Supernovae and the 2011 Nobel Prize in Physics - Sixty Symbols

[@AlexChanNZ]

I love physicists. "Yeah the guy was a nice buddy of mine." So modest and friendly to each other.

[@hockeytom11]

I love Sixty Symbols. Im not nearly as bright as anyone on this show but I am continuously blown away by the amount of information in the videos. Very educational, thank you and keep it up!

[@salerio61]

@kurtilein3 red shift can only give the velocity when it was measured (back when the light was sent out), the absolute brightness can give an instantaneous measurement of distance which is based onpast accelerations which might not be the same we measure today from red-shift.

[@525047]

I love how you just barely got Dark Energy in there at the end. This was a pretty major discovery and I'm glad it got recognized.

[@Amethyst_Friend]

Dr. Gray has such a lovely voice.

[@zapfanzapfan]

Voice, face, brain... all lovely.

[@Triantalex]

thx

@sixtysymbols It's bloody great. This has turned into a great body of work kudos.

[@sixtysymbols]

@AstAMoore thank you!

[@sixtysymbols]

@fcadet I pretty much aim for on per week... and usually manage it... Since launching we've actually uploaded 157 videos at one every 5.8 days!

[@sixtysymbols]

@MindLessWiz glad you liked it!

[@StreuB1]

HAHAHAHAH!!! Professor Merrifields devious smile and laugh is hysterical! LOL HAHAHAHHA!!

[@fcadet]

can you put up videos more frequently?? at least once a week would be nice. love the channel

[@hockeytom11]

@sixtysymbols anytime. thank you too!

[@cristianfcao]

I thought one of my favorite science popularizers was involved in this project: Alex Filippenko. According to his Wikipedia article, he "was a member of the Supernova Cosmology Project and the High-z Supernova Search Team that used observations of extragalactic supernovae to discover the accelerating universe. This universal acceleration implies the existence of dark energy and was voted the top science breakthrough of 1998 by Science magazine".

[@kurtilein3]

@salerio61 the light used to measure the brightness is the same that is used to measure the redshift, same distance in space and time. and in physics, we can do extremely precise measurements when it comes to frequency, staggeringly precise, lots of digits to be obtained. if a star moves at the speed of a crawling baby towards us or away from us, 20 cm per second, thats about the limit of what we can detect in redshift. we cannot measure brightness that precisely, not by a large margin.

[@FordPrefect23]

Heard the prof and the bottle of whiskey tale on BBC Radio Nottingham earlier. Tuned in while I was in my car as there was crap on the other stations and thought "I know that voice!"

[@sixtysymbols]

@hockeytom11 thank you!

[@loserofnothing]

I like the dude. Smart, concise and not hesitant to praise others. What's his name???

[@makahabradda2]

got to see his presentation here in UH Hilo after he got the prize it was awesome!

[@WhichDoctor1]

@n310up As DeeOakster says because that quote makes no reference to acceleration or expansion of any kind it could just as well be, and probably more accurately be, applied to verify the truth of a steady state universe. In which case it would be wrong.

[@jmomm]

I enjoy all your videos. Can you do me a favor by adding the speaker's name/title? That way I can follow their studies. Thanks from Connecticut

[@HRomega]

Well yes in a way, the initial direction has faded to subtlety by now, though not due to gravity by majority, is due to dark energy (the thing that allows galaxies to hold together and move away from each other).

[@MindLessWiz]

Brilliant! Thank you so much for the explanation! I absolutely love these people.

[@Nackenkamm]

great video! it was said that "this has very fundamental implications for measuring the fate of our universe" .. what is the "new" fate then?

[@huyked]

Oh, the beauty of science.

[@KamiKagutsuchi]

@LikeEminem It was given to him by someone. And the best way to argue against someone, is to know what they are arguing for.

[@oXoBeansOnToastoXo]

This is brilliant - clear, nice to listen to understood! Thank you !

