Supersymmetry & Grand Unification: Lecture 10

[@TN6625]

What a great and brilliant professor! He takes a subject that seems to be the private domain of top physicists and makes it seem more personal and intimate to the student with his easy going way: In particular, focusing on the theory instead of getting concerned about small numerical factors, asking questions and repeating some points, drinking coffee and eating cookies. Maybe now I can open some of my SUSY or Supergravity books without being so intimidated.

[@erwinmarschall8879]

28:35 colors of quarks: red, green, blue colors of antiquarks: antired (=cyan), antigreen (=magenta), antiblue (=yellow)

[@alfonso9476]

The professor is a good man.

[@2pizen]

best explanation of proton decay!

[@Grandunifiedcelery]

Have a nice proton decay!

[@joehaley2691]

The description of the particle content of SU(5) was excellent. It is quite compelling that everything fits so well... If only the GUT scale were any where directly experimentally accessible.

[@NuclearCraftMod]

He goes over it in the Standard Model lecture series.

[@peterhind]

@@Gandalf98This is his lecture with SU(3) kzbin.info/www/bejne/enqodZ6PZ75nb9U . but half the lecture is missing, however Dr Physics A covers it at kzbin.info/www/bejne/sISQfaagp69-hqM .

[@TenzinLundrup]

This reminds me of the periodic table before quantum mechanics.

[@ak776]

me too seriously

[@zxrxrichter4471]

🙏

[@loren-emmerich]

1/2B-MC2+1/89M

[@zacfootball]

16:41 si i J is the isolation of the leap expiration (Janet)and Mr. Trumps Inauguration on the 67% days (1/3 in quantum) and the argument of minutes later in the video

[@Powd3r81]

this is way over my head.. it sounds like jibber jabber to me

[@ralfkruger300]

Fenris17 try binge watching while high

[@ak776]

watch from the starting to understand

[@ZacharyXAE]

2ˆ11=2048

[@loren-emmerich]

(1, 1, 2, 3)(1+1+2)(4 + 5(1,1,2,3)6 +((1+1+2+4))7 + 8) etc. Fibonacci sequences making normal sequences, this is why i think we can't predict natural phenominals.

[@TheAncestrica]

SuperBoring Symmetry and Grand Boring Unification of Nobody knows what.....but Leonardo is a Great Professor!!!

[@fabiangomez7580]

there are no particles...your science is empty.

[@ZacharyXAE]

it's all spin ∑a

[@TenzinLundrup]

What causes the tracks in a bubble chamber? What causes the photoelectric effect? Why was the neutrino flux from the sun predicted so well and turned out to be right after neutrino oscillations were discovered? What caused the phosphor to glow in old TV sets. What runs through the circuits of your computer? What does a geiger counter detect? What causes magnetism of the earth? Or of a permanent magnet?

[@fabiangomez7580]

@@TenzinLundrup false

[@TenzinLundrup]

@@fabiangomez7580 The questions I asked were not true or false questions.

[@fabiangomez7580]

@@TenzinLundrup the answer is: There are no such particles, and non of your questions merits being responded with false info, as I said, there are no particles, there are/is no such thing. There is in did a model, used to represent or explain certain activity, but even on that case, there is nothing, no particles, physis is not made out of particles, nor is it built from models, there is only one energy, and everything that is, is crystallizing as is, but not as particles. So the way you explain the interaction of forces has nothing to do with physis but with the way you where trained to resolve a certain problem and the way you verify truth, which apparently is mistaken, because like others, the level of poverty natural of your training, limits your logic into a solution that confuses a model of representation with the phisis. Its like that dumb idea that time is, forgetting time is nothing besides a convention.