Particle physics made easy - with Pauline Gagnon

[@anthonyhebert5630]

It's such a privilege and empowering gift when you're understanding what you're learning as you learn it, simply by focusing on a passionate teacher with the gift of speaking in appropriate relation to student level knowledge

[@biffy7]

After years and years of watching lectures on particle physics, I must say this is excellent. She is so clear and precise in her choice of words.

[@hamsterclamper]

I had the disjointed vocabulary stored away in my brain, but now the words have all been eloquently knitted together to form sentences that I can finally begin to comprehend. Excellent!😊

[@tony.999]

What a great lecture from a passionate speaker. I wish Pauline was my Physics teacher many years ago. My job may have taken a different path and I may have been immersed in Physics by now.

[@johnhagan-zr4pm]

Totally unlikely John Dalton taught himself science and mathematics at the age of 10 (1796) Marie Curie paid for her own tuition, was totally devoted and original The results you have got in your life have nothing to do with Pauline.

[@vidyalankargharpure]

I offer my comment after watching the video for one time. The subject is excellently explained in understandable language that any layman in science like me can understand. Of course I shall watch it again and again to understand it fully. Thank you all, very much. Note, I hail from India.

[@edwardlee2794]

Very captivating lecture. I thought I knew something something about particle physics. Not so fast, until I come to this one. Not that I changed anything that I knew but now they make more sense. Thanks RI and Dr. Gagnon and keep up the good work. From Hker worldwide

[@johndoepker7126]

The lil one an i jus finished watching this, she's 8. After she got done asking questions about her accent and got used to it....she, along with me were glued to our TV. An absolutely phenomenal presentation! We both learned a lot today !

[@TheRoyalInstitution]

Watch the Q&A for Pauline's talk here: kzbin.info/www/bejne/rIKbiGmVqrJjhtk - and hear about why she thinks particle physics is stuck here: kzbin.info/www/bejne/aGeTfKV3f9p7nac

[@theherk]

That bit about spectroscopic x-ray is very exciting. The whole lecture was superb.

[@zoozolplexOne]

Really cool the way she interacts with audience and very pleasant to hear her talking. what a good example "ripples on the water tank, can you see the water?" Thanks for sharing.

[@vikramheble9972]

A brilliant lecture on Particle Physics. To say Brilliant... is an understatement!

[@stephen_pfrimmer]

Thanks!

[@jacklcooper3216]

What a brilliant communicator

[@NandishParashar]

This was one of the best lectures I've watched.

[@r1madbrit]

Marvelous presentation, marvelous woman. Wonderful scientist and good fun attitude!

[@AlokKumar-ym8bl]

Excellent explanation..very informative..great God bless you all..love 💖 and respect 🙏.

[@johnrose5312]

Fantastic lecture - thankyou RI and Dr Gagnon.

[@MAGA_Extremist]

Wonderful presentation

[@anwerbutt2621]

Thank you madam, you are a wonderful teacher.

[@elamvaluthis7268]

Very nice explanation thank you 👍👍👍.

[@mihirnakar4513]

This video just brings so much of information in summary in a quite engaging way, absolutely loved it

[@SilentRacer911]

Now if only she talked about the guy that put his head into a particle accelerator, they use such small masses but it still caused damage, just a few atoms moving at that speed is incredible

[@hilaryporter7841]

Gosh, it may have been Mileva, that's encouraging. I loved your delivery of this lecture, your way of illustrating using every day comparisons such as Lego bricks but at the same time putting over particle physics facts which are truly at the cutting edge of knowledge for man and womankind. Hope a few of those wonderful books find their way to Afghanistan. Brilliant

[@simon_driver]

One of the best lectures I’ve watched. Epically excellent

[@Jasonnewlook]

Please could you do a presentation on low frequency noise and vibrating effects on human body. Love your presentation.

[@joec.9833]

Thank you for content like this and at length.

[@PurnamadaPurnamidam]

Merci Madame Pauline vous etre la meillieur, bravo ✌🇲🇺

[@derekholland3328]

very engaging very inspiring..thank you.

[@BaalFridge]

Merci Pauline

[@sarahstewart2059]

I'm curious about neutrinos and the relationship of black holes and gravitional force they may produce. Even with producing light, I would suspect that they would qualify as dark matter or the result thereof in that particular instance. I have so many questions! There is no measurement to the amount of respect and awe I have for this woman. I wish I had attended this lecture in person. Passionate humans are wonderful. Very cool 😎

[@sarass1234]

Wonderful wonderful woman.... Great knowledge given to public

[@KetogenicGuitars]

Thank You!

