The Nature of Nothing | Space Time

Viewers like you help make PBS (Thank you 😃) . Support your local PBS Member Station here: to.pbs.org/Don...
It turns out that "nothing" is one of the most interesting somethings in all of physics. Signup for your free trial to The Great Courses Plus here: ow.ly/OOOp30beNyt
Note: There is a correction in this video that has been addressed in the pinned comment below.
You can further support us on Patreon at / pbsspacetime
Get your own Space Time t­shirt at bit.ly/1QlzoBi
Tweet at us! @pbsspacetime
Facebook: pbsspacetime
Email us! pbsspacetime [at] gmail [dot] com
Comment on Reddit: / pbsspacetime
Help translate our videos!
www.youtube.co...
Previous Episode:
Absolute Cold | Space Time
• Absolute Cold | Space ...
Links to Comments Response:
Man from Nantucket
• Absolute Cold | Space ...
Laxmi Papney
• Absolute Cold | Space ...
Flo Striker
• Absolute Cold | Space ...
HK Norman
• Absolute Cold | Space ...
thesimulacre
• Absolute Cold | Space ...
How do we study nothing? An empty jar still contains something: molecules of air and a bath of infrared light from its warm environment. But what if we suck out every last molecule of air, chill the jar to absolute zero, and shield it from all external radiation? The jar would contain only empty space, but it turns out that empty space is far from nothing.
Written and Hosted by Matt O'Dowd
Produced by Rusty Ward
Graphics by Kurt Ross
Assistant Editing and Sound Design by Mike Petrow
Made by Kornhaber Brown (www.kornhaberbrown.com)
Special thanks to our Patreon Big Bang, Quasar and Hypernova Supporters:
Big Bang
BITISM
CoolAsCats
David Nicklas
Richard Senegor
Quasar
Tambe Barsbay
Mayank M. Mehrota
Mars Yentur
Mark Rosenthal
Dean Fuqua
Y2
Justin Lloyd
Hypernova
Edmund Fokschaner
Max Levine
Matthew O’Connor
Eugene Lawson
Barry Hatfield
Martha Hunt
Joseph Salomone
Chuck Zegar
Craig Peterson
Jordan Young
Ratfeast
John Hofmann
Thanks to our Patreon Gamma Ray Burst Supporters:
Denys Ivanov
Nick Virtue
Alexey Eromenko
Nicholas Rose
Scott Gossett
Mark Dykstra
Peter Durocher
Michael Kers
Chris Hicks
Mark Vasile
Patrick Murray
Sultan Alkhulaifi
Alex Seto
Michal-Peanut Karmi
Erik Stein
Daniel Lyons
Kevin Warne
JJ Bagnell
J Rejc
Amy Jie
Avi Goldfinger
John Pettit
Shannan Catalano
Florian Stinglmayr
Yubo Du
Benoit Pagé-Guitard
Nathan Leniz
Jessica Fraley
Loro Lukic
Brandon Labonte
David Crane
Greg Weiss
The Great Courses Plus is currently available to watch through a web browser to almost anyone in the world and optimized for the US market. The Great Courses Plus is currently working to both optimize the product globally and accept credit card payments globally.

[@pbsspacetime]

Correction! Gluons are massless. Please think W or Z boson (mediators of the weak nuclear force) instead of gluon. Both of these have mass and hence their range is limited (as stated in the video), rendering the weak force, well, weak.

[@shadoah]

ok I was confused for awhile lol.

[@vacuumdiagrams652]

Ironically, there is a bit of literature about a sort of "constituent gluon" picture in which gluons acquire an dynamical mass (see e.g. link(dot)springer(dot)com/article/10.1007/s11467-015-0517-6 ). This issue is actually rather controversial because naively, massive gluons should break gauge invariance and render the theory mathematically inconsistent, but there is much subtlety that could undermine that expectation.

[@Saitama62181]

Why don't gluons have infinite range, like photons?

[@vacuumdiagrams652]

The strong interaction has a property called "confinement". This means that at sufficiently long ranges only particles which are neutral with respect to this interaction are allowed to exist. So a quark, which carries color charge, must always be accompanied by other quarks such that their combination is colorless. This can happen in at least two important ways: 1. You can marry a quark to an anti-quark, which carries opposite charge, creating a meson. Particles and antiparticles annihilate when brought together, so all mesons have a short lifetime. Nevertheless, they are very important, particularly the pion, which mediates the nuclear force between protons and neutrons. 2. You can have three quarks such that their colors combine into something colorless. People like to give the names "red", "green", and "blue" to these colors to indicate that their combination is colorless, but this is just an analogy. The important thing is that the mathematical structure of the color charges is such that three different colors combine to give a colorless object. These particles can be stable, and we have the proton (which is stable always as far as we know) and neutron (which is stable in a nucleus), as well as a slew of heavier, unstable particles comprising three quarks. The reason _why_ confinement happens is not as well-understood as we'd like. There are various explanations that are each good for different things. Nevertheless, when we simulate the theory, we typically observe confinement, and it's very well established that the theory does satisfy this property.

[@vampyricon7026]

"Why don't gluons have infinite range, like photons?" Vacuum Diagrams has given a good explanation of colour confinement, but now to directly answer your question: Gluons themselves have colour charge, even though they are the carriers of colour charge, so gluons are confined to a short range. Now can someone explain why some of them are multiplied by -i and why some have red-antired/green-antigreen/blue-antiblue terms in them?

[@bryanchambers1964]

Im a theoretical physicist in the M.S. program at TUM myself and let me just say these videos are INCREDIBLE.! They help me so much with the conceptual side of what I am working on. These subjects are very difficult to understand even without all the horrendous math but these explanations are second to none. Thank you so much PBS for bringing this amazing information so they world can appreciate our incredible universe.

[@ajdelozier5034]

How is it difficult to understand? Hold out your hands. If there was nothing between them, then they would be touching! if they are separated in any way shape or form then there is something between them instead of nothing. If there is nothing between two walls than those two walls. If there is nothing for you to grasp then there's nothing for you to consider. Then there's nothing for you to understand. If you think I'm trolling you you're wrong. It is as simple and elegant as:

[@quantum7401]

Horrendous math isn't so bad when you apply slightly less horrendous computer coding.

[@ajdelozier5034]

@@CChissel I was using speech to text. I didn't go back and proofread because that would have been too easy LOL. I was saying that if there is nothing between two objects than those two objects are touching.

[@Tomahawk1999]

It is so difficult to understand because much of theoretical physics is nothing more than peoples fancy imaginations multiplied a 1000 times over to create one hell of a confusing situation. Add maths to it and no one has any clue whats going on. Best example? String theory. Not one single prediction, hasnt gone anywhere in 30 yrs and wont go anywhere in the next 300.

[@dwalto02]

Try Ken Wheeler. He'll set you straight. There's a lot of bologna here...

[@95TurboSol]

This is my favorite science channel, it's rock solid science wise but still they entertain fun ideas without getting "out there" like other click bait channels.

[@javi8905]

i agree absolutely

[@bullymaguire2061]

i love my weekly dose of spacetime...

[@sean3533]

"Are we living in a simulation??!!!???"~Neil deGrasse the just shy of Nye the popscience guy.

[@luciferangelica]

i can't believe it's not educational!

[@thomasharris1090]

While a lot of the information is really good they actually make a lot of errors and (in the past) have presented controversial theories as fact, some that have since been proven wrong. If you want solid information or information presented with context, there are lots of other good KZbin channels for this kind of stuff, such as vSauce or In A Nutshell.