[@richarddantz4256]

Hahahahahah straight minimalizing the Nobel winners. 0:57 Quote " They've won the prize for very carefully measuring the brightness of a hand full of little dots and learning that they're not as bright as they expected them to be".

[@HeythemMD]

Is it though? If you continue the quote: "...and this just has fondamental implications for measuring the fate of our universe"

[@Sizerian]

@Blunder1248 To your second question, probably not. Most likely anit-matter behaves the same in relation to gravity as matter does.

[@sixtysymbols]

@atthetopofmyvoice thanks... lucky this one played to our strengths! Between them, the speakers knew all three winners. :)

[@gencofilmco]

Got this up good and quick. Well done.

[@NeutronCafe]

when that photon moves from that galaxy, and passes that galaxy and the cluster of galaxies, and then all those clusters of clusters and reaches earth, which gravitational effect we take in consideration? all the masses being in a sphere that has the center in the point of origin of the photon? or the one sphere that has the center on the point of the observer? cause in the first it becomes more red, and in the second it becomes more blue. or is there a third case? please if someone can explain

[@CelticSaint]

Congrats for a 3 winners and to the UON for willing University Challenge last night!!

[@ShiroKage009]

You can always try and go/go back to college and try to get yourself a graduate degree. I know that everyone has their situation (did not mean to pass judgment on yours) but you can find a way.

[@sharrynuk]

I like the woman with the Canadian accent. She explains things in a way that's really easy to understand.

[@darrenhello2]

It was thought that the universe was deccelerating but now it's seems that it's accelerating. Something comes into my mind, can it be that the acceleration of the universe is not linear but in an oscillatory way which will stabilize at a certain time ending up for the universe to stop expanding?

[@chrisofnottingham]

Brady, this is way after the event for when you were asking for questions but anyway... The CERN thing seems to be all about how particle physicists don't know what causes mass. Dark matter seems to be all about finding evidence for more mass in the universe than we were expecting. Do the profs think there could be a common explanation?

[@socratus1]

@sbergman27 It ( cosmological constant) was expected to have a much larger value. / sbergman27 / But the expectation was fallen down. The fact is: The detected material mass of the Universe ( the cosmological constant / the critical density of Uuniverse) is so small (the average density of all substance in the Universe is approximately p=10^-30 g/sm^3 ) that it cannot ‘close’ the Universe into sphere and therefore our Universe as whole must be ‘open’, endless

[@mcpooch]

@HiAdrian I noticed that too. Or at least I assumed that "novae" was pronounced something between "novay" and "noveh".

[@zapfanzapfan]

Are they really standard candles? Wouldn't the metallicity of the original star somewhat alter the composition of the remnant white dwarf and therefore the precise nature of the explosion? Stars in the early universe were lower in metallicity than more recent stars, wouldn't that potentially influence this result?

[@dojokonojo]

When was it discovered that the expansion of the Universe is accelerating, since it seems to me we have always thought that it was? Also when was dark matter and dark energy first suggest? I think I am too young to remember an era when we thought otherwise.

[@sixtysymbols]

@Bitjet311 feel free to email the link! ;)

[@DanielLiNeutrinos]

Had Sixty Symbols already did a video about Enstien's cosmological constant?

[@kurtilein3]

okay, now im a bit confused. i assumed that for figuring out the expansion rate, they would first use supernovas as a distance measurement, but then look at the redshift! Now this video seems to indicate that they only looked at brightness, not redshift. now i really wonder how they arrived at a velocity, let alone a change in velocity. how is that done by just looking at brightness? this confuses me, i assumed redshift to be a big part of it. does someone know more?

[@L00NGB00W]

@LikeEminem The guy that wrote 'Atlas Of Creation' sent free copies to universities.

[@nate22621]

@fcadet don't complain, sixtysimbols is amazing!

[@Blunder1248]

So could certain light change over time in open space. would anti matter have a reverse effect to gravity?

