What Happens Inside a Proton?

[@imsleepy620]

I was so blown away by looking at that linear regression technique to 0 pixel spacing. Literally haven't felt this amazed in a few years. So simple yet so beautiful.

[@martinakis3747]

Should be done to Planck Length. Remember the UV disaster.

[@DESOUSAB]

Sorry - I don't think that is linear regression. They aren't trying to see if there is a relationship between degree of pixel spacing and mass prediction - there is a relationship in the data points by definition. What I think the are doing is simply using the data points to allow them extrapolate to "infinity". Defining zero as infinity makes it a bit easier and having control over the units of the x axis is also helpful in this endeavour.

[@dougr8646]

O shut up deso

[@manpreet9766]

There are several other examples. One is the extrapolation of gas volume to 0 to estimate the 0 kelvin.

[@stevenverrall4527]

The same method is horribly imprecise when attempting to calculate nuclear magnetic moments. Also, chiral EFT diverges from experiment down near the low nuclear energies of normal matter. This is why you hardly ever hear about low energy nuclear physics.

[@caniborrowapencil5160]

The fact that this quality of information is available to anybody for free is the biggest miracle of the universe.

[@shadesilverwing0]

We live in a golden age of information.

[@ScorpionXXXVII]

Some people say we are the universe trying to understand itself.

[@skepsisology]

The Internet is like a primitive form of collective consciousness. Exciting times!

[@februarysnows5528]

Humanity is advancing at a rapid rate, love it

[@MantraHerbInchSin]

I would say life would be it, but yeah

[@uchepowers]

I am not anything close to a scientist, but I enjoy hearing things like this... It is so amazing to see how much human have observed the universe. It is all very complex but my heart wants to hear more. It makes me feel complete.

[@vogelvogeltje]

Human fee-fees are powerful.

[@soundsoul4796]

@@woodypigeon it is quite possible we will never understand quantum mechanics since theres evidence the interactions are influenced in the 5th dimension or even higher

[@soundsoul4796]

@@woodypigeon its not mysterious or fictional at all hidden dimensions that only exists in the quantum level is just as valid as any other theory on quantum mechanics

[@stuartdparnell]

All which can be easily seen when you take psychedelics. Something about sensory-overload bring out the inferences between waves and particles so you see all as energy patterns and formations.

[@jddjdjsjjssjsjsjs]

As non-scientist i confirm this

[@ScienceAsylum]

The graph at 13:10 was really interesting! The linear relationship between pixel size and mass is surprising.

[@RME76048]

Kind of like the limit in calculus.

[@purelife9000]

I'm pretty confident this was delivered in English, but that's the extent of my confidence. Thanks for this.

[@Tingleton11]

The extent of my confidence is that this is a video

[@wallymcguire2033]

And then he pulls out the "if I explained that we would be here all day" line. How much deeper does this rabbit hole go?

[@DrySushi]

I can't think of anything more comforting to the undefinable chaos of the universe than PBS Space Time.

[@EnterMyHorizons]

That half life 3 comment got me cackling out loud in my steel factory job. Thank you for all your fine work, detailed laymen explanations and humorous add-ons.

[@Big2theBird]

I haven't touched anywhere near this subject in years, but you do a fantastic job making modern ideas accessible to us all. Love it!

[@johnb8940]

I feel like everything in quantum physics is built on, "This is how it works, except its not how it works."

[@joshyoung1440]

Got nothing to do with what it's built on; it's just how PBS has to simplify things to help the audience understand them

[@alienturtle1946]

That's all of science, really. All models are mere approximations.

[@stevenverrall4527]

​@@alienturtle1946Approximations completely dependent on foundational assumptions. The history of science shows that those foundational assumptions started off as wild speculative guesses.

[@alienturtle1946]

@@stevenverrall4527 Eh. I mean you're right that you can question anything back to some foundational assumption/axiom. But you need those axioms to have any kind of working knowledge. Without them you can barely assert anything, a la Descartes. And the axioms that most of math and science are built on are relatively straightforward, as opposed to wild guesses. But some people do play around with alternate sets of axioms, and I'd agree it can lead to some interesting things, even if their applications are niche or not yet discovered.

[@stevenverrall4527]

@@alienturtle1946 Not only must scientists rely on fundamental axioms, but they need to keep imagining and devising new ways to test them. In addition, every scientific theory has a realm of applicability. It is important to discover and probe the edges of each of these realms.

[@HannahHoffmanMusic]

stays in a proton.

[@fiddysat]

Chortle

[@Ezhil-dq8op]

haha that's a good one

[@Dadzuka]

Gosh, I love this channel. Thank you for the amazing content! The dig at Half-life 3 at the end was over-the-top amazing 😂

[@nematode_interface]

Great video. Also thoroughly enjoyed the prospect of a PhD astrophysicist saying the word "Booba" because another PhD holder with that name asked a good question.

