Neutrinos, Einstein, Time and Paradox: Tom Weiler at TEDxNashville

Tom Weiler was born in St. Louis, grew up(wards) in the Black Hills of South Dakota, matured a bit more in Lincoln, Nebraska, and graduated from HS in Milwaukee, WI. He has a B.S. degree in physics from Stanford University, and a Ph.D. from U. Wisconsin in high-energy particle theory. Vowing never to be so cold again, he left the Northern US for England, Boston, California, and joined the faculty at Vanderbilt in 1984. In the Spring 2012 semester, he will teach a course titled "Meaning of Time, Possibility of Time Travel". Starting in the early 80s, he was among the pioneers in applying modern particle theory to astrophysics and cosmology. He has over a hundred refereed, published papers, on topics ranging from neutrino astrophysics to dark matter to faster-than-light particle travel. He is also a member of the international EUSO collaboration, with intent to place a downward-looking telescope on the Space Station to monitor extreme-energy cosmic rays when they strike enter our atmosphere. His awards include "Fellow of the American Physics Society", "Outstanding Wisconsin Physics Alumnus", and "Alexander Von Humboldt Senior Researcher Award". In 2009 he had the good fortune as a visitor to the Max Planck Institut in Munich, to be assigned to an office once held by Werner Heisenberg, famous for his co-invention of quantum mechanics. The empty chair in the attached photo was Heisenberg's chair.
In the spirit of ideas worth spreading, TEDx is a program of local, self-organized events that bring people together to share a TED-like experience. At a TEDx event, TEDTalks video and live speakers combine to spark deep discussion and connection in a small group. These local, self-organized events are branded TEDx, where x = independently organized TED event. The TED Conference provides general guidance for the TEDx program, but individual TEDx events are self-organized.* (*Subject to certain rules and regulations).

[@ddorman365]

Thank you everybody for including me in your analyses of current and future science work, I am very excited to be considered a colleague of so many gifted minds, peace and love, Doug.

[@MindfulPersonalGrowthop]

Come on! Don't place the camera on him while he explains a visual model!!

[@Biskawow]

+Brandon Rodriguez neutrinos can't travel faster than the speed of light tho so it was pointless

[@Biskawow]

Kaecilius wat? ...

[@tbonyh3976]

Mario D. Zmaj ,, mm’

[@hitnmissmusic70]

Thanks for the open mind charlie. Looking forward to your next lecture. :-/

[@Biskawow]

poor editing, guy speaks about a diagram, but the camera is showing him instead of the diagram

[@glutinousmaximus]

An electron popped into a bar. It ordered a drink, then noticed a positron in a corner booth getting stoned. They had a few more, but at the end of the night they got absolutely annihilated!

[@gregciach1920]

So what?

[@FirstRisingSouI]

Sadly, the experiment was found to have a systematic error. No neutrino hyperspace =(

[@goo37]

Thankfully you mean. I prefer the universe make sense and have distinct cause and effect.

[@FirstRisingSouI]

It would still make sense, we would just have to figure out how it made sense. I would very much like there to be a way to travel interstellar faster than light.

[@glutinousmaximus]

Well, it was one of Einstein's great discoveries that light is a constant, and time _is not._ Very non-intuitive. Faster than light therefore is rather nonsensical (or maybe 'non-intuitive' also!) The old idea of somehow 'folding space' is probably our only hope. If we really get down to understanding 'dark energy', then maybe we have a chance.

[@kaecilius2656]

+FirstRisingSouI You're postulating without sources. Stop it! The neutrinos could very well travel quantumly interacting with the quantum foam for being so small and appear and disappear and appearing again like teleporting thus explaining the FTL effect... there are more than 120 professional scientists claiming there is no error about that. There are so many explanations for this, shutting it down is closing doors to scientific investigation, just like Einstein denying quantum mechanics. The neutrino could be the Dark Matter (why couldn't that part of the Universe really be a "blob" of random particles acting as a shadow from higher dimensions. The electron neutrino is almost a string, it weights less than the Higgs Boson. The mass from the neutrinos are in a phenomenological approach from the predicted graviton mass. It is the only known particle to actually escape the event horizon on black holes (although most of them are swallowed anyways). When the jet comes out from the center of the galaxy in Hawking Radiation it flows as a torus and full of neutrinos throughout the galaxy. Many scientists are now just denying reality because of their attachment to their own papers and theories based on emotional attachment to the mathematical incapacity and childish stubbornness of Albert Einstein against quantum theory! There's a revolution coming, the Standard Model will start not to fit anymore. It's what everybody is saying. It's not a single crazy guy like Wegener anymore, it's not just one single insane scientist claiming this but basically half of the community. We understand the "jihad" from those who are afraid of change. It happens all the time with scientific models and theories. Do you know how many theories were discarded after relativity was recognized? And how many after James Clerk Maxwell? Just get over it!