[@singlespies]

Just wondering: is it possible that matter is contracting while the universe is expanding? This might create the appearance of an accelerating universe, I think.

[@HiAdrian]

It seems all of the speakers have difficulty pronouncing (or distinguishing) Supernova, the singular, and Supernovae, the plural. I noticed this last video too.

[@JimWarp93]

Great as always!

[@NeutronCafe]

lets suppose that we measure the redshift of a photon emmited by a galaxy very far away. there is for as far i can understand the doppler redshift, due to its moving away, the cosmological redshift due to the expansion of the space. (not that i understand the aspect entirely, just some intuision) and the gravitational redshift, which the latter troubles me the most. if a photon loses energy when going from high gravity to lower and so it is seen as more red to the observer in the low gravity,

[@HRomega]

No, that is the cause of expansion, the direction is outwards from the origin, which is the big bang.

[@AstAMoore]

Excellent editing, Brady!

[@Dalton_w]

@MuffinatorXII because it is part of physics. like neurology is part of biology, and particle theory is part of physics.

[@iHerpaDerp69]

If everything is moving faster and faster with greater distance we only know how fast something is going how ever long it took light to get there and back to us and since they keep getting faster with no slowing then how do we know if they arent already moving faster than the speed of light or possibly even more of the universe is moving faster than the speed of light and we dont know its there

[@Noovil25]

Please, people, don't take that century-old debate here, cursing and being disrespectful to others are very unprofessional. anyway, congrats to the scientists who won the Nobel Prize!

[@SpencerCJ]

I think just learnt more from this video than 4 years in high-school :P

[@advers1078]

@TheRealLaugh99 Into Nothing, As far as I understand it the point of the big bang is that it explains how time, space and matter came to exist; and as such space only exist within the boundaries of the universe and beyond this is nothing in the most absolute sense of the word. That's my understanding of it I could be wrong so someone could correct me.

[@TheEightfoldPath_]

@nonbutone Those verses does not imply knowledge of an expanding universe. There has been supernovas that has been visible with the naked eye thus the second quote of yours. Also: The first quote, fair enough, expanding. What about the part of "We built it with might"? We didn't create the cosmos. Well then you might say it's referring to the research in it? It's only twisting something in order to make up for the otherwise huge lack of predictions and evidences religious texts provides.

[@cristianfcao]

In case you are interested in finding more about this discovery, here's a whole 2 hour lecture about that!: watch?v=vPkGEVgOJK0 and here's a 20 minute lecture: watch?v=-gAtPyEu0G4

[@alexChenAUS]

why is her poster so crinkled?

[@X3QT0R]

Does that mean we will attain the state of heat date earlier than first predicted?

[@advers1078]

@djay00009 Not Quantum Physics but rather the Multiverse hypothesis, which solves the problem of explaining the constant and stable nature of the laws of physics we observe; to me people to often take it as a Theory which it is not, it's a hypothesis, yet to be proven and without a evidential bases as of yet, where as the big bang theory has a solid evidential bases and from it beyond universe exists nothing in the most absolute sense, its a nice concept for deep thought but its not proven.

[@anweshbhattacharya8017]

Is that Chris Conselice in the video?

[@advers1078]

@advers1078 That was a very careless use of the word how from me, rather the big bang theory explains how the universe as we know it can be tracked back to the point of origin which we refer to as the singularity due to the laws of physics breaking down at that point. expanding into my use of the word nothing, neither space, time or matter exists beyond the universe.

[@zz0mfgz]

Those pictures at 2:00 are real right? Those are absolutely magnificent.

[@911gpd]

Of course they are

[@TheRealLaugh99]

This migt be stupid to ask, but what is the universe expanding into?

[@djay00009]

@advers1078 Quantum Physics talks of other universes , What if there is more stuff out there than we can ever imagine ? What if there are other universes ? There could be a lot , As they say , the only way to measure something that far is through is luminosity ,What if there are something much more further away so far away that its light has yet to reach us , or might be blocked cause of something ..... But yeah , this is very interesting that the universe expanding faster .....