[@roosh2927]

Doing a video with a Half-Life 3 joke was the last hurrah needed for this channel to reach geek-out perfection, and I’m happy to report we have reached that threshold. Bravo. 👏

[@mw3gameplayj117mw3]

Thank you for coming back, gives me comfort to watch these videos again

[@LMarti13]

As someone who uses MCMC in Bayesian computational modelling for the human brain, it's very cool to see it pop up in this video.

[@DrWhom]

dangling modifier

[@skittles1736]

I don't understand a thing this guy is saying, but I'm subscribed and I like watching every video his channel has lol

[@MortalH]

I’m an undergrad cure doing research on the phase diagram of QCD. This is really helpful for understanding the scientific papers I was given. Thanks much :)

[@Iakovanders]

"If I tried to explain that too, we would be here all day" don't you dare threaten me with a good time Matt!

[@TheFos88]

I absolutely love this channel and have been watching and learning for a few years now, but after all this time, I have to wonder... Will Matt ever come back to earth? I mean, space is amazing but man.

[@deandeann1541]

The best episodes of PBS Spacetime are those episodes that give me an unexpected insight. It does not happen often. This episode gave me an insight re the fine structure constant and what was really meant when it is described as a coupling constant of the electron with the em field. I had never considered what that meant in a Feinman diagram.

[@andrekz9138]

Phenomenal explanation of a complex topic. Space Time's years of scientific communication are showing. I'm very glad to be on this trip to explain the roots of our reality, as best we know.

[@mhouslay7281]

Utterly awesome. So interesting, so well presented. Love watching doing my daily exercises in my retirement.

[@kurtgodel28]

The high-quality graphics you employ in your videos is probably one of the coolest things I've ever seen. Its potential is unlimited, it has the power to visually explain things I wouldn't understand otherwise.

[@trevorputbrese6069]

Your explanation of the spin axis and quantum entanglement at the 18:20 mark is excellent. That's the first time it finally "clicked" for me in regards to understanding it. Thanks for continuing to make such great content!

[@shashankchandra1068]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/Z6KtYaJqiptml9k @1:40 Is that blue colour what can be called as a gluon field?(AKA one of quantum field ) and red colour a gluon particle?? Or the lowest energy density which is not shown/render in this image (prf.derek said tht in this video) is what we can call as GLUON-FIELD? Or is that RED COLOR RECTANGLE @1:21 is what can be called as gluon-field(AKA one of quantum field)

[@webx135]

What's awesome is that QED and QCD seem like perfect matches for quantum computing. Calculating all paths simultaneously and responding with a probability distribution. If you want to compute quantum dirt, make your computer out of quantum dirt.

[@RME76048]

That video "lucidified" (is that such a word?) QCD and lattices for me. Greatly. Thanks once again, Matt, for making the seemingly intangible tangible.

[@blakkwaltz]

Elucidated

[@Tonyface666]

Love that we've finally got a decent vid on QCD! Another way to think about the Shrodinger's Glove from the comment replies: You put two gloves in the box, but instead of opening a box and seeing left or right handed, you measure to see whether the glove is left/right handed, or up/down handed, or front/back handed, and whichever you measure, the other will be the opposite if measured along the same axis.

[@MediusMajere]

Gold. That ending was pure gold.

[@harper626]

I am interested and amazed by these videos even though they are way over my head.

[@varunverma5997]

I am a Frontend engineering in IT. These videos are not related with my field but i love to watch this kind of videos before sleep. Thanks for the video. 🙂

[@manbirjudge8415]

I am far from someone who can understand it properly (becuase I am a 9th grader) but things like this make me excited for the future.

[@esmenhamaire6398]

Excellent video! I love that lattice computation trick for estimating the mass of the neutron!

[@Robert-sq7bp]

I asked this question in your feedback form a while back! Not sure how much those forms direct your content, but it’s great to see you making stuff in the direction my mind goes

[@agiar2000]

15:29 There's something special about seeing a user named "i, booba" with that profile picture who has a PhD in Chemical Physics. :)

[@graymars1097]

As a layman, my mind went 🤯 for the way you changed the calculation from particles to the fields themselves! It’s just genius. Thanks for the upload.

[@krikeydial3430]

I'm still trying to figure out what's inside Tontons.

[@The_Aspiring_Sacred_Clown]

I watched a video about free will a while back that had me seeing the perspective of free will being an affect of having hind sight. Then I thought to myself: Because the past only really exists as information we hold (as memory), sentiments like “if only I’d done that” reaches for change in something we didn’t think about in the moment. There are things we definitely choose to do, but then the nuance of psychology creeps into view, “free will” isn’t something I worry about but it’s always a blast getting existential.