[@adraedin]

@@kaecilius2656 Got sources?

[@jamesrucki4558]

Maybe I missed it in this, multiple accelerator have came out to say they broke the speed of light tho. They retract the claim, blame it on failed mechaincal components or programs, fire the big guys and some close down shortly after. In one case they blamed a part that was stated to of only been able to throw the reading off by less then what it broke the speed of light by.

[@sergiuszkiev]

Well, now we know that neutrinos do not travel faster than speed of light, but this aside what is the logic in this video? First we are told that due to the special relativity theory no information can be transmitted faster than speed of light, but superluminal neutrinos do not transfer information so it's OK to them to go faster than speed of light (I don't understand how it is possible that the detectable particle doesn't transfer some information but OK). Then we are told about how if we could see the world with "neutrino eyes" we could "premember the future". WTF? Is this not a transfer of information faster than speed of light prohibited by special theory of relativity?

[@Yuurekk]

sergiuszkiev He only got 20 minutes, so it's no wonder that you can't understand something that wasn't fully explained. Search google for neutrino event, if you want to learn more.

[@kaecilius2656]

+Yuurekk People are acting like Einstein against Quantum Theory, no wonder there. Many papers are to be discarded *even if relativity is right and the speed of light being a constant* anyways. So the inquisition is not a surprise to most people. Those who are truly against quantum theory and extra-dimensions are prone to find any excuse that better suits them (and Einstein). We very well know it's possible for particles to "teleport" specially subatomic for being more susceptible to the quantum foam. It happens in the LHC when strong forces are detected with quarks being shot into what is called a "jet" by creating anti-quarks to annihilate the jet of gluon force until it breaks off the quark into the stream it's famous CGI pictures from the detectors receiving the jet of quarks coming out of the collided nucleons. I find very unlikely to continue the study of neutrinos by detecting them with the same array of detectors, there should be a bigger and fuller surface of contact on a prototype for a neutrino detector chamber for further future research.

[@jeffreylardizabal3964]

Carom Billiards and reflections on things, seen and unseen… "If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough." - Albert Einstein Quantum theorists propose many things from their experiments, though the scale of their propositions might not, always be clear. Maybe on scale, analyzing carom billiards, where the table has no pockets and the object is to bounce a ball off the other two balls, in order that all three make contact, scoring a point each time this occurs, might clarify things. Within the flat plane of the game and including "jumping" your ball to execute strikes, i.e. hitting it in such a way as to jump off the surface of the table in order to strike elsewhere on the table, are there finite or infinite numbers of possibilities, wherein such points might be made - even with respect to the surface contacts of the balls and how they interface with one another? If infinite, and we're just talking about 3 billiard balls in an enclosed space, then what of infinity, with an infinite number of neutrinos, colliding and producing what they do? The scale of the problem appears insurmountable because, we're talking about attempting to see the unseen in an effort to, possibly understand, a greater law than Einstein's special theory of relativity. Instead of special relatively we'll end up with, what? - Super-special relativity where, because of neutrinos', imagined - super-luminous activity, what occurs? Theoretically, you could have quantum upon quantum to infinity without any retrospect as to how anyone had ever arrived there; with 'there' being indefinable in terms of place, time, space, mind, who's mind, material, immaterial? A chicken makes it to the other side of the road, not because it understands the universe, but because it either wanted to get to something or, escape something. Did it just wander there, pondering its existence? Doubtful. It was either looking for something to eat or escaping from something, attempting to eat it. Even a barren field with no sustenance might cause it to wander. A scientist or group of scientists might never leave this cosmos for another, having failed to do the math between the life of our sun and the time it takes them to figure out such things. I'm not saying that science does not yield improvements in life, for it absolutely does! Maybe it just has to do a better job of selling its story, on scale with everything else; whereby, it might garner more support from those too chicken to cross the roads it has yet to define. Ray Kurzweil attempted to do so in his book, The Singularity; and, there have been others, attempting to draw readers and funding, but buy in is important, if big science desires to stake big claims. I’m reluctant to think the math is there and, if not, what might the human race miss out on? With Jesus, I am assured eternal life and that it is good. I don't need a scientist to tell me this, but his Word, which cannot be reduced to quantum, for how does one break down a letter - let alone a word, or string of words, and their consummation in the Bible? One cannot, but God can, and through him, all things are possible; without, no other explanation will do. Maybe science can help us realize, not so much so our place in the universe, but that it is more a thing (the heavens) put in place by God - to reveal God's glory, just as the Bible says, however so simple that seems, and that his glory cannot be surpassed.