[@EJHEJHx2]

Ah, awesome as always.

[@mokopa]

Would it not be supremely frustrating if it turns out that the Final Answer derived from the Ultimate Unified Formula depends on something absolutely arbitrary, like how you felt about that morning's first cup of coffee?! It may eventually be discovered that the "dark matter/energy" in fact /does/ exist (everywhere) - and even though it may be interacted with - its effects can only ever be observed, never predicted...not due to lack of tools/intellect, but simply due to The Ultimate Uncertainty

[@ragnkja]

Friendly enough to bet against each other: one bet that the results he and his collaborators were getting were right, the other bet that the result published by another team of cosmologists while his opponent was working on his measurements was right. There were two possibilities, the universe either accelerating or slowing down, both considered at the same time (1997).

[@MaCs1313]

I'm still a little skeptical about the expanding of the universe, i need to do some extensive research

[@salerio61]

@kurtilein3 Didn't these guys just win the Nobel prize for measuring the absolute brightness? That's what I understood from the video and from the news reports

[@chrisofnottingham]

Fascinating video

[@zacherypeters]

whenever i watch these videos i always think of the big bang theory

[@CorneCap]

(وَالسَّمَاءَ بَنَيْنَاهَا بِأَيْدٍ وَإِنَّا لَمُوسِعُونَ)

[@scrustle]

@sixtysymbols Time to re-arrange your bookcase maybe?

[@Thenutron]

Thank god! Have to do a report on Schmidt and found this in my sub box. :)

[@ThePostmanpat63]

So did we think the universe was slowing down, before this discovery???

[@nathanjordan431]

A brilliant use of supernovae.

[@novajiva]

I don't understand how you deceide that a supernova observed is of 1A or another type.

[@sixtysymbols]

@LikeEminem not again, no.... search: merrifield atlas creation

[@MuffinatorXII]

how come astronomy isnt in a catagory of its own for the nobel prizes?

[@mcpooch]

The supernova at 2:18 looks like a cave troll from lord of the rings or a Persian cat with all his fur and his ears singed off.

[@itsMinuteMaid]

The stars in the observable Universe number at LEAST in the sextillion bracket. Thus, I assure you that supernovae are not rare

[@tahamoha1000]

Liamathepry When the atom it was discovered??? And when did you discover the parts of atom??? All this mention in quran If it is not from god how he know about the atom ?? And how he know about the part of atom which smaller than the atom???

[@reganmarin16]

So if the Universe is expanding where is it expanding from?

[@Neueregel]

@ThePostmanpat63 no.

[@andersbendsen5931]

So, what bottle did Mike buy?🤷‍♂️

[@HRomega]

Nah man, there was originally a direction, outwards from the beginning, but as time passes and the expansion continues in every direction due to dark energy the precision on this direction fades. This is a common misconception.

[@Bluebuthappy182]

very good vid guys

[@BKMarcelus88]

awesome vid

[@MrZombieZebra]

@MaCs1313 Those people just got a Nobel Prize for it, and here you are saying you're going to do "extensive research"; yeah, right.

[@Ed1H3r0]

Looked at this and though: "Sheldon Cooper". xD

[@50PullUps]

I wish I had Brady's life.

[@dothemaths1256]

50PullUps same

[@Ucada]

I think you shot this video too close. It would be better if we could see they moving their hands while explaining.

[@valhar2000]

The curvature of space-time, obviously.

[@LikeEminem]

"Atlas of Creation" ...care to explain?

[@ilikechess1]

great, I have now go find @muntheraqel's comment. Congratulations to the astronomers!

[@tahamoha1000]

Liamatheory I am not tiling you to convert but we know this information 1400 years ago and it is written in our holly Quran ... And congratulation for people who won the prize!!!!

[@NeutronCafe]

or am i missing something fundamental?