's not true. The whole theory of relativity and its consequences are based on the speed of light. If the message from the events were travelling at an unlimited speed, they would arrive instantly. If both observers were now made to travel at a high speed, that would make no difference. Even if their speeds were unlimited that would make no difference, there would be no relativistic consequence. When light, with its limited speed is introduced as the messenger, even space starts to bend. Very strange, but its all in the mind. We only take relativity to be correct because it coincided with some measurements. Otherwise, it's no more legitimate than the instantaneous transmission. Relativistic effects have nothing to do with the speed of light, observers, simultaneity or clocks. An object moving through space is not concerned with any of the former, nor is involved with any of them. The object is just moving relative to space and that is the problem. Physics has always assumed that there is no relative to space. This cannot be true. A moving body "knows" that it is moving, velocities are not relative, they are absolute. They are absolute because there are proportional effects on moving objects that are not relative. This is what this equation says: mr = m0 / sqrt (1 - v2 / c2 )

[@danielpl8535]

Wait a minute... So Lawrence Krauss has only 3K subscribers on his own channel??

[@lkrauss1]

Yup.. but on the positive side, I just started recording videos for my channel a little under 2 weeks ago..

[@danielpl8535]

@@lkrauss1 OK, that makes sense