[@falalaffel]

She's fantastic

[@unnikrishnannairkrishnannair.]

Standard wave is due to movement of hot water fro hot region tp cold region over varying diametrical surfce. From north to south the land mas slip out from oving water and slip down sand, hot water moning from eqatorial region to poles approach lower dimetrical land region and smash up the underwater sand prevously drawned to bank and build beach

[@vinp6093]

Its time to capture the imagination of all children's brains before 7 years of age with this!!!

[@thomaskerkhoff579]

Particle physics made understandable...bravo!

[@jac9301]

I adore how infinitely intelligent she is.

[@sarcasticstartrek7719]

3:38 is wrong. Electrons do not "gravitate" around the nucleus. Gravity doesn't affect them.

[@utl94]

"Gravity doesn't affect them." What? Gravity certainly effect electrons, just way less than the electromagnetic forces of the nucleus.

[@thedouglasw.lippchannel5546]

Wonderful video, like magic.

[@_._191]

57:31 bless you!!!

[@havefunbesafe]

Great lecture and cool shirt!

[@FD-rt3rv]

Pauline does super interesting talks

[@alvaug2]

Fantastic lecture!

[@davidwilkie9551]

"Take no one's word for it" at the RI, because Sincerity is another aspect-version like "Precision is not Accuracy", and Physics is Literally Written interference interpretation, not directly understood AM-FM Logarithmic Time Communication and substantiated Actuality. The shift initiated by Galileo's harmonic timing methodology was an interference positioning resonance bonding sense-in-common cause-effect at an instantaneous, Observable Measure and the reciprocal of relative-timing frequencies determined wavelength of mass-energy-momentum continuous creation connection cause-effect. Every "Particle" represents a "chord" identifier of compound resonant probability frequencies, which is a matter of integrating reciprocals of prime-cofactor frequency density-intensity interference that relates to the Periodic Table and Standard Model spectrum of nodal-vibrational emitter-receiver holographic quantization cause-effect @.dt instantaneously observed and compared with modulated memory in the context of e-Pi-i omnidirectional-dimensional logarithmic interference positioning Actuality. Note that your "Word" observed is congruent with your absolute positioning relative-timing relationship with a sum-of-all-histories memorisation of here-now-forever instantaneously, and therefore pivoted at Absolute Zero/.dt instantaneously, otherwise there's the perception that an unsubstantiated opinion is like the anti Epicyclic arguments that may look "haywire" in comparison to the Heliocentric system, but epicycles have inherent continuity at Absolute Zero-infinity axial-tangential relative-timing and are not really isolated from the Universe and a BBT type initiation-commencement of coherence-cohesion sync-duration resonance. Not taking anyone's word is standard Sciencing practice, to critique and realigne the sense-in-common POV cause-effect, Absolute Zero reference-framing from substantiated Observable Eternity-now Interval Conception (Galilean harmonic relative-timing) phenomena.

[@hridaychasat980]

Really appreciable

[@jnhrtmn]

CERN language: "No matter how much energy we put into the fields, the particle never reaches the speed of light." My question: How can you expect to push a car faster than you can run? Maybe the speed limit is in the pushing ABILITY itself. A field must have a reaction limit, in spite of what Maxwell told you. Someone second-guess something. Testing your pet theory is not the same as questioning it, because a PERFECT MATH ANALOGY will FOOL YOU FOREVER just testing it!

[@schmetterling4477]

Please stand in front of the mirror if you want to see a person with Dunning Kruger. ;-)

[@aqilshamil9633]

@@schmetterling4477 particle physics is hot garbage , Heaviside and Maxwell must be rolling in their graves

[@utl94]

Well, nobody is expecting to push a car faster than the speed limit on running. Remember that we are not "running along" the particles "pushing" them down the accelerator. The accelerator is in place all along the acceleration path so there is absolutely no need to "keep up" with the particle being accelerated.

[@jnhrtmn]

@@utl94 You are missing the point. The speed limit may be due to a reaction limit of the field's ability to push something. Modern science is only math, so this concept in not in the math, therefore it's not a concept for anyone to realize, but I just said it, so it's really there. The field may have a reaction limit in its ability to push a particle.