[@difdaf436]

Man I love watching space time, even though I would say 90 percent of the time I have no idea what he's talking about, I still love it haha!

[@PaulSebastianM]

I just love the way Matt talks. Everything he says sounds marvelous!

[@pookie5247]

Me as well...the more I watch and listen to though the more I realize these guys have a unique language to describe very simple things..the complexity of their language makes their work seem prohibitive and exclusive...but when decoded it really addresses things like “pass me the hot sauce please, my tacos 🌮 are mild today”

@@pookie5247 Have you watched Sean Carrolls playlist on "The Most Interesting Ideas in the Universe"? As someone who watched just about all the videos on this channel and a bunch of others too, those were *fantastic* to me.

[@isjustme4530]

I learn little by little as I contie to watch

[@eastasiansarewhitesbutduet9825]

Kinda similar situation. Only if I have all the time and resources to study physics again!

[@nikitakuznetsov8446]

Friend: What are you watching? Me: Nothing.

[@marv5078]

Lmao

[@redisanuber]

Bruh

[@abstractrussian5562]

Friend: (giggles) Nothing. I know. Show me. Me: (shows) Friend: Hmm. This is not what I expected.

[@redisanuber]

@@abstractrussian5562 😏

[@anas6934]

The nothing *

[@contessa.adella]

Ah…The difference between a scientist and an engineer. Engineers get most excited when they find a new solution, scientists get most excited when they find a new question.

[@induchopra3014]

No scientists get excited when they find a new perspective

[@deaustin4018]

damn it, now everyone knows that that jar of absolute nothing at absolute zero which I have on ebay is fake

[@Ireallylikeeggs]

Yo 99% of the time the comments on these videos arent funny but bro this was clever as hell and i wanted to let you know that I appreciated it.

[@beberivera7011]

🤦🏾‍♀️ay dios mio!

[@manfromnantucket9544]

Hey, they answered my question @ 12:31 Noice.

[@chandrashekharvk5765]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/lWOZeIyNftporpo This is my second part of environ existences in which i am discussing about environmental laws in india kzbin.info/www/bejne/nmbZZYqtnaucZqc *_With lots of love and blessings this channel is created to generate awareness, about the environment around you!_* If you like my work support my channel And instagram page based on *natural environmental photography -* *@environexistenses* instagram.com/p/CB8EYZrgvM-/?igshid=13fbiw28h5tdy Thank you very much!💜 For your time, Subscribe my channel🙏🏻 Like👍🏻 my videos for updates

[@winonafrog]

👌🏼

[@AvalanchePerformance]

Someone who will either improve upon or disprove each video's concept is watching each video.

[@dexterrity]

One of the best Physics channels on KZbin. Between _Space Time_ and _Sixty Symbols_ , you guys provide enough inspiration to get people around the world who are seriously curious about science to take their studies to the next level. Of course I'd love to give honourable mentions to all the other great educational content out there, but when I think about it the list starts to grow quite large.

[@ronaldderooij1774]

Unfortunately, there are precious few people interested and curious about science (including social sciences!). Look at the view numbers of KZbin video's and you will be amazed/shocked.

[@shadoah]

So true. You can add Veritasium and Vsauce. But to me PBS Space Time really helped me get the pieces together. Before that show I was maybe at 0.005% understanding. Now I might be close to 1% lol.

[@TowerArcanaCrow]

David Noireaut Some channels, like Veritasium, are good for getting people interested in science. But channels like this are what allow the curious to delve deeply into complex sciences.

[@sean3533]

If you like Sixty Symbols, check out Brady Harons other channels Numberphile etc

[@professorpro9400]

David Noireaut That is the exact path I took down my interest in science. I started to watch Vsauce and Veritasium videos which really sparked an interest in science for me and when I found this channel... well let's just say I hope to study Physics at university next year! Other things contributed to this interest as well but these channels really did set things in motion.

[@Scanini]

As a complete layman in these subjects I struggle a lot to understand anything, however every now and then something slots into place, it's worth the effort! :)

[@guidedmeditation2396]

At the end of the day. There are no particles. They too are just waves and they come into and out of existence (From our perception) as they oscillate between the "7" quantum fields. What is missing from all of this is that which directs and hosts this virtual wave/particle show.

[@christianbro2]

I wish I had the knowledge to fully understand these videos.

[@americancitizen748]

I wish physicists had the knowledge to understand that no one understands them!

[@johnmichael1594]

CHEER UP! you DO have the knowledge to fully understand that these videos are incomprehensible, and the REASON they're incomprehensible is that they are pure unadulterated weapons-grade BALONEYIUM!

[@candlestyx8517]

Immerse yourself in it, then you'll be able to put the pieces together, and build a concept of it all in your head. Some of it I don't understand still.

[@johnmichael1594]

+John E - before you waste any more precious years of your life, PLS, make the modest investment in this book, "Old Physics For New," by Thomas E. Phipps Jr. (heavy on calculus). i also recommend "Popper vs Einstein," by Christoph von Mettenheim. what you believe you understand is a delusion. for a quick preview, read this pdf: christoph.mettenheim.de/app/download/5053175/Fundamental_Errors_CvM_2016.pdf

[@napalmstickstokids9976]

VireAss de wanna puke

[@brianschwarm8267]

I so often forget to “like” videos on KZbin, but I really enjoy SpaceTime, keep up the good work! I love how you guys break it down, and if it’s too simple for the video, you’ll refer us to another great video. I also like the corrections to past videos and responding to comments at the end. I feel I have learned so much thanks to you guys and I’m only just getting started.

[@nenmaster5218]

Brian?

[@treearoha]

Brian?

[@brianschwarm8267]

Brian?

[@defeatSpace]

Brain?

[@mattthai7378]

Just found my new favourite KZbin channel! I am going to binge so hard. Bye bye productivity...

[@XBeautifulParadoxX]

2:18 turn the volume up and listen close, you can hear the “doorbell” sound effect used on the Enterprise D from Star Trek: Next Generation

[@joshuagibson8235]

Wow... I have been on quite a journey this past year, and I cannot believe the relation here. I have been a research and learning addict since I decided to pursue all the things that I believe I know are happening around us. I have had this pattern in my mind for a year now as well, and I came to the realization of it thanks to your videos. I think I have found the particular way of quantifying certain things, and everything this video states correlate with it perfectly. On my paper, I wrote that 0 cannot mean zero as is nothing, but instead be something that provides a seemingly neutral amount that must be worked up to. It halfway makes me want to loco with the number of weird thoughts I keep thinking are ideas and how to solve them, end up being real-world functions or questions. It is a bit intoxicating if I am being honest. I come from a lesser than practical kind of world, so there is no way of finding out what it means to daydream and, due to my ignorance and lack of much formal education in my 30 years, imagine a new level of reality and a way to answer it with too many similar patterns that are in similar tiers in their systems. Of course, I am now finding out that we are already here thanks to current math and science, and are working on the same idea. This is awesome. I am trying to figure out how to apply it, and if crazy stuff happens, I would like to preemptively thank you for all of your work on these videos.

[@charlieangkor8649]

Empty space is filled with PhD’s and Nobel Prizes.

[@2fast2block]

Damn, that's a good one! Love it!

[@fivish]

Did you know the scientists at Cern are paid $100,000 a year to play with billion Dollar toys? They could be more productive working as baristas.

[@flymastera8199]

John King , one of the definitions of science- "Information looking for a use that won't kill us all."

[@Tom-fh3zg]

Lol, very good

[@johntate6537]

My degree is like a virtual PhD - it came and went leaving nothing in my career - specifically income - altered in any way.

