Nuclear Engineer Reacts to Kurzgesagt "False Vacuum the Most Efficient Way to Destroy the Universe"

[@SomeUnsoberIdiot]

Fun story I heard; some guys on a nuclear sub, when they wanted to prank guests, would run by them shouting "The reactor is critical! The reactor is critical!" pretending to be in a panic.

[@Sharea-Yang]

hahahaha~ thats a real troll xD

[@AllmightyGigachad]

Gotta love traumatizing people now thats a good prank.

[@SomeUnsoberIdiot]

@@AllmightyGigachad If a quick prank is traumatizing to you, then good riddance.

[@AllmightyGigachad]

@@SomeUnsoberIdiot the most minor stuff can really make a scar on your heart. I'm traumatized from driving now even though I didn't get hurt. Just the thought of it happening again

[@azztopia]

I like the new thumbnails! Doing awesome my guy! #1 fan :)

[@tfolsenuclear]

Thanks so much! I’m happy you like them!

[@hhf39p]

For example, quantum tunneling is the effect used for writing data into floating gate memory cells. It happens billions of time a second when writing data on an SSD drive for example. So just because something requires tunneling, does not mean that it is impossible, or even rare. Given we do not want to solve a Schrodinger equation, generally the probability of tunneling occurring is a function of the size of the energy barrier versus the energy of the particle behind the barrier. For writing floating gate memory cells the energy of the electron is increased by applying an electrostatic field. The probability of the jump increases, and some electrons start making the jump. Those electrons charge the floating gate defining it to be "a one" (or vice versa). (The electrons that jump do not appear in the barrier material, there is no hole in that material, they just disappear from one side, and then appear on the other. I.e. they really tunnel.) So how much energy does a Higg particle have to be given to cause the probability of the jump to the true stable state to become more probable? How high is the barrier that holds it in? Is endowing a Higgs particle with enough energy to cause it to be probable, such that the mean time between events is something say, years, rather than 10^1000 years, achievable with a particle accelerator, past or projected in the future? Without answering these questions I don't see how you are providing any more information beyond that in the video you reviewed. BTW Kurzgesagt made a video called "We lied to you, and we will do it again." Not surprisingly they are also known for not making corrections when they make mistakes - so your commentary is helpful. And of course, they give no numbers in this one.

[@julieroy7156]

Brau

[@charlesmayberry2825]

Dude, I love your videos, But we really need to talk about your audio setup. There is a low background hum that is constant and consistent. Have you considered gating the mic? or using an EQ to lowcut the noise that seems to be mostly in the low end? It doesn't need to be perfect, but the noise that comes through is at least on my speakers and studio cans (usually using my studio headphones while watching these) it's very distractingly loud. You could even do a Subtractive EQ using something like Cockos Refir in subtract mode, It's not ideal but it's a free plugin in a pretty standardized format that most editing software can use. (the one ya but there is if you aren't careful it can negatively impact the voice quality as well as filtering out the background noise) If you want, I will volunteer a few minutes with some audio software to help find a solution. For purely selfish reasons, I enjoy this content, and would like to enjoy it without that background noise being as overwhelmingly present lol

[@rogervanbommel1086]

I hear it too(did not hear on speakers, had to use headphones to hear it)

[@rogervanbommel1086]

(Do a lotta audio stuff too, even live mixing of a band)

[@JohnRandomness105]

I hope that you don't mind this pre-video comment, but research in nuclear and particle physics is far from the nuclear physics used in nuclear weapons, nuclear power plants, and even the nuclear fusion that always seems beyond our reach as a macroscopic power plant. Also, even if we are in a false vacuum, supernovas and collisions between neutron stars aren't sufficient to tunnel us into the true vacuum. (I use "tunnel" as in quantum tunneling.) 3:50 The term "vacuum" isn't quite that bad. In quantum field theory, the vacuum state is minimum energy state, and is also the zero-particle state. So the universe isn't quite in it's vacuum state, merely an almost-vacuum state with particles here and there and occasional microscopic regions of non-vacuum such as solids. 5:50 An example of something analogous to quantum tunneling: light traveling down a single optical fiber can't escape, even though the optical fiber is made of clear glass. However, put two optical fibers very close together without touching, and light can still go from one to the other. 6:10 10^-100? Maybe 10^-googolplex. Whenever a professor discusses a human tunneling through a brick wall rather than going over it, I imagine the human disassembling by quantum tunneling -- body parts tunnel away from their proper place. 8:10 The two universes might be as different as cheese and Wednesday.

[@fbiagentmiyakohoshino8223]

why 360p

[@wrath7879]

great video

[@hipokemonfans]

Hey I liked your video, but I have some feedback for you! I would recommend clipping the video to contextual information and your response to it. Posting the entire video in full could land you in legal hot water as you're technically stealing views from the original creator. Also you should elaborate on complex concepts. I don't know physics like you do, but I would like to learn more and who better than an expert? Other than that interesting video!

[@plsdrop291]

You should watch videos more related to your sphere of knowledge, such as videos about known catastrophes on nuclear reactors. Or something like that, because now you are just watching videos with pop science and not sharing too much knowledge, you can do more than that. I'm not the hater, I'm just sharing my opinion to make your channel more attractive. Because right now you look like one of the regular reaction youtuber that only shares your emotions. I really think you can do better than this and share people with your knowledge.

[@tfolsenuclear]

I appreciate the feedback. I’ll mix it up a bit more with nuclear plant videos such as my next mini series on Atomic Twister: kzbin.info/www/bejne/b17ceZeXnZmYaLc.

[@plsdrop291]

@@tfolsenuclear Yes, I watched it, nice video! ) I will be happy to see videos with reactions to actual real-world, known nuclear-related "situations". But it's only my preference, maybe you don't want to watch that kind of content, up to you.

[@VelociraptorsOfSkyrim]

I disagree here. His area of Expertise involves Nuclear devices. That requires a level of physics knowledge. This video in particular is talking about a concept in physics. While it's not directly related to Nuclear devices, it's not like it's completely separate from his field.

[@rulas1122]

I think he shared plenty of knowledge. do you expect him to pause and talk for 3 minutes for every 30 seconds of video like other reaction channels? this is his area of expertise. all physics is related. goes to show how much you know