[@utl94]

@@jnhrtmn I did not "miss" anything, I simply went with you saying "How can you expect to push a car faster than you can run?" This is what I responded to. Now: there may be a limiting time scale on quantum field interactions. As far as particle physics is concerned, any interaction between fields, and therefore particles, is the exchange of force carriers: the bosons. The massless ones propagate with the speed of light, the massive ones somewhat slower. From pure relativity, we have that any massive particle follows E = gamma*m_0*c^2 and this gives the velocity as u = c * sqrt(1 - m_0^2*c^4/E^2) Crank upp the energy to infinity if you like, the velocity u will not exceed c. I.e. your quoted "CERN language" is perfectly accurate as "No matter how much energy we put into the fields, the particle never reaches the speed of light." To answer your question why, I have to disappoint you. The existence of a propagation limit c is a postulate of special relativity, and, further, we have not observed any information propagate any quicker and within special relativity, such notion is frankly absurd. Also: "Modern science is only math..." Actually, moderna science is a lot more than mathematics, there are a lot of impressive experiments around. I can put on the hat that questions if mathematics is actually science.

[@scottwalker9766]

Another thing that is closely related to energy is will.

[@patriciajob7829]

Thanks to the royal institut for inviting Mme Gagnon. Very interesting lecture. The way she does it makes science not exclusive to students but the one who does want to learn more about us, the world. Thank you for that. Look forward to watch the next lectures.

Small correction: LEGO started out in Billund, and the headquarters is still there. Not in Copenhagen.

[@benjamindover4337]

Excellent

[@leonmedenilla6095]

There is no end for everything ...PERPETUALITY is all we are...as long as there is existence there is no end to it...atom can be the largest of all when perpetual is the basis...as above so below they are connected

[@nwogamesalert]

I am losing quarks all the time. Especially in my brain. They are replaced with dark matter.

[@PetraKann]

What do you mean?

[@iamzae6123]

Lol

[@scottwalker9766]

Elon will fix that by employing the dark web.

[@Robert-wr8pz]

What the quark?

[@DrDeuteron]

what about (uuu) and (ddd) particles?

[@delhatton]

Clear, informative, well done. BUT is the term "fabric/canvas of the universe" just another way of referring to the Higgs field? Which is apparently not a particle.

[@davidrandell2224]

A proton is a collection of 1836 expanding electrons and add a bouncing expanding electron makes a hydrogen atom. The electron ‘mass’ -9.11- multiplied by 1836 equals the ‘ mass ‘ of a proton. Adding 9.11 to a proton once or twice equals the ‘mass ‘ of the neutron. No energy, charge, photons, waves, spin, fields, potential, quantum,quarks, space- time, information etc. The expanding electrons do it all.

[@frenchguyst-croissant3432]

Strong québécois accent right here . I'm québécois and i can recognize this accent from miles away 😅

[@michaelogden5958]

What an enjoyable presentation.

[@123tinhat123]

Excellent informative lecture and she had me laughing out loud in parts, so very entertaining as well.

[@Materialist39]

I appreciate all of these excellent scientists continually and relentlessly going out of their way to explain to lay people (like myself) what is likely our best working theory about existence itself

[@l.gagnon3846]

Cette conférence était intéressante et amusante. Ça faisait plaisir de voir des graphiques présentant l’approche statistique. Merci!

[@m.moolhuysen5456]

Fun thing is that the normal size LEGO brick actually does fit on a LEGO DUPLO brick, as you can find out after some proper experimentation.

[@BestCosmologist]

What's a quark made of?

[@stayfocused6848]

Strings

[@tofu-munchingCoalition.ofChaos]

@@stayfocused6848 That's not supported by evidence at the moment.

[@wareforcoin5780]

We don't know exactly the physical make up of a Ferengi, but when Paramount decides to go in depth about that I'll let you know.

[@tofu-munchingCoalition.ofChaos]

Naïvely one would think that they are elementary particles. And in a sense it's true (they are not composed of states). But they are nevertheless not strictly elementary in the way the Lagrangian is constructed. Quarks are composed of a "left handed version" and a "right handed version" without mass. But not that they are decomposed of two particles. They oscillate between these two versions by interacting with the background Higgs field. So what we call a "quark" is an interaction of osculating versions of two elementary particles and the Higgs field in the Lagrangian. The state however can't be split in the vacuum associated to our current state we are in. The same goes for the electron btw.