[@ranjithseneviratne6870]

sergiuszkiev i

[@TechNed]

That was pretty cool!

[@JulianMaytum]

Kind of surprised. This guy jumped all over the superluminal neutrinos even though there was great doubt about the "finding" and wasn't too long after this talk shown to be in complete error.

[@gizabitadat1499]

tanx for the info blew my mind JAMBO 79 DUBLN

[@julianchosun]

Back to the Future explained in layman's terms, emphasizing the most recent research with its focus on nutrinos.

[@KipIngram]

It amazes me that Ted didn't flag this video. I saw one yesterday that was much closer to being true (though still probably not true) than this one, and it got flagged. How could Ted not recognize this as an incredibly speculative theory?

[@friendlyone2706]

Maybe it did, but he came back from the future and unflagged it. 😁

[@SlayAndPlay]

Where can I get these slides? please someone answer

[@sywaddr11]

Only left handed image without right handed pair could it point out that instrument only hold up within lighting speed changing? And it just proves material world is limited in light speed, and any faster then light speed get into quantum world.

[@rgaleny]

could the neutrino be the particle of the ether field ?

[@donfox1036]

This should be redone. The faster than light neutrinos were a mistake based on satellites involved in tracking the neutrinos whose clocks were running a little slow because of SR.

[@al1383]

Could neutrinos explain magnetism and gravity. Neutrinos can’t or has difficulty passing through iron, so when neutrinos are passing through a block of iron it is also going around this iron (very minute) so if you have 2 pieces of iron with neutrinos trying to go through them the neutrinos will actually push the iron objects together because the amount of neutrinos going between the iron blocks starts to go around both blocks, becoming stronger and stronger. When the iron is repelled, it is caused from earths magnetic effects on the iron. Keep in mind we never see magnets or planets repelled in the universe, it only attracts. The only reason magnet poles “push away” is because earths magnetism (electromagnetism) has an effect on the iron.

[@MikeRosoftJH]

How on Earth did you conclude that neutrinos have difficulty passing through iron? Neutrinos pass through just about everything. And how magnetism works is well-known; it's, ultimately, from moving electric charges. (See Maxwell's laws of electromagnetism.) In particular, the magnetic properties of an electron are caused by its spin and electric charge (just like a rotating, electrically charged ball will have a magnetic field).

[@ItsAnonymousGuy]

Did he spend 10 minutes talking about thoughts he based on a claim?

[@phy29]

Science always amaze me more than magic cause you progress in truth that open your mind to the great part of imagination that is often forgotten the beauty

[@ale198519]

Neutrino facts are crazy

[@DerekWilliamsMusic]

Favourite quote: "A theory that has no experimental base is 'philosophy', or worse."

[@josephvancamp6744]

I wish physicists could explain neutrinos to the general public better

[@negrefloricel]

Absolute madness.

[@alphaomega1089]

"If something is moving beyond emf it'll not be measurable using standard emf dependent equipment."

[@stuskivens4295]

the OPERA experiment was found to have an error - worth about 60 nanoseconds. And this effectively means the neutrinos weren't superluminal. Although this was worked out after this talk. So don't be too harsh on this speaker.

[@EDUARDO12348]

Trillions of neutrinos, almost as abundant as light, Neutrino eyes, remembering the future, moist robots!.... = mind blown x 10^9

[@kaecilius2656]

Much much much waay more abundant than photons... way more! Just trillions of them passed though your nose during one second.