[@robertb1742]

The Science Asylum and PBS Space Time are by far my two favorite channels on youtube!

[@wallacegrommet9343]

When you take away everything, you still have the infinitely energetic field of space time

[@yamansanghavi]

My god, Matt is 46 years old. I seriously thought he would be in his late 20's. BTW, as always the videos are great.

[@CTSmerv]

It's the t-shirt and lack of gray, isn't it.

[@user-fo8lz6om7l]

I can't tell you how often I have that thought. I think he bathes in cosmic rays or something.

[@javier01123]

whaaat

[@NiflheimMists]

@@user-fo8lz6om7l Wouldn't that accelerate your aging?

[@user-fo8lz6om7l]

@@NiflheimMists I was gonna come up with a witty remark but the pursuit of science got in the way again. No, not in the traditional sense. High doses will Probably give you raging space cancer (in a normal not-Matt type human) but I mean you are technically bathing in them right now and if I understand correctly they are even neccessary in types of experiments. So like any radiation I suppose small doses are kinda meh, but out in Space you end up being bombarded like Mr. Fantastic minus the cool powers.

[@mrityunjaysah178]

First of all thank you very much for these videos and this channel is my favourite channel on KZbin. Thank you sir for your great explanations. You are really doing great job.

[@Sigusen]

*Nods knowledgeably with an intelligent smile* *when asked to explain this... runs away quickly*

[@SkywalkerSamadhi]

I wanted to hit the 👍🏻 button but there are 42 already.. so what's the point. You've already got the answer to everything...

[@dworkeen]

Thank you, thank you, thank you! For years I've had an intellectual itch to come to terms with virtual particles. Always felt a discomfort in knowing that such particles 'appear' and 'dissappear'. It has been the stuff of pop science TV shows for decades but never, ever was I offered even a glimpse of a mechanism. This that was numero uno in my bucket list is assuaged.

[@BothHands1]

I wonder if the uncertainty principal causing zero energy particles to have possibly infinite velocity, or particles coming out of nothing when there truly is nothing, explains something about the big bang. Certainly over my head, but from what you've explained, it sounds reasonable. :)

[@toshiro0o]

Not really. 'Virtual particle' is just the name given to a mathematical thing that appears in perturbation theory, it's not something real. In other words, it's not 'measurable'. Things in the universe certainly are though.

[@kokopelli314]

Thanks for mentioning the Casimir effect. Also, electron/positron pairs can form from gamma photons close to heavy atomic nuclei and the Schwartzchild radius of quantum black holes. Its like a tension in spacetime enhances the formation of virtual particle pairs from photons. Nothingness has some measurable properties.

[@nmarbletoe8210]

Nothing isn't chopped liver

[@ronsnow402]

@@nmarbletoe8210 It might not even be nothing. It sounds more like waves overlapping to create a fluctuation. QFM seems incomplete.

[@vhawk1951kl]

"Virtual" is a word in tends to convey imaginary, is it not? Are not all these famous "particles" imaginary?

[@kokopelli314]

@@vhawk1951kl they can be measured under certian conditions however virtual pair production most often goes undetected, thus the description.

[@vhawk1951kl]

@@kokopelli314 Really, and when exactly- time place and date did you yes* You* titch, do that? Yeah right, never-not once in you entire credulous little life Somebody tells you something and you believe them because you are credulous are you not? you believe everything that you are told do you not? All this bullshit about atoms and particles is pure invention and you have never seen or experienced an atom particle in your life, have you you credulous child? Somebody *tells* you something and you believe them; you never seek to verify anything for yourself because you are passive, is that not exactly correct? Have you ever in your entire life experienced an atom or a particle and been able to say yes I know that is an atom or a particle because I have seen one before and they look like that or behave like that. No no my child you believe everything you are told without verifying a single thing and it stands out a mile that you are simply credulous, and you are credulous because you are entirely passive. You have never verified anything for your yourself in your entire life, have you ? no no child you go running to*somebody else* to ask them because you are a child and you believe everything you are *told* It has never once in your entire life crossed your mind in doubt or question anything that you are told, has it? You believe passively because all the other children and babies believe or you imagine they do and you follow the flock like a sheep without a single ounce of initiative or anything of your own that results from your own direct immediate personal experience, and you have never once in your entire life verified or questioned anything have you? No of course not, children don't do that because they are passive and credulous. When exactly did you - yes* You* titch do this famous measuring? Yeah, right; *Never.* you are like the child in it's a wonderful life "teacher says that every time a bell rings a child gets its wings" or teacher says that there are atoms and particles and so little sheep you believe teacher because you are passive and credulous anything "teacher tells" you swallow whole, is that not *exactly* correct? You have never measured anything you or anything to which you refer, have you - yes *You* tich? No of course not, you are simply repeating or aping what you are told because "teacher told you." If teacher told you that every time a bell rings and electron jumps magically to some imaginary shell, would you believe that as well? Have you ever seen an electron in your entire life? No, you believe everything you are told because "teacher told you", and you passive credulous followers of the absurd religion scientism wonder why it is that those with common sense that can think for themselves and don't believe everything "teacher tells them", regard you with at a contempt as they do all the are passive and credulous. Because you are a good obedient believer of everything that "teacher tells you", you are absolutely horrified that anyone should doubt anything that "teacher tells you" - even if "teacher tells you that every time a bell rings an angel gets its wings That is*exactly*correct, is it not? It is simply *impossible* for you to doubt anything that "teacher tells you" is it not? God God, no wonder Americans are such passive credulous docile tractable sheep that can be swindled out of anything - they believe absolutely everything they are told without exception simply assuming that it comes from teacher because they believe everything that "teacher tells them", and you wonder why Americans are regarded with contempt! Only in America could there be a company that attracts investment that has *never once* - repeat *never once*- not in its *entire history made a profit or declared a dividend. Now what company is that do you think? But " teacher tells you" that it is a jolly good thing to invest in a company that has never once not once in its entire history made a profit or declared a dividend, and if "teacher tells you" that there are such things as atoms and particles, like a good obedient passive credulous little sheep you believe *everything* that "teacher tells you", don't you? - Moreover you are absolutely horrified that anyone might not! Your passive credulity is absolutely breath-taking! - No wonder that company that has never in its entire history made a profit or declared a dividend manages to sell shares and those shares go up in value despite the fact that the company in question has never once *not once* in its entire history made a profit or declared a dividend. Hardly surprising in a land full of passive credulous children that believe everything that "teacher tells them". Now you are going to have a tantrum and call me names because I have the temerity to doubt anything that "teacher tells" - go ahead that is what children do. They also believe absolutely everything that "teacher tells them" and it never even crosses their tiny passive credulous little minds to doubt or question or verify for themselves anything that they are *told*. You really are absolutely shocked and horrified that anyone might not believe in atoms and particles, are you not? You are only believe in them because "teacher told you". *Of course* it is easy to sell shares in company that has never once in its entire history made a profit or declared a dividend, why would it not as easy as tricking imbecile children? - Particularly children that will believe absolutely everything that "teacher tells them" you really are *appalled* that anyone might not believe everything that "teacher tells them" are you not? - Of course"- because you have been conditioned or programmed or as they say "educated" to believe*absolutely everything* that "teacher tells you" - even anything as absurd and unverifiable as your famous atoms and particles not a single one of which you have ever experienced in your entire credulous passive little life, have you? "they can be measured under certian(you word-it's a copy and paste) conditions however virtual pair production most often goes undetected", my arse!-you only believe that bullshit because " teacher told you" Did*You* -yes *you* titch " measure them? It's all right, I know very well that you have never measured anything like a particle in your entire credulous passive little life, why would you since you believe everything that "teacher tells you"?