[@stayfocused6848]

@@tofu-munchingCoalition.ofChaos the oscillation must be occurring due to some excitation and there must be happening energy transmission.

[@davejones542]

but what makes up electrons and quarks

[@christopherrobinson7541]

Magic.

[@schmetterling4477]

They are both irreversible energy exchanges. The structure of these exchanges is predicted directly by two facts: space is three dimensional and all of physics is relative.

[@utl94]

@@schmetterling4477 "Irreversible" in what sense? I am thinking about annihilation and pair production.

[@schmetterling4477]

@@utl94 Irreversible in the sense of open systems. In an annihilation event we take two "local" massive quanta and we turn them into two massless ones. The result is that the energy in our photons is now leaving the interaction point at the speed of light. Because one can't catch a light beam those two quanta will never recombine into the two original massive quanta, again (at least not with anything resembling a macroscopic probability). This is clearly spelled out in Copenhagen, already. The Schroedinger equation describes a closed and isolated system (which is fully reversible), the Born rule an open, irreversible one.

[@utl94]

@@schmetterling4477 Well, recombination happens all the time in Quantum field theory as per the Heisenberg uncertainty principle and the path integral formulation. As for the Born rule, it may be applied to the solutions to the Schrödinger equation as well as to the solutions to the Dirac equation. The Born rule and the solutions to wave-like equations do not form a dichotomy. I don't get the "[i]Irreversible in the sense of open systems" idea.

[@AbbStar1989]

I love these lectures. Very interesting and educational.

[@vikramheble9972]

This lady reminds me of my school days....Yes, lad what is an electron? Me: Duh!!!

[@IKnowNeonLights]

I first thought of posting this comment on the materialising of artificial intelligence part of "science", then I thought (backwards) why give any publicity to that, when "particles" can be made so "easy". The comment is this....! I just happened to finish listening to an (Etruscan) proving (with a scientific method such as DNA sequencing/biology), for over an hour that an (Etruscan) he was not, and in doing so I finally understood what science is. It basically steams up to this....! (I am, but I cannot think ((why)). Give me something to calculate, and then I can think about that, and therefore as a consequence ((be)) related to something/anything/somehow). Now that I have understood what "science" is, I am left with a more (triple component) puzzling question, (for the moment being). One of being.....! Is that very very dangerous, is that very very liberating, or is that simply very very calculating......!?!?

[@PRG888]

Why just adding protons and neutrons, make elements have so many different properties

[@utl94]

Neutrons stabilise the charges nucleus. The charge of the nucleus determines how many electrons will bind to it to form a neutral state. Almost all properties of the different elements are chemical for everyday use and the chemical properties are determined by the number, the density, and binding energy of the electrons.

[@robert8124]

The chart is telling you what gravity is....What is all, their common characteristics.

[@noisywan]

Is there really a fundamental particle? Every fundamental particle must have fundamental particles so it should be impossible to call a particle as fundamental. It's temporary for that time.

[@schmetterling4477]

There are no particles at all. There are only quanta. Quanta are irreversible energy exchanges. For the purposes of high energy physics the difference doesn't matter, which is why the majority of high energy physicists will tell you about their mental model (which is false), rather than the real scientific explanation, which is tedious to use in these limited scenarios.

[@ayeshakawakil845]

There are no particle but fields

[@markoszouganelis5755]

👏👏👏👏👏👏👏

[@RodgerMudd]

Lego building blocks of matter I knew it as a kid.

[@Simonjose7258]

27:48 "No good drugs for him."

[@davejones542]

Re: "we think gravitons will cause gravitational waves but we havent found them yet ". um... Gravity is only a description for space time curvature effect that mass causes itself so you wont find it. Spacetime is made up of the other particles.. so how do you bend a quark or an electron.. the theory is full of holes. I am sick of scientists self congratulating how clever we are. Need to be more humble. we know less than 5%

[@schmetterling4477]

We don't bend quarks and electrons. Quarks and electrons are irreversible energy exchanges between different parts of the vacuum that we call "systems". The problem with "gravity" and "the graviton" is that it interferes directly with the background that is required to define what "energy" is and "where one system begins and another one ends". Our language is a good macroscopic approximation for the classical physical vacuum that creates everything else, it is not a good approximation for the the non-classical vacuum.