[@EDUARDO12348]

I've heard somebody say that sometimes neutrinos will interact with photoreceptors in the eyes and cause a rapid flash, this is rare but I've had it happen several times. Do you think it could be true?

[@thomasanderson8482]

String theory videos need disclaimers. Im tired of watching a video halfway through then they start making up nonsense.

[@bboyagua]

thomas anderson This is not one of those videos. This is about the standard model of particle physics and you should have kept watching.

[@kaecilius2656]

+Trevor Flynn-Alling The Inquisition against Quantum Theory started. By trolling around everywhere with no regards. Just like Einstein did stubbornly without success...

[@99bits46]

hhahhahah same ;D

[@TheOriginalJAX]

based on what?

[@romansedano6251]

This conplexity of the topic covered in this video almost gave me a seizure :/

[@obvioustruth]

Badly recorded. Image is too much focused on the person instead of slides. I have to pause, to see but then I can't listen to explanation.

[@KipIngram]

7:45 - No, just BEING in the left or right quandrant doesn't mean you're traveling faster than light. It just means that you WOULD HAVE TO travel faster than light to get to that place from the origin. But stuff could quite well already be over there - that's not a problem at all. Dr. Weiler surely doesn't have the most "sparkling" stage personality...

[@RLModerndayJoseph]

It's true, neutrinos are a portal of sort into time and I have indisputable proof, thus will be bringing this evidence forward soon.

[@sylviacrabtree4494]

MDJ has it been long enough, can we see some proof now

[@Turanbar74]

OMG, this guy needs to put his Delorean back into the garage. It was just a measuring error.

[@phy29]

Neutrinos is made to interact with star and planet heart for stabilised their magnetic field .....

[@fbicknel]

13:15 If neutrinos don't interact easily, how is it there is so much scattering around the sun? The density of matter around the sun has to be a lot less than in a detector...

[@goo37]

The basic version is that the sun produces a shit-ton of neutrinos.

[@kaecilius2656]

Neutrinos are shot from radioactive nuclei. They interact only through the weak force, ignoring all the others. The sun is almost as relevant in mass for neutrinos as the detector chamber. The neutrino hits more nuclei on the Sun than in any known detector chamber... obviously. Even with these detectors having artificial neutrino-producing jets (instead of detecting the neutrinos coming from the Sun which are limited). But they really don't interact easily for being the smallest particle known. The density of matter is almost irrelevant because neutrinos are almost weightless... The core must have lots of interactions between neutrinos and nuclei but it's almost irrelevant their interaction. They hit protons almost like tiny neutrons which doesn't interact with electromagnetic nor strong forces or color, it interacts only through gravity. It's no wonder it's called The Ghost Particle.

[@m-bronte]

they come from the core of the sun they are beta decay particles, that scatter in a straight line and they travel very fast and go through everything, our bodies into the earth etc. Neutrinos are considered in a category of dark matter which scientists don't know much about.

[@alquinn8576]

+Derek WIlliams "A theory that has no experimental base is 'philosophy', or worse" is a statement that has no experimental basis--so his reason for disdaining philosophy is built upon a philosophy that cannot be justified within his own system of belief. Having an anti-philosophy philosophy is a tad bit self-defeating...

[@ergbudster3333]

His "usual comment when following other physicists" ie "never follow an animal act" is not finely tuned. One can see this as an insult. OR one can see it as a complement ie., to an impressive, lovable, delightful display which puts one's display to shame. I think he means the latter but I know and understand nerds. Most people do not.

[@manishakaul3585]

From a layman perspective I can take a step defying gravity but if I want to eject myself into space suddenly gravity becomes so strong How come ?

[@ChrisRobertsThe]

Each step requires counteracting gravity. You spend energy to oppose gravity. The more gravity you want to counter, the more energy it requires. Gravity doesn't "become" strong when launching something into space, it just requires more energy to break through to orbit. Plus, in achieving orbit you're still in Earth's gravity well so orbiting bodies are still heavily under the influence of Earth's gravity. Breaking out of orbit requires even more energy due to needing to escape even more gravity.