[@mrhdbnger]

My bank account has quantum energy. So there is that.

[@SuperDreammaster]

Quantum energy has unlimited potential. So there is that.

[@emersonherrera4939]

👦👀😂🔥🙉🕵😞😥😥😥😥

[@mickyjagah]

🙆‍♂️🙆‍♂️🙆‍♂️

[@saroth1978]

my bank account has absolutely nothing, its absolutely zero.

[@10Tabris01]

Well, if you're lucky (and not looking), virtual money might spontaneously come into existance

[@Master_Therion]

Jon Snow is an expert on the subject of nothing.

[@kennypowers5006]

Master Therion "You know nothing Jon Snow"

[@1224chrisng]

except Microbiology

[@marksmadhousemetaphysicalm2938]

That’s assuming his critics knew something...🤔

[@oscarmike1131]

Random Guy and quantum physics

[@sticklarry]

Master Therion how many top comments have you gotten over the past 2 years? I keep seeing you everywhere

[@RobertEWaters]

I can understand the fascination with speculative physics even when it leads to more questions than answers. It's possibly more useful when it leads us to paradoxes than at any other time, and to concepts which don't seem to make sense. Paradoxes are fascinating and can spur us on to look for ways to resolve them. Puzzles beg to be solved. And no rule says that we have to be able to explain something in order for it to exist. It's axiomatic that human language (except, perhaps, mathematics) is inadequate to completely describe reality. And I'm not even sure that mathematics can ultimately do that. But we do have to define a thing in order to coherently talk about it. Words mean things. To say that reality is real is a tautology. It's one thing to say that language can't perfectly describe reality; it's another to forget that it's the only tool that we have besides mathematics itself with which to do that. Particles not "burdened by reality" are, by definition, not real. Even in the absence of mass, energy itself is not "nothing." As the video itself says, even empty space is not necessarily "nothing." Yes, I understand that something that is "virtual" by definition is not actual. But isn't at least its potential existence actual? The joke about Jon Snow points to a troubling question: at one point does the description of a paradox, or of something for which we lack the words to accurately describe, lapse into gibberish?

[@karltanner3953]

Late to the party but I have to say that was an excellently written comment. Thank you.

[@nenmaster5218]

@@karltanner3953 Would it be too random to declare my intend to recommend my fellow science-youtuber-fans some... well... more science-youtuber? I mean, in my mind, it just makes sense, but many call me B0t, so... your choice...

[@ronsnow402]

Is it possible that quantum fluctuations are a hint of weaker quantum fields? & these fluctuations are overlapping waves on those fields? Like this is at the edge of what we can detect, it would seem reasonable that these fluctuations don't just come out of nowhere.

[@nenmaster5218]

@@ronsnow402 Hard to tell.

[@nenmaster5218]

@@karltanner3953 Karl?

[@mikemurrill01]

Super important info. Your simplifying things into clarity is appreciated. INFINITELY.

[@alleycatsphinx]

Am I wrong, or did this skip the question of what empty space is? Virtual quantum field vacuum energy is not “empty space,” even if it is a fine observation of complex physics. It is a discussion of particles, not space. I‘d argue there is a logical answer to space, but I doubt anyone would care to ask. : ( Simulation is still considered secondary to observation.

[@victordasilva4777]

Ok, we're now back on I-dont-understand-*nothing* episodes. Still loving it.

[@nenmaster5218]

Would it be too random to declare my intend to recommend my fellow science-youtuber-fans some... well... more science-youtuber? I mean, in my mind, it just makes sense, but many call me B0t, so... your choice...

[@stevendowney9978]

Am I tripping,, or does this guy talk like this with no edits? Rehearse much? He's a freaking genius!!

[@stevendowney9978]

Really, try it your self, flawless!

[@mastershooter64]

I mean he does have a PhD in physics so it makes sense he'd be able to talk about physics stuff without edits, he loves that stuff!

[@ToddRickey]

Thanks for another fascinating presentation. Your elucidation of facets of this very tricky subject is comparable to none. I am enlightened very often by your presentations.

[@ButchBeaver]

Pretty good video. I'm a physicist and find it a good talk about this kind of stuff.

[@captainzappbrannagan]

How did I never hear about Bethe before this explains so much having virtual particle alignments in fields shielding electrons form the core and causing changes in orbital distances because the effect is simply more spread out. We really need to teach more of these game changer ideas and discoverer's in school. Great episode!

[@vhawk1951kl]

What leads you to suppose, believe, or accept without question, that there are any such things as what you call "particles"? Have you any direct immediate personal experience (as direct immediate and personal as pain) of a particle? If so, how do you set about establishing whether or not what you are experiencing was what you call a particle? All this mumbo-jumbo about "particles" is religious mumbo-jumbo is it not? - It is based entirely on belief and in no respect whatsoever on direct immediate personal experience (as directly and personal as pain)?

[@captainzappbrannagan]

@@vhawk1951kl Particles are proven from the results/ measurement of a thousand experiments.

[@vhawk1951kl]

@@captainzappbrannagan Your exact words: “Particles are proven from the results/ measurement of a thousand experiments.” Who told you that and why do you believe them? If it was not those that themselves conducted those experiments, that can only possibly be hearsay can it not? Were you able to cross examining whoever told you that? Do you perhaps (like some credulous imbecile child) believe everything that you are told? No, no, my friend, this is gossip and hearsay, or tales for children. If I were to tell you that I had conducted experiments proving that unicorns were capable of balancing nine sided triangles and square circles on the tips of their horns while standing on their own shoulders, would you believe me? Would you not at least ask me some detailed questions about the precise nature of my experiments and ask me to repeat them in front of you? Apparently not given that you believe absolutely everything you are told without question.

[@mysterynad]

"This episode is about nothing" *cue Seinfeld theme*

[@feynstein1004]

SERENITY NOW!!!

[@kurtross9098]

lol yup

[@wcsxwcsx]

Has someone alerted Jerry Seinfeld about this episode?

[@bantaar]

Nothing has been much maligned. Nothing is now lying lonely and miserable, crying because nobody thinks it's anything, even if it's full of mass and virtual particles. "I've got a good mind to produce particles from myself in empty space," says Nothing defiantly. "Even if it takes me a brazillion times. I'll just keep spawning virtual particles so rarely and randomly that those li'l chimps won't notice with their crude Hubble telescopes and so-called "large" hadron colliders. I'll just lay low here and give birth to the odd particle now and then and make the universe expand. Serves those bigbangers right. ,Look what you've done! Happy now?

[@americancitizen748]

Watching this made me want to run out and buy a manzier.

[@szamszatan]

What about gravity and the gravitational waves? As they pass through a chunk of empty space... they will effectively fill that chunk of spacetime with information...?

[@HarryNicNicholas]

are the waves "things" or are they a distortion of what is already there? a wave in water isn't a wave of something else, it's a distortion of what is already there, water. arent' gravitational waves a distortion of space/time? that is a distortion of what is already there, not something new moving through space / time?? good question though, like to hear this guy's answer.

[@davidralph9652]

The most solid and factual way to understand the explanation of everything and nothing is human preceptive thinking which is the everything of nothing and the nothing of everything.