[@jackodonnell3463]

This was so well written and explained that I walked away understanding way more on this topic than I should have

[@43lk]

WoW I was asking for this video a ~year ago and here we go... thank you 🥰

[@scientistpac]

So cool that you go in harder and harder topic! I can't wait to learn more!

[@davidbailey1777]

The hl3 q&a is my favourite in the whole series and actually made me lol

[@AntneeUK]

I enjoy these videos. They help keep me grounded and stop me thinking that I'm even remotely intelligent

[@ftolozag]

really love listening to matt talk about cuacks

[@alexeyvlasenko6622]

For "explaining" asymptotic freedom, it's not really necessary to be here all day. One could just say that the strong coupling constant becomes smaller at higher energies (as measured in a center-of-momentum frame of the colliding particles), and for energies like those at the LHC, it reaches something closer to 0.1 than 1. So, at high energies, the same phenomenon as for the electromagnetic force applies, diagrams with more vertices become less important and it's possible to cut off the calculation at a finite number of diagrams for any given desired precision. But for low energies, where the strong coupling constant is close to 1 (or even larger), more complicated diagrams are just as important as less complicated ones, so interactions cannot be computed by adding up any finite number of diagrams.

[@marias2636]

Simply BEAUTIFUL !

[@n-da-bunka2650]

Cool! Never knew about Latice QCD until this video

[@CaptainKirk01]

I love your channel. Your my No. 1 favorite. And I love your comments section as much as much as the content itself. That Half-life 3 joke was just precious!

[@jeremiahgazsi8579]

I confess I don’t understand all of this in spite of an engineering degree and four years at Princeton University where Feynman taught, but nevertheless I found this video NEXT LEVEL FASCINATING! MORE of this PLEASE.

[@houserhouse]

Dude got this figured out in '74. That's nuts

[@zrinkobaricevic642]

This explained to me subatomic particles better than any chart ever could!

[@brianmessemer2973]

16:33 I appreciate the super-determinism joke 👏👏👏👏

[@brushylake4606]

I believe that the words "quantum" and "easy" have like linguistic charges. The closer they get in a sentence, the more difficult it is to make sense of the sentence.

[@emmswarega]

I watched this entire video pretending to understand. But atleast I learnt a few new things

[@jfbelanger84]

Training my brain with this kind of stuff is truly the best kind of exercise. Thanks for the amazing job guys 😉

[@memehi8081]

I'm so excited about what this channel is diving into.

[@SenZjo]

this makes as much sense to me as explaining how ddr5 timings work..., i love it XD

[@7thquark309]

Easily one of the most fascinating episode, well done!

[@Numba003]

I'm looking forward to the upcoming QCD episode(s)! This one was fascinating. It's astounding how clever dedicated mathematicians and physicists can be. Stay well out there everybody, and God bless you, friends. ✝️ :)

[@gspaulsson]

In 1974 I was working on an IBM/360-50 with 512k of core storage, as RAM was called back then. ("Core" as in "central". Physically, it consisted of magnetic donuts strung on wires; the donuts came to be known as "cores".)

[@StitchTheFox]

I appreciate that you talk briefly about the things you arent covering

[@gabrielfair724]

I would love all these videos organized into a playlist ordered by increasing complicity so new ppl can get started

[@connormudie3870]

Why was this so intuitive for such a complex topic, I caught myself answering the questions about how to predict the behaviour of quarks in a hadron by saying to simply simulate them in waveform with thier known interactive properties and to see what happens, the inability for simulations to run continuous non incremental simulations is new information to me, I always thought there must have been a way to represent continuous things without requiring infinite information e.g systems of 3D or 4D equations.

[@kiancuratolo903]

I find it so amazing for some reason that all this amazingly complex beautiful physics ends with basically extending out a graph line till it intersects the axis...and thats like, it

[@epiclivestreams6733]

I love the fact that there is a program that goes somewhat in-depth in physics. It is a rare find in my experience.

[@vj.joseph]

I wanted this answer in my school syllabus 10 years ago. Thank you so much for answering it.

[@gnagyusa]

This is the most educational video on physics I've seen. Awesome. It must beat some record for most nagging questions answered in the shortest possible time.

[@ronaldjorgensen6839]

thank you for persistence as also again great outline and details

[@AlexKleinkanocomputing]

Loved this one Best summary of lattice QCD I’ve ever encountered

[@CobbyCaputo]

You guys should release a reference guide to ideas and concepts mentioned in previous episodes with succinct explanations so we can pull it up while watching to refresh when necessary. I don't follow every video so I find myself missing out on stuff that isn't actively being discussed.