[@ergbudster3333]

Ouch! I just got hit on the nose by an electron neutrino and two muon neutrinos from an experiment that hasn't happened yet! Dang it!

[@phy29]

Time is scale elastic ....

[@FishTankEnjoyer]

Scott Adams!

[@DigitalLibrarian]

This guy wants to extend himself into Einstein's forbidden regions.

[@nielsssg]

If you close your eyes while the video starts it sounds like your ps3 is turning on

[@kaecilius2656]

Quantum Relativistics!

[@madisondrum9179]

he is uh hilarious

[@davep8221]

Why do neutrinos like to go through fingernails so much?

[@streettrialsandstuff]

Okay what if you make a machine that once it receives the neutrino from the 60ns future tells the machine that sends it not to send it? Boom💥🤣 (I am aware that this was a measurement error)

[@MrKnnknn]

I don't care much about his "as a matter of fact attitude", Physics is about discovery and realization, with that comes raised eyebrows and "polytonie" sentences :)

[@DavidMorley123]

Videographer: The man's slides are more important to see than his personage. Why don't you park a tiny personage view in a corner of his slide.

[@alanpotts3297]

Oh dear...an old post! It was clear to all (nearly) when neutrinos were observed in Italy, travelling at superluminal (>c) velocities that something was wrong with experimental data and NOT with physics. So much of this TALK is, frankly, irrelevant! Neutrinos are tres important as a mass constituent of the Universe. Oscillations to tau neutrinos could produce mass that describes dark matter...with the slight problem that dark matter is COLD...not near luminal. So all things remain confused (but interesting), as of 2017.

[@alanpotts3297]

Tachyons would be interesting to consider with respect to multiverse branes...

[@giuffre714]

Even if they traveled at twice the speed of light, it wouldn't be instantaneous. So they couldn't get anywhere before they left. That rules out time travel.

[@bboyagua]

Joe Giuffre That's not how physics works. Time is part of the fabric of space. The speed of light is how fast light moves through time AND space. When you move through the space-time fabric at a speed close to the speed of light, time slows to a near stop. Mathematically, what is beyond that in any vector of space-time is backwards. Instantaneous travel isn't actually travel at all. Your concept of speed is colloquial, and unrelated to how it works with relativity.

[@giuffre714]

bboyagua I'll tell how physics work. Atomic clocks are affected by gravity. It has nothing to do with time. Time is just us counting, it doesn't exist. It contains no matter or energy. Slowing down or speeding up the ticks on a physical device has nothing to do with the rest of reality. It only affects the device.

[@bboyagua]

Joe Giuffre "I'll tell how physics work." What a lovely way to preface you telling me how physics DOES NOT WORK. They make physics books, you know. In fact, anyone is allowed to read them. You clearly have some free time on your hands, maybe spend it that way. "Atomic clocks are affected by gravity. It has nothing to do with time." Are you under the impression that clocks measure time? They measure internal motion, which is why every time you used the word "time", you used it incorrectly. And EVERYTHING is affected by gravity, even dark matter. "Time is just us counting, it doesn't exist. It contains no matter or energy." Wrong, and wrong. Clocks are just counters. Time as an isolated thing doesn't exist, so that was almost correct, but space-time contains all the known matter and energy in the universe. "Slowing down or speeding up the ticks on a physical device has nothing to do with the rest of reality. It only affects the device." Once again, you presume some magical properties about clocks. Just go to the free online MIT library. Even if you went to Wikipedia, you could have read up on time enough to disprove everything you've said.

[@giuffre714]

bboyagua I'm not under the impression that clocks measure time. Time is defined by the ticks if our clocks. Time is in fact us counting.

[@bboyagua]

Joe Giuffre So... you didn't understand a single thing I said? "Time is defined by the ticks if our clocks. Time is in fact us counting." Repeating the same thing over and over doesn't make it right. I've wikipedia'd space-time for you, since you refuse to learn independently: [time cannot be separated from the three dimensions of space, because the observed rate at which time passes for an object depends on the object's velocity relative to the observer and also on the strength of gravitational fields, which can slow the passage of time for an object as seen by an observer outside the field.]

[@chrisofnottingham]

The difference between TED and TEDx is disappointingly huge. It needs to become common knowledge that the x version means you are likely to hear any old rubbish.