[@vacuumdiagrams652]

There is a conceptual error in the previous video which seeped into this one as well: the impossibility of reaching absolute zero is not directly related to the uncertainty principle in the manner suggested. Temperature is about how the states of the system are distributed among states of constant energy which can be as "uncertain" as they like about macroscopic observables such as position and momentum. Rather, it is because of the third law of thermodynamics: the entropy of any system approaches a constant as the temperature goes to zero. The heat capacity, which is related to how entropy changes as temperature is varied, goes to zero. This means that the entropy doesn't depend on pressure, applied magnetic field, the position of the moon, or anything like that. The entropy at zero temperature is just some number. If the entropy _did_ depend on some external parameter (say, pressure) at zero temperature, there would be no third law. You could set up the pressure to be compatible with the pressure at zero temperature, suck out some heat by some process at constant temperature, and bam. You're there. But that's not how it works. Only an incredibly finely tuned process can reach the absolute zero. It's like trying to hit an infinitely tiny target with an infinitely tiny ball. Unless you're infinitely accurate, you'll never be able to hit the target. But if you allow yourself to make lots of moves, you can get pretty close. If you allow yourself to make infinitely many moves, _then_ you can hit it. Bottomline: it is possible, with care and effort, to cool down a system as much as you like. You just can never reach absolute zero _in a finite number of steps._ The third law of thermodynamics actually predates quantum mechanics by quite a bit. It was known back then that classical gases fail to satisfy it, which was one of the earlier clues that classical mechanics can't be right and must be replaced by something else. That something else turned out to be quantum mechanics, and quantum systems _do_ satisfy the third law of thermodynamics, but it's not because of the uncertainty principle. It is because quantum mechanical systems have (almost) unique ground states, which automatically have constant entropy. It's also important that in quantum mechanics you don't change state unless you provide the exact amount of energy. You can't make just "a little bit" of a particle. You either make it or you don't. This means that the heat capacity goes to zero as T -> 0 in a quantum system, which is the same as saying that the entropy approaches a constant. The third law of thermodynamics is deeply related to the solution to the ultraviolet catastrophe.

[@kenlogsdon7095]

IMHO, it is only meaningful to speak of thermodynamic entropy in terms of bosonic fermion interactions, whether virtual or real. As long as a single fermion is present in a given volume of space you have a temperature, if only by virtue of the nonlocal virtual interactions between that fermion and the entire rest of the cosmos. To achieve absolute zero one must remove the fermion!

[@vacuumdiagrams652]

Temperature is not about interactions; it's about states. The simplest idea is perhaps that the temperature defines how states are distributed according to their energy. The probability of finding the system in a state with energy E is proportional to exp(-E/T). Bosonic and fermionic distributions are just special cases of this general principle.

[@vampyricon7026]

I think I remember a paper earlier that derives the Third Law from quantum principles

[@cahdoge]

As you can apply the uncertanty principle to a particle in those conditions the other way around you could say, thet the wave function of your particle is getting more spread out approaching infinite spread. This is why Bose-Einstein-condensates can exist. (this is a different viewpoint of @Vacuum Diagrams second paragraph) If you look at the formulae for the classic thermodynamcs you can see, that, according to the third law, in order to reach 0K you need to get the entropy to it's base state. But due to the second law the entropy in your system would actually go up if we extract heat out of the system in inreversible fashion. So you could reack 0K in either a infinite amount of time or with an infinite amount of energy. I thonk entropy alone would desereve it's own mini series on this chanel. because sometimes it is even harder to get ones head around than QM.

[@WiseGuy508]

Hang on. Wouldn't the heat capacity have to tend to infinity as temperature decreases? That is, the C in Q = nC(delta T)? That would explain why the magnitude of Q needs to increase to remove more and more heat when approaching absolute zero.

[@ViralKiller]

no not that 'nothing', i mean absolute 'nothing' between the nothing

[@sanket9305]

What would that even mean, let alone be?

[@itsoktobedummythicc8996]

I think that the “real nothingness” it’s still something, and that is dark matter

[@malvinalacoban4850]

@@itsoktobedummythicc8996 that makes no sense. Because nothing ness can’t have any attributes but dark matter has attributes. Unless you mean dark matter takes up the space between well everything

[@tracefleemangarcia8816]

Nothing is not no-thing, neither is 'absolute nothing', not even the name 'no-thing' can be said to name it since it delineates a 'some-thing' seperate from the rest. Indeed the pronoun 'it' cannot name 'it' either, because that is a stand-in for a noun which necessarily can't reference what it attempts to, because the referent cannot be a referent since it is no-thing, necessarily no thing else. Anything that can be named is not it, not even that 'it,' any proposition given about it fails and must be corrected, ad infinitum.

[@gabagaba6207]

@@JEA- i just got to say what exactly is the quantum vibrations

[@nickush7512]

This and the previous video are experienced as the sweetest music, the most profound poem, the most breath-taking sunrise and the scent of Bluebells: all is one and one is all. What is the equation for ~ infinity equals one and one equals zero ??

[@eval_is_evil]

"This episode is about nothing (laugh track)" **Seinfeld theme music**

[@RobsonWilliam82]

So, George is an electron, because he is always negative, Elaine is a proton, Jerry is a neutron, he tries to neutral in all that mess, and Kramer is a photon. 😂

[@MushroomManToad]

Lots of great information in this video! I got *nothing* from it!

[@bernardforand4078]

Here is one thought ... As we approach negative Kelvin we approach the slowing down of entropy... {A Border?}As we increase the heat to extremes the slowing down of entropy..{Another Border?} A vision of a black hole singularity balanced by the white hole expansion ... Dimensions interrelated ?

[@bernardforand4078]

False.. Entropy decreases as Kelvin degrees go down as they also decrease as you increase Kelvin degrees.. Perspective of absolute lack of movement establishes an eternal presence where time has no function. Just as accelerate the particles to ever greater Degrees .. Space exhibits a Black hole .. Where time ceases to function. No time for Entropy beyond those borders.

[@mrwho2513]

Lol

[@Baraa.K.Mohammad]

Bernard Forand No you are the who is wrong... That's why they call it an ISOLATED SYSTEM.. It doesn't get changed by the outside effects, no Kelvin decrease, no increase. So it's true: In an ISOLATED SYSTEM, entropy can only increase!

[@cyberguru09]

nodded my head all through- at the end- i still got zilch!

[@LordLuciferFromDk]

I enjoy watching pbs, ive got alot of knowledge out of that 👍🏻☺️

[@jaredhill4367]

at 4:51 this went over my head lol, gonna watch more stuff till I can get a grip on it, yay science.

[@FredrikNaevisdal]

Is it possible that the reason the theoretical amount of energy, doesn't match up with the observed, comes from only accounting for the volume of the observable universe, and not the possible unobserved universe?

[@FredrikNaevisdal]

@Scott Whatever I was just thinking that is a possibility if properties of the unobserved universe affect phenomena here.

[@FredrikNaevisdal]

@Scott Whatever I think its amazing that they have been able to find out so many different things. I also believe that as more and more pieces are collected, these fundamental questions will get better answers. I can't wait to hear all the different things they will figure out! :)

[@ghiath6434]

Scott Whatever What? Who’re you talking about? I haven’t seen a scientist claiming anything as a fact unless there is evidence that supports it. It’s also VERY wrong to live by the mentality that you know literally nothing, because it’s factually wrong. We know some things, even if very little. Which nobody needs to admit because it’s obvious that we don’t know much. Theories are theories, nobody claims them as an absolute facts. We make theories BECAUSE we don’t know. If the theory makes sense mathematically and physically, then it has the potential to be true. That’s it.

[@johnnykerley4791]

@@ghiath6434 you just stated this very theory, in an observation of the mental state of man ! Nice !