[@RussianSevereWeatherVideos]

I would have lost it if he added "it's wibbly wobbly" at 12:57 for sure! Time and relative dimension in space!

[@NevelWong]

Lattice QCD absolutely blows my mind. The idea of simulating a complex system at several abstraction levels, then interpolating along the common errors to calculate the real infinitesimal value, is insane to me. Never even crossed my mind. Where else could we use this approach? Just wow.

[@DrDeuteron]

I think it's pretty common. We're just lucky it doesn't diverge.

[@KingDracSiege]

This channel deserves way more subs

[@shamanbhattacharyya9285]

As a science student interested in particle physics, I really enjoy your channel.

[@Darxide23]

"That's not a proton, that's just three quarks in a trenchcoat."

[@ojussinghal2501]

Matt: "Let's make sure we understand *exactly* what we are trying to do here." Matt's next line: "We want the probability that some wiggly quantum field wiggles between one state and another." Matt is god.

[@bucky1651]

At 4:20... Matt: ~describing the intricacies of QED and the complexity of vertices on a Feynman diagram My brain: "look at those funny people in different phases of a summersault"

[@polarwind77777]

Love this show! I’m very excited to see QCD here.

[@ALBERTOERSA]

This video really does feel as though I missed half a semester worth of classes XD Suggestion: Mention the videos in which you covered topics relevant to the current subject at the beginning of the video. Edit: I mean 10 seconds in, like before the intro.

[@lunafoxfire]

Very good video, I love this computational physics stuff! I always wondered why we never did computations with fields as the fundamental elements instead of particles -- turns out it's just because it's wayyyyyy harder.

[@varunentertainmentnetworks2670]

I look forward in meeting you, Mr.Matt, in the next livestream ( ask me anything ) session. All the best for PBS space time.

[@neanda]

I love seeing what this guy has to say, but I can never get past the first few minutes before my mind is doing too many gymnastics. I fkn love science, I love how you guys think, but I am not one. Thank you guys for your service :)

[@stephanieparker1250]

Excellent video, loved the info and graphics! Well done!

[@nickdegroot222]

Excellent and enlightening!

[@syntaxed2]

I would like a video about the effects of inflation on the QCD vacuum - That foam being expanded/blown up as a snapshot into universal scale looks kinda similar to the cosmic structure etc

[@nickthorpe7567]

it was nice to have a video that we can actually keep up with!

[@madprofessor1683]

The fact that "I Booba" was there with the save on the correction is spot on.

[@DoctorT144]

Whenever the Monte Carlo method gets brought up, you know you're dealing with some ridiculously complicated stuff.

[@emmettobrian1874]

I've always been told that virtual particles were real actual particles that only exist for a tiny amount of time. I actually got shouted down when I suggested that they could be perturbations in the field and not actually particles. Glad to hear i wasn't far off

[@stephenrulz2011]

Definitely never got to quantum chromodynamics, but I took a quantum chemistry course and it got into early quantum electrodynamics, as well as things like using the schroedinger equation to solve for the wave functions in hydrogen and helium atoms. It’s incredible how complex just those most basic things are, I can’t imagine trying to solve for things like this

[@feelincrispy7053]

Another episode that just way over my head but all these ones give me lots re watchabilty. Slowly I understand it more the more I relisten to it

[@silentcaay]

Matt: "I can teach you how to make a universe." You: [A partially simulated proton] The universe she tells you not to worry about: [Reality]

[@andreylebedenko1260]

17:30 Is it really chosen randomly or due to the fact that it is impossible to know, how exactly you will measure its spin in future?

[@jan_kisan]

wow. i actually understood this one, more or less. thanks!

[@fireburner81]

Thanks for that bit of existential dread at the end. It's exactly what I need at midnight before going to bed. I'll be laying in bed, staring at the ceiling, and contemplating my existence if anyone needs me.

[@RalphDratman]

Wow, this is so helpful! Thank you, PBS Spacetime.

[@justinschofield9083]

Excellent subject learning this is fantastic for those who don’t have the time to study properly like me

[@ftmrivas3043]

Thank you. Love your ability to simplify these theories.

[@intelligentcomputing]

I understood about 1/137th of that; more than usual. Thanks!

[@fossar_]

A: Hey man quick question. So protons, whats up with them? B: Well actually there aren't enough particles in the universe to ask that question uniquely but tl;dr: y=mx+c. I will refrain from writing a 2000 word essay on the glories of physics but you get the picture.

[@martinakis3747]

So it happens that Virtual Particles are real albeit discontinuous oscillations or irregularities in the real Q Fields! And real particles are stable standing waves of the later.

[@stanislavbutsky8432]

Thank you for your informative and easily comprehensible lecture. The QCD as non-abelian model contains some truly weird conclusions. The lattice approach allows to bypass them somehow.