[@bopperette7260]

If time is the fourth dimension but is only a human construct then by definition that is not the fourth dimension. This begs the question if time is a human construct... What is it that we're missing?? We can't be that far off the mark 🤔 Edit: Unless it's another paradox 😂🤣 Maybe that's where the answer lies, in why there even is a paradox. My brain's starting to hurt

[@wazha8371]

You are confusing mathematical dimensions and the common SciFi meaning of "dimension". But anyway, it is very arguable (and probably very wrong to say) that time is only a human construct. Also, what we are talking about when we use the word "time" is in the end very different from what "time" actually is in physics, and therefore, you could say that this "time" we are talking about is a human construct, while keeping in mind that "time" in physics is probably not.

[@k.ganesanganesan6825]

When are you going to end HUNGER STARVATION POVERTY ?

[@ffggddss]

Sure, because, y'know, that's someone *else's* job, not yours.

[@neilanderson891]

QUESTION: How could neutrinos travel faster than the speed of light? PART 1: if photons "interact" more than neutrino's do, perhaps photon's are slowed-down more than neutrinos are, in any given environment. Perhaps the "Speed of Light in a Vacuum" has never been properly measured because there's no such thing as "Absolutely Empty Space". (Theory says - Every cubic centimeter in the vacuum of "outer space" is roiling with virtual particles and energy being created and annihilated every nanosecond. That's a lot to interact with.) PART 2: Perhaps neutrinos travel in a "straighter line" than photons do, simply by having fewer interactions in every possible environment. The path of a photon is bent by it's interaction with gravity, much like the path of a baseball or bullet is affected by gravity. A faster baseball, and a faster bullet, will travel in a straighter line than slower bullets and baseballs, and thus have a shorter path to their destination. PART 3: The illustration shows the path from the source to the detector is "straight line" that takes the neutrinos through the crust of the earth, and (at one point) reach a maximum depth of 1.1 kilometer (I think). Well, if you travel below the crust, there's mass above you which slightly cancels some of the gravity of the earth below you. There's arguably less (net) gravity. Since time is "slowed" by gravity, then whenever there's less gravity, time is slowed less. In areas where gravity is lessened, then time is slowed less, and the neutrinos appear to move faster than expected. Photons could've have traveled a bit "faster than expected" if they could have taken the same path as the neutrinos. It's an interesting talk, but it would have been nicer if he had "ruled out" the 3 obvious "naysayer's explanations" above.

[@Unboundedominion]

Particle physics: It's a zoo out there. Comment section..

[@blackhawk754profile]

why d fuc* you have only 18 minutes?

[@starman8225]

The Italian experiment was flawed.Get your correct information before you give a presentation.

[@fleurdepapaye9635]

I don't like an explanation of phenomenon in science which jumping up here and there touching philosophy and imagination without a profound evidence and a firm basic understanding.

[@PrivateSi]

No, stop following the maths in physics and correct it!

[@deborahdeacon9156]

The guiltless company quickly crack because ethernet advantageously wipe pace a invincible share. crabby, psychotic bongo

[@gyro5d]

Photons are not particles. The Slow Mo Guys, "Light at 10 trillion FPS". The "C" doesn't exist. Light has a rate of induction. Through the coaxial circuit of the Inertial plane. On Tesla Nodes, where EM waves travel.

[@vinceanthony7046]

WTF! Dont watch this!

[@DoubleM55]

Started great, but then turned to a philosophical rant and fantasy. Sorry, but extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, even If you happen to have a Ph.D. You can't just make shit up and expect a Nobel prize!

[@kaczan3]

TEDx? Is this a real science lecture or just another feminist "science" lecture?

[@tomslaski8597]

What semantic BS!

[@stringedassassin]

Holy crap... worst speaker ever.

[@dontgetmadgetwise4271]

Perhaps this reflects your inability to listen. Would you prefer a talking media head with lip gloss, a pretty smile and laughter?

[@johnkelly6809]

Why are you describing a diagram when you don't show it? We have seen people talking before... show the diagram instead of yourself. For a lecturer, you haven't a clue how to lecture. Can't be bothered to watch anymore!

[@jakkbnimble4085]

Yawn

[@bayisbenevolent4899]

Goddamn, that intro near blasted me into another dimension. Volume warning ⚠️