[@johnhagan-zr4pm]

"Someone something turned on the Higgs Field" WHY ? HOW ? Was it God, a Pigeon or a cuddly furry that "turned on a mysterious Field" ? OK. The BEH Field just popped up out of nowhere and for no reason ?

[@scottwalker9766]

I will take what i see fit and only what i see fit.

[@scottwalker9766]

Science in a nutshell.

[@scottwalker9766]

Some things the eye can not see.

[@michaelgonzalez9058]

The body is composed of Kelvin particles of the dimension of his and my known by chamber

[@alchemyjoe]

and yet theres nothing i can utilize out of it or applies to our use of it on earth nor did it provide proof of anything

[@lepidoptera9337]

Awh, your intellectual laziness is so cute when it feels sorry for itself. ;-)

[@brandonfetter3559]

24:48 Saying "someOne or something" triggered the Higgs Field is pretty irrational..

[@andrewcarbine7808]

Let’s hope we never learn of the other two period tables

[@nwogamesalert]

They say that yoghurt stimulates the up quarks. When you get plenty of healthy up quarks, you will be able to withstand the rest of the radiation better!

[@smlanka4u]

My TOE is the best.

[@smlanka4u]

@@RayzeR87-PutTheDinYOU, T: Theory, O: Of, E: Everything.

[@stayfocused6848]

The boson of Higgs Boson is came from an Indian physicist Satendra Nath Bose.

[@donc-m4900]

I'll wait for the book untill its translated into American English. 😉

[@christopherrobinson7541]

Isn't that an oxymoron.

[@seanclaflin8826]

The higgs boson is not useless, we do not yet know it's usefulness

[@schmetterling4477]

It stabilizes matter. That's useful enough. No Higgs, no matter. ;-)

[@tkvashist620]

Q 👍👍

[@michaelgonzalez9058]

Which is dark matter

[@anthonyalbillar-montez5946]

We do not have ilizreanas consent to use her for science no more.

[@mahoneytechnologies657]

There are other much more important areas of Physics and other Sciences that need Money more than CERN, Money spent on Science must be prioritized.

[@schmetterling4477]

It is. Most money goes to medicine by far. Since you don't know that, it's obvious that you are science illiterate. :-)

[@UnKnown-xs7jt]

❤😃💯🙏🏽

[@davejones542]

made easy... um

[@MinolleoneSilva-hw6no]

මොඩ අක්කලට හොදයි මෙව

[@stoatystoat174]

:)

[@salwaneleyland5874]

--±++ im sure you see just nutral si Ø ±

[@philippewinston2740]

Gobbledygook madame Gagnon is *charabia* in french

[@hamsterclamper]

N’importe quoi

[@philippewinston2740]

@@hamsterclamper exactly

[@patriciajob7829]

Gagnon in french with a S at the end means "lets win together" or "we win". Charabia means in french talking in a laangage not understandible. Far from what I heard. And for her name, what a great programm ! As a lecturer interesting, pedagogue, adaptable, great. She explains something we don't usualy hear of. And she's doing it with passion, humour and pedagogie. So thumb down for your non constructive note

[@philippewinston2740]

@@patriciajob7829 vous n'êtes pas francophone de naissance ? Je le suis.Mais votre petit esprit se trahit par vos fautes d'orthographes aussi. Improve your english

[@Dr_LK]

Due to language limitations she makes many mistakes in her statements... after the first few minutes I had to switch it off. Very tiresome speaker. Sorry.

[@michaelgonzalez9058]

Cicumference's

[@fb9010]

the usual presentation that does not explain anything; she is really losing it....very little lucidity

[@Mountainmonths]

particle accelerators are just massive money pits and never produced anything of practical value

[@michaelsommers2356]

You do realize that the World Wide Web was invented at CERN, don't you?

[@nwogamesalert]

@@michaelsommers2356 No

[@matthewwakeham2206]

The thing with scientific research is you find out the value afterwards. Sometimes decades later. Without pointless research there would be no science and we'd still be hitting rocks with other rocks.

[@nwogamesalert]

​@@matthewwakeham2206 "You find out the value afterwards". Yes, as well as the eventual dangers and adverse effects of new knowledge. It seems to be getting more and more like a gamble. The over the top interest in promoting the untested vax is just one example, the operations on healthy children another.

[@michaelsommers2356]

@@nwogamesalert Well, it was.

[@keithjones2379]

This would make a lot more sense if she was a man.

[@Eigil_Skovgaard]

A new "educater" from the Jew Academy.