[@deths1679]

Exactly what I have been thinking. Not to long ago most of this was itself part of the unobservable universe. Exciting to think of how much there is still left to discover.

[@davidfuller1061]

1:55 Begin (NONSENSE/(Planck length))^3 2:34 I'm VERY EXCITED!!!!

[@Ashiente]

This kind of videos are so hard, they make me feel like there's perfect nothingness where my brain should be...

[@c.j.3184]

dont you dare

[@bjarke7886]

Where you the one that commented on visuel politics video about never having been on a flight?

[@ethankapolis]

Balderino Kripperino That was completely unnecessary. Theres no need to attack random people on the internet, friendo.

[@liambrennan769]

ethankapolis it was not unprovoked... look at the mans profile picture I mean come on

[@pcuimac]

Ashiente If you can feel it, it's nothing like true nothing.

[@heavilymeditated2263]

Buddhist, Tao, Zen, & some eastern teachings call this "Emptiness" thanks to Emptiness, everything is possible.

[@marius10ster]

Enjoyed this video...! I have to agree to your comment on HE-4 being a Boson, because I remember the classification of particles being based on their quatized spins and particularly for Boson's since Bose was from India and that's where I was born. I also kind'o dig your explanation on negative temperatures, it makes me wonder as to why engineering and pure sciences are separate majors.

[@vacuumdiagrams652]

A nice curiosity about the Casimir Effect is that in certain conditions the energy _inside_ can be larger than the energy _outside._ For example, this is the case for a sphere. Even though there are fewer wave modes that contribute to the vacuum energy inside the sphere than there are modes outside, the vacuum energy inside the sphere is _higher_ than outside. This occurs for the same reason that 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + ... = -1/12. Actually, the Casimir effect with plates is an example of a sum like this one, while the Casimir effect for a sphere is a similar divergent sum that gives a positive answer instead. It's one of my favorite things :)

[@Tomyb15]

Ramanujan summation seems completely unrelated. Is it just an analogy?

[@vacuumdiagrams652]

It's literally used in the calculation. Well, typically not literally Ramanujan summation, but zeta-function regularization which is pretty much the same idea. Quantum field theory is just a quantum harmonic oscillator for each possible wave mode. Each harmonic oscillator has a zero point energy given by h * frequency / 2. The energy of the vacuum is calculated by adding up the zero point energies for each oscillator. In between the conducting plates, only frequencies that are integer multiples of pi * c / L are allowed. It's just like a guitar string: you can the fundamental note plus its harmonics. When you add them all up, the energy of the vacuum is given by E = constant * sum (1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + ...) = constant * -1/12. This was valid for a universe with one space and one time dimension (so the "plates" are really just points) but the calculation for the real world is analogous, only more technically involved. The answer is something like E = constant * sum( -1³ - 2³ - 3³ - 4³ - ...) = constant * -1/120.

[@NuclearCraftMod]

I talked to a maths lecturer about this a few days ago. He showed that those infinite sum of positive integers can be broken up into an 'infinite piece' and the 'finite piece' -1/12 by taking to limit of the infinite sum n*exp[-n*s] as s -> 0. We didn't go into the physics but my qualitative understanding is that the infinite part is not important as adding any constant to the energy of the vacuum doesn't actually change the physics. For example, when trying to calculate the vacuum energy of a QFT, you often get infinite answers, but since adding/subtracting any constant from the energy has no effect on the physics, you can then just define the energy of the vacuum to be zero. I guess this is somewhat similar to how we usually define the potential energy of a system of, for example, a collection of gravitating bodies to be zero infinitely far away.

[@vacuumdiagrams652]

Yep. The important thing is that the "infinite part" is independent of plate separation, so it drops out of all physical quantities. You can keep track of the infinite constant during the calculation if you like, and see that happening explicitly (I believe one of the first chapters in Zee's QFT book does this). There's an excellent blog by Terry Tao where he discusses why the prescription typically used by physicists (something based on analytic continuation such as zeta function regularization) gives the right answer. It takes a bit to work through it, but it should be illuminating.

[@madao9381]

+

[@SeeMeRolling]

matts face when he says "nothing is one of the most interesting somethings" :D

[@jnamemoption7742]

You know snails are of the same family as octopi? Practically no trap they can't escape. I.E. no problem too hard to solve. Very nice handle

[@nicholasflamegun3883]

"burdened with reality"!!I really like that phrase.These statements which arise when extremely high-functioning mathematicians use philosophical symbolic logic to generate an internally consistent, self-referential conceptual edifice of great explicative power(within the bounds of it's paradigm)."Here", in this metaphysical, non-local counterspace we may find exotic intellectual "objects" vaugely reminicent orf the "strange attractors" which are the metaphorical apex predators of the Chaos topology.

[@-funmemes-9759]

Nothing is when I open my fridge lol.

[@daryljonesfoster4102]

Broke bitch 👺

[@rollerstein]

I had mustard?

[@arielsproul8811]

no it's H

[@thakurshil1007]

Super Crackers HIV?

[@slytub]

Super Crackers I don’t mind a bit of H

[@michaelportaloo1981]

I've been studying nothing for a while now. The stuff I haven't learned, you wouldn't believe.

[@michaelelbert5798]

Wow I learned love this summarization it f****** really blew my mind finally

[@michael3263]

If empty spacetime contains an intrinsic energy does that also mean that space-time has an intrinsic mass? I know I'm probably missing something obvious but I can't figure that one out.

[@rykehuss3435]

Virtual particles are massless, and so is space-time.

[@garethdean6382]

Sort of. One problem is that since spacetime is the same everywhere, so there's no center for that sort of mass to act on, any gravitational pull would be the same at all points in all directions. But the energy does produce a pressure, such as creates the Casimir effect. This could be what dark energy is.

[@nicolaiveliki1409]

E^2=m^2c^4, so yes, since energy and mass are equivalent, that means there is a non-zero curvature of space-time due to the zero point energy...

[@rykehuss3435]

Nicolai Veliki So you just proved that space-time is not flat. Expect a physics nobel coming your way next year.

[@nicolaiveliki1409]

Rykehuss you're just jealous for not having figured this out yourself... Seriously, though, Spacetime is 'pretty' flat, and a non-zero zero point energy won't upset this notion much, especially not if zero point energy really is the Dark Energy responsible for the expansion of Spacetime

[@Great.Milenko]

who else hears the Star Trek TNG doorbell sound at 2:19?

[@dosmastrify]

AwesomeVindicator yeah they use those sometimes

[@scottm5425]

These are great videos, so well presented

[@KessaWitdaFro]

Hans Bethe taught at my school! We have a dorm named after him ❤

[@nmarbletoe8210]

Should have a row of dorms, Aleph House, Bethe House, Gamow House...

[@ytdertignulses201]

KessaWitdaFro That is fantastic.

[@stuffums]

PBS spacetime can you do an episode on the "Tipler Cylinder" thought experiment? It's about a universe-sized rotating device that can manipulate time (maybe)

[@nyleen]

dis plox

[@locutusdborg126]

Tipler: isn't he that religious guy?

[@WalterUnglaub]

Yes, Tipler is a religious pseudoscience nutcase.

[@agodfortheatheistnow]

Let me explain something to you. Your mind is where everything actually happens. Sounds are vibrating energy decibels Sights are vibrating energy angstroms Thoughts are vibrating energy firing synapses All your imagined physical existence is vibrating energy subatomic electromagnetic energy waves not physical particles Rene Descartes said it all quite literally, “I THINK… therefore I Am” We create this perception of a physical reality in our consciousness. We imagine it into existence like an hallucination a dream. But just as in watching a movie suspension of disbelief allows us to enjoy the subatomic electromagnetic sapient vibrations we call the firing of synapses as if it was really happening… much more enjoyable than surround sound

[@vinayakgupta2003]

*The hardest thing to do is to do *nothing**

[@arzus4]

Can you please make a video on absolut hot? There's less and way more confusing information about it around the internet

[@eoinh]

arzus4 Not sure if there's such thing as absolute hot honestly, I don't see why there would be a limit to adding energy to a substance, after it's broken down to plasma. VSauce did a video on it once, "How hot can it get?" I think, if you trust him as a reputable scientific source that is.

[@MRNoOne-jm4fl]

For achieving an absolute hot state of matter their shouldn’t be any space to lose into. So, basically at the very beginning of universe aka big bang might’ve been the only absolute hot stat happened in universe.

[@breannathompson9094]

Absolute hot would honestly probably end up being a new state of matter. I have no idea about it though. It would be like some quasiplasma or some shit.

[@Majinant]

Vape juice?

[@Lorkanthal]

if something were to achieve absolute hot would it not incinerate the entire universe?

[@deewood6489]

GuRU (an amateur physicist): The Casmir Effect is usually measured using two rectangular parallel metal plates separated by a tiny distance. These plates exclude some frequencies of particle fields from the area between the plates. A force can be measured due to the difference of the broad spectrum of fields outside the plates and the smaller spectrum of fields inside the plates. Is there a correlation to the AC component of the forces on two separate sets of parallel plates? This asks the question: “Are Virtual Particle Fields correlated in spatial extent or does each point in space host Virtual Particles unaffected by Virtual Particles from ‘adjacent’ points in Space?” If a linear array of parallel plates was constructed such that each plate had a wide bandwidth force detector that can measure a spectrum of the Casimir Effect, would there be any correlation between these detectors? In other words, is it possible to build a “Casimir Effect Telescope”?

[@MusiCaninesTheMusicalDogs]

Whenever you're depressed, thinking your life means nothing, remember even nothingness has its own energy. Better than Freud, eh!? 😁

[@adizmal]

L Galicki Band "You know, man doesn't stand forever... his nullification. Once, there would be a reaction, and I've seen it, setting in. All men seek their own existence, and to assure their existence against that complete atomization... into nothingness, or into meaninglessness... man cannot stand a meaningless life. We need more understanding of human nature, because the only real danger that exists is man himself... he is the great danger... and we are pitifully unaware of it... we know nothing of man." ~ Carl Jung

[@No-oneInParticular]

Nothingness is not nothingness if it has energy. By definition

[@シロダサンダー]

@@No-oneInParticular therefore even nothingness isn't nothing.

[@JackPyro333]

@@シロダサンダー No, therefore what they call nothingness is not actually nothingness, since it has energy..

[@mathematicalninja2756]

Lexipaichnidi • there is nothing with no energy, so nothing doesn’t exist and it exist at the same time

[@erb1991]

The moment at the end of each episode when you wait for him to say "spacetime".

[@MsSonali1980]

and hit the space bar for pausing the video

[@robertschlesinger1342]

Interesting and worthwhile video.

[@nebula-not-a-website]

Does anyone else realize they're closing in on the end of the video and then try and guess when he's gonna say Space Time lol?

[@ljfaag]

"...between our theory and observation of the behavior of..." Spacetime? "...nothing." Oh. Me every time an episode is about to end ^^

[@nenmaster5218]

Would it be too random to declare my intend to recommend my fellow science-youtuber-fans some... well... more science-youtuber? I mean, in my mind, it just makes sense, but many call me B0t, so... your choice...

[@Quantum_Mathematics]

In universal expression of same, you cant have something without having exact same nothing. Thats how volume is made, of something and nothing all together. I know that there is difference between half-empty and half-full, but it is sujective experienced.

[@Jesuisunknown]

Lol

[@patricialauriello3805]

This gentilman is reading this. It all comes together brilliantly! Especially after 4 shots of scotch. Raise a glass to that nothing!

[@AnnoyingMoose]

The proper title for this video would be "The Nature of Empty Space".

[@habkenubai8200]

"Should be"

[@blijebij]

It also means that the vaccume of space contains information. Interesting for an expanding universe.

[@robertdaw3364]

Nothing really matters. Anyone can see. Nothing really matters, to me.

[@garethdean6382]

Is this the real particle? Is it just fantasy? Caught in superposition, A result of uncertainty.

[@robertdaw3364]

Open your X-ray telescopes Look up to the skies and see...

[@ViewtifulSam]

I half expected the bass line from Seinfeld at the beginning

[@mohamed.s.elnaschie1697]

CITATION] On certain “empty” Cantor sets and their dimensions MS El Naschie - Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, 1994 - Elsevier The present note is intended to explain in some detail how to draw a distinction between a zero set {0}, an almost empty set {} and the totally empty set 6. To understand this distinction is essential for a correct interpretation of some recent work on it dimensional Cantor sets and … Cited by 42 Related articles All 2 versions

[@chandrashekharvk5765]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/lWOZeIyNftporpo This is my second part of environ existences in which i am discussing about environmental laws in india kzbin.info/www/bejne/nmbZZYqtnaucZqc *_With lots of love and blessings this channel is created to generate awareness, about the environment around you!_* If you like my work support my channel And instagram page based on *natural environmental photography -* *@environexistenses* instagram.com/p/CB8EYZrgvM-/?igshid=13fbiw28h5tdy Thank you very much!💜 For your time, Subscribe my channel🙏🏻 Like👍🏻 my videos for updates

[@mohamed.s.elnaschie1697]

@@chandrashekharvk5765 [PDF] A Grand Unification of the Sciences, Arts & Consciousness: Rediscovering the Pythagorean Plato's Golden Mean Number System S Olsen, L Marek-Crnjac, JH He, MS El Naschie - researchgate.net 12 days ago - In this condensed paper, by combining the insights from E-Infinity theory, along with Plato's initiatory insights into the golden section imbedded in his Principles of the One and Indefinite Dyad, David Bohm's ontological framework of the superimplicate, implicate …

[@mohamed.s.elnaschie1697]

@@chandrashekharvk5765 www.researchgate.net/profile/Leila_Marek_Crnjac/publication/342411637_SCITECH_Volume_16_Issue_2_RESEARCH_ORGANISATION_A_Grand_Unification_of_the_Sciences_Arts_Consciousness_Redis

[@fernandocue3797]

Just remember one important thing, even your thoughts have mass.

[@tanjiroukamado6841]

I wonder if I’m the only one out there who can’t really imagine nothing... I don’t know how to describe nothing, and im not referring to an empty space, im referring to basically NOTHING! Can anyone imagine what nothing is actually like?

[@mengmeng3256]

Surprising to me is that this is something similar in Budha: everything (moutain, river, human, ground ...) exist in human's mind virtually, but still they come from the "ONE-REALITY", which is virtual but in essense is also real. this "ONE REALITY" ( the empty space) generates everything, but itself is simply "empty" and quiet.

[@mickanvonfootscraymarket5520]

It's a Universe about 'nothing' - George Costanza

[@neviesticks2489]

I just thought I was confused then dude said "they can only exist when we aren't watching."

[@frippp66]

the people who live between the walls

[@gyro5d]

Because us watching adds another vortex field into the scalable Aether field Universe. Our braintenna field adjusts the Universal field frequency.

[@kelvinyonger8885]

By definition they can only exist in the uncertain time from the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, which also means they aren't measurable, as our measurement precision is also governed by said uncertainty principle.

[@radlord]

What I don’t get is; if subatomic ‘particles’ are just vibrations in a field, how come the atoms they make up are ‘physical’ pieces of matter?

[@zachb1706]

They only collapse into a particle when they’re interacted with

[@iMshadab]

"Nothing is one of the most interesting something" 😂

[@1stPCFerret]

As William Powell said to Myrna Loy, "Everything is all something."

[@zkip1307]

1stPCFerret, except nothing

[@Merennulli]

Whinny the Pooh was a quantum physicist after all.

[@marcuspi999]

"Virtual particles govern the interaction between actual particles without themselves being burdened with reality." Uh, okay. Translation: We're not really sure what the hell's happening here.

[@ikaros4203]

THEY ARE THE LAW LOL

[@blacktimhoward4322]

You don't get it, therefore experts don't get it. *seems legit*

[@janakmedicos9735]

Quantization of the space , time and fields. The mediating force charge particles.

[@dgodiex]

I love you Space-Time, thank you.

[@MegaParker1981]

This definition of "nothing" leaves something to be desired, literally and figuratively.

[@lesterlewis7018]

How often do these overlap though? Almost always where absolutes and paradoxes are concerned right?

[@johnkeck]

Right. It's an equivocation: only apparently "nothing" but it's really something. This is fine if we're speaking figuratively and having fun, but can create real problems when people take the language too seriosly.

[@yadirmora]

this video has one of the BEST openers.

[@empathylessons2267]

Personally, I think the entire universe is the running of mathematical possibility, with the "calculator" being spacetime/ quantum fields/nothingness.

[@rastapatchmail2357]

No. Improbability.

[@MinecraftEpicPlayer]

Hmmm. I guess it's a possibility.

[@Honkey99]

ITS NOT A PHASE MOM I'M NOTHING INSIDE LIKE THIS VIDEO SAYS!

[@mickwilson99]

Alex B "Phase"!! Excellent! Love it!

[@locutusdborg126]

Hilarious.

[@TheRogueWolf]

Well then use that vacuum energy to go get a job!

[@maiagates9130]

its actually a phase since in the initial moments after the big bang "you" were full inside

[@studtistics2448]

Diego galvez pincheira :\

[@mohamed.s.elnaschie1697]

[PDF] The physics of empty sets and the quantum L Marek-Crnjac - Nonlinear Science Letters B, 2011 - el-naschie.net … A set theoretical proposal for the classical-quantum interface is outline. Keywords: Quantum sets, measurement, classical and quantum interface, E-infinity, empty set in physics, El Naschie's Cantorian spacetime philosophy … Cited by 6 Related articles All 6 versions

[@epicmetod]

1:21 master yoda lightsaber batle.

[@MrRolnicek]

Wait, negative temperature is when the energy is so high that it actually means low entropy? So that means "the big bang" actually had negative temperature in the beginning, right? Extremely high energy, extremely low entropy at the start of our universe?

[@garethdean6382]

Negative temperatures only apply to systems that have a maximum energy state. For regular matter that can have arbitrarily high kinetic energy you can't really reach a limit, so negative temperatures don't occur. The systems we've made it in are actually thermally quite cool gasses of atoms, where their atomic spins in a magnetic field were used to generate a 'second temperature' as it were.

[@MrRolnicek]

Ah, so during the big bang everything still had the regular temperature distribution and therefore positive temperature, right? So how do you figure out the entropy of the big bang?

[@kaustavsengupta8757]

At beginning of big bang since all energy is concentrate in very very small point. I think it is safe to assume that at the instance of big bang there was no energy liberated and hence temperature was absolute zero. Moreover entropy just means that the degree of freedom/ randomness a particle has inside the system. And as far as temperature is concern I think it's safe to say negative temperature is just a relative term, as Gareth explained above. Cause if negative temperature is possible ( below absolutely zero) then according to Charles law of ideal gas which states that volume is directly proportions to temperature. If temperature is negative then volume will also be negative and we all know that negative volume cannot occur. My friend you are actually getting confused between entropy, internal energy, enthalpy I will suggest you to refresh your thermodynamics knowledge.

[@MrRolnicek]

Well ... I'm not really sold on the thermodynamics refresher. Relearning that would probably just mess up my understanding of entropy from information theory. Just wanted to know whether hotter start of the universe would mean less entropy or more entropy. Since entropy is kind of the lifeforce of our universe (aka once we get to maximum, the universe is done for)

[@MrRolnicek]

Not at the beginning of the universe. Matter didn't exist as far as I know, it was all just energy. And a photon for example can have arbitrarily large ammount of energy. Although not a single photon, the minimum wavelength should be limited by planck length, but I'm pretty sure they can stack (occupy the same space). Anyway as far as I know, the temperature in that situation should not have an upper limit.

[@davidbohy7267]

did you get a free drink? as I asked during the shooting as I asked. that explanation of heat waves or gravitational waves brings with it a completely different perspective. theory produced by David Bohy. teacher of the heat wave theory. where student preaches. thank you young man. well done.

[@peridinkle]

There is no such thing as nothing

[@Mick0722MX]

Yes there is. Take away matter and energy, and you have nothing. Saying that nothing is something is a play on words.

[@FaeQueenCory]

There's infinity miles of nothing. Just look right outside the edge of the universe.

[@Mick0722MX]

@Bryce Simpson How so?

[@danielmoore1734]

0

[@absentiambient]

I may be just too stupid to understand but, how? How there can be infinite something?

[@shepardplays1477]

You missed a great opportunity to do a Seinfeld intro spoof. :(

[@WTAWWR08]

Correction @1:27 In my opinion, you should show particles as waves(in the case of the Uncertainty Principle as pulses); not as spheres. Why? Because people associate spheres with solid macroscopic objects for which the uncertainty principle doesn't apply.

[@ViralKiller]

Ok here is a brain twister: if nothing is so unstable and always produces something, why is our universe currently so stable? What's stopping another big bang at any second?

[@nmarbletoe8210]

maybe it is banging every planck time

[@johntate6537]

OK, not 100% sure but, if I'm remembering things right: firstly, nothing - the quantum vacuum - it not unstable. To say that it was enegetically unstable there would have to be more free energy in the system that in an alternative state to which the system was able to decay. In that sense, absolute nothingness in the classical sense, i.e. the total abscence of all matter and energy, is not unstable, it simply never exists; and the quantum vacuum has both the lowest energy for any of its constitutive fields and maximal entropy, so its over all chemical potential is the lowest it can be. To stray still further into areas I know nothing about, I have heard it argued that there can be a variety of different quantum vacuums, and it is postulated that at some point our universe was in one such state which then spontaneously 'tunnelled' to a lower-energy state, creating the universe we know in the process. I have also heard it further speculated that this may happen again, which would mean that the answer to your question would be that there is nothing to prevent our universe from spontaneously shifting to a new state. I believe such a process would happen at the speed of light, so I suppose the good news is that we would never know anything about it. I suppose if we want to go full Twilight Zone we could speculate that this is in fact always happening and that the only reason we have an experience of a continuously existing universe is that the multiple-worlds interpretation is true and we only experience those realities in which we still exist according to the anthropic principle. Kind of a sobering thought.

[@ewqdsacxz765]

We don't know that black holes are not big bangs of more worlds like ours.

[@saugatmazumdar1901]

Maybe it just has a low probability of happening?

[@zoellazayce6796]

If nothing is unstable, this implies